If we could provide great / sufficient / pervasive "non-wired" coverage
using $40 AP instead of $400 Cisco AP, resident might not want to bring
in their own $40 AP.

I didn't use word, wireless, but non-wired instead. Will carrier be not
interested to penetrate such market?

On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 15:39 +0000, Hanset, Philippe C wrote:

> Pay $40 to violate our AUP and have a chance to be disconnected and
> not recover $40. 
> 
> I guess you can never discard dumb people!
> We will handle them carefully and one by one ;-)
> 
> 
> Philippe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 11, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Osborne, Bruce W wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > And what if somebody pays your $40 per semester to connect their
> > personal AP to your network?
> >  
> > Bruce Osborne
> > Wireless Network Engineer
> > IT Network Services
> >  
> > (434) 592-4229
> >  
> > LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
> > 40 Years of Training Champions for Christ: 1971-2011
> >  
> > From: Hanset, Philippe C [mailto:[email protected]] 
> > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 8:44 PM
> > Subject: Re: College deals with wireless issues
> >  
> > If you provide a great wifi coverage and no wired access
> > You shouldn't have to worry about rogues (since there is
> > No port to connect to ;-)
> > 
> > Philippe, 
> > University. Of TN, Knoxville
> > 
> > On Nov 10, 2011, at 8:29 PM, "Jeff Kell" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >         On 11/10/2011 8:24 PM, Harry Rauch wrote:
> >         We have in our internet docs for students that rogue
> >         wireless devices that interferes with the dorm's internet
> >         usage will be requested to shutdown or the student will lose
> >         internet rights for 30 days. Students seem to be more than
> >         willing to shut off their wireless router after they are
> >         made aware of the problem; they honestly don't have a clue
> >         about the effects of their personal wireless and the
> >         school's.
> >         
> >         We have similar policies.  If we detect a rogue (shows up in
> >         our NAC as a NATed client), we quarantine the MAC address of
> >         the router.  If they connect to their rogue wireless, they
> >         get a captive portal telling them to disconnect it!  If they
> >         then connect directly, they are fine again.  Other than us
> >         having to mark the MACs, it is self-remediating (and if the
> >         MAC returns, it gets the same result, regardless of the
> >         jack/location).
> >         
> >         Jeff
> >         ********** Participation and subscription information for
> >         this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found
> >         at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
> > ********** Participation and subscription information for this
> > EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found
> > athttp://www.educause.edu/groups/.
> > 
> > ********** Participation and subscription information for this
> > EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found
> > athttp://www.educause.edu/groups/. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ********** Participation and subscription information for this
> EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at
> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. 
> 


-- 
Leo Song, Senior Analyst & Cluster Lead
Computing and Communication Services - Networking and Security
University of Guelph
(519) 824-4120 x 53181 



**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Reply via email to