WISPA worked closely with OpenCALEA writers when we developed our CALEA standard.
There are two standards. v1 will sunset early next year (it has some NAT provisions). I suggest you start with v2. The standard is free and open to the public. We're still working on it, but there will soon be an implementation guide that will help in network design etc. and is specific to CALEA concerns. That document will be free to WISPA members, pricing to the general public has not been set yet. Probably $250 or less though. I hope this helps, marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 6:42 AM Subject: [WISPA] Fw: Hardware capture platforms > Wasn't there some debate about availability of calea solutions before? > > This might be of interest on that topic. > > Charles > > > ------Original Message------ > From: Manish Karir > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Jul 29, 2008 7:54 PM > Subject: Re: Hardware capture platforms > > > Hi John, > > You might want to check out www.opencalea.org. We have just > released opencalea-lite which is a complete re-write of the original > opencalea software. OpenCalea-lite is a much better and cleaner > re-write(we learnt from our mistakes in the previous releases). > One of the problems of the original version was that we were > getting bogged down in details over the precise standard format > instead of making the core more stable. > OpenCalea-lite takes a step back form this and aims at > doing well the essense of what packet taps should be able to. > It has a nice clean tap/controller/collector architecture which is much > more robust. Taps will register with the controller irrespective of > which is started first. Process control has also been improved. > Starting and stopping taps is handled in a much cleaner way. > In addtion TCP streams are used to transfer data. > We were about to send out an announcement > regarding opencalea-lite on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] > mailing list. Aside from calea requirements opencalea-lite is > actually a fairly good platform for running remote-taps in > your network. > > -manish > > > >> Message: 4 >> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:10:09 -0700 (PDT) >> From: "John A. Kilpatrick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Hardware capture platforms >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >> >> >> We've deployed a bunch taps in our network and now we need a platform >> on >> which to capture the data. Our bandwidth is currently pretty low but >> I've got 8 links to tap, which means I need 16 ports. Has anyone done >> any >> research on doing accurate packet capture with commodity hardware? >> >> >> -- >> John A. Kilpatrick >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Email| http://www.hypergeek.net/ >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Text pages| ICQ: 19147504 >> remember: no obstacles/only challenges >> > > > > > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
