Just for argument’s sake: why? Your users do not care about their WiFi access
being authenticated. They don’t care about it being encrypted. From your user’s
perspective, you’re about to make the wireless system behave worse.
Do you have an underlying reason that makes driving traffic towards
Main goal is to put registration in front of unsecured Guest Wireless to help
drive more traffic towards an authenticated secured campus wireless but
students bring personal devices which may not be compatible with the
registration / authentication process which is why we are enabling MAC
May I ask what your goals are in this change?
(to echo the other responses, Aruba Clearpass is a great choice for this, we
use it and it does everything we need it to).
[The Culinary Institute of America]
Robert Harris
Manager - Telecom, Networks, & AV Services
Culinary Institute of America
Vendors handle this very differently, but in general they tend to "block"
inter-device communications in order to protect the wireless network
experience from chatty protocols like mDNS.
Aruba's Clearpass for example uses the concept of AirGroups, where every
user's devices can see each other and
The various devices are all over the place in behavior, requirements, and
capabilities. There is no one single answer. Cisco has a 36-page guide for
configuring the WLAN for Chromecast, and some of what it wants you to do
arguably will not scale very well.
I don't envy what you are taking on.
Hello,
At NIU, we are currently undergoing a project to move away from open access
Guest Wireless to a registration based Guest Wireless using Cisco ISE and we
are having following issues and any help or suggestions on these are much
appreciated.
1. In the new system, devices are not able
