Not trolling, what you explain makes perfect sense. The original posters
question is what threw me off.
On Sep 24, 2012 10:25 AM, "Greg Ihnen" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Obviously the intended/proper use isn't to interfere with other people's
> legit networks. The intended use is to prevent rogue networks within your
> own area where you want to maintain network security.
>
> So in the case you mention, the proper configuration is to whitelist the
> other tenants' networks/APs and *not* interfere with their network. A
> legit use might be to disassociate clients from a rogue AP that is on the
> channel you're using, which is also using your SSID and is an obvious
> attempt to lure people to use the rogue network probably for nefarious
> reasons.
>
> Does this not make sense to you or are you trolling?
>
> Greg
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Zach Mann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> So in turn, becoming exactly what it's trying to prevent???  A Rogue AP
>> from the viewpoint of the other tenants who are simply trying to do
>> business on a different floor.
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Greg Ihnen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I believe the rogue countermeasures *could* be configured to
>>> disassociate the other tenant's clients from the other tenant's AP.
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Zach Mann <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's not how the system works.  The other Tenants would still be
>>>> using their OWN wireless network, only the floor that deployed Cisco WLC
>>>> would be 'squashing' the "rouge AP's" from their OWN network.
>>>>
>>>> Z
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Doug Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>    Did any of you read the original posters question?
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that the technology is out there to squash *"ROUGE
>>>>> AP's".  *
>>>>> Let me make this a little simpler.  Lets' say we have an office
>>>>> building with 6 floors and each floor is leased to a different tenant.
>>>>> Lets say that the tenant on the fourth floor decides he is sick of
>>>>> competing for airwaves for his wireless system and deploys the Cisco
>>>>> or Motorola system and squashes all the other tenants APs.  All the
>>>>> other tenants APs now do not work because of the system which
>>>>> has been put in place by the tenant on the fourth floor.  Would this
>>>>> be a violation of Part-15 if all the other tenants were to file a formal
>>>>> complaint with the FCC?
>>>>> **
>>>>> *-------Original Message-------*
>>>>>
>>>>>  *From:* Greg Ihnen <[email protected]>
>>>>> *Date:* 9/22/2012 5:34:47 AM
>>>>> *To:* WISPA General List <[email protected]>
>>>>> *Subject:* [WISPA] Can they really do this?
>>>>>
>>>>> There's a current debate raging right now on the NANOG list about the
>>>>> ins and outs of setting up large temporary networks for things like
>>>>> conventions.
>>>>>
>>>>> This one post caught my attention. Has anyone heard of a WiFi AP that
>>>>> will spoof neighboring networks to intentionally interfere with them, not
>>>>> by occupying/jamming the spectrum in a brute force way, but rather by
>>>>> impersonating the other network and rejecting new associations?
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wireless mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wireless mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wireless mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wireless mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wireless mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to