nate at natetech.com
Tue Aug 13 18:14:24 MDT 2002
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 16:10, Brian Jarrett wrote:
> The other nice thing is Cisco has proprietary methods for securing the
> wireless connection. If you go with another solution (or maybe even on top of
> what Cisco has) I would highly recommend setting up a subnet between the two
> antennas and running a secure tunnel across the wireless subnet. The most
> basic way for these devices to work is as a network bridge between the two
> lans, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Definitely agreed. Also, all the latest stuff does 100mW RF output,
whereas many other vendors don't.
I used to be a huge Orinoco/WaveLan bigot (well, you like what you
know...) but after seeing the Cisco stuff in a real production
environment, they have a number of advantages over many of the other
Of course, everyone is slowly raising their power levels and stuff like
that, but Cisco's definitely ahead of the game. The proprietary
security stuff is good to have, although it will mean that if you're
doing a more "traditional" access-point setup, everyone will have to
have Cisco cards. For a point-to-point, I think having the additional
security of the proprietary stuff *AND* a tunnel would be wonderful.
Nate, nate at natetech.com
More information about the LUG