Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

wireless routers

Expand Messages
  • Patty Gaddis
    Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers that we ve received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six months or so. No
    Message 1 of 24 , Sep 10, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
      that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
      months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
      box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.

      Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
      the building for the different areas?

      Thanks for any input.

      Patty
      Exeter, NH FHC
    • Terri J.
      Oh, nice! You got routers. We ve got wireless cards for our computers, but no router, so the cards are useless, so if you d like to send your spare our way...
      Message 2 of 24 , Sep 10, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Oh, nice! You got routers. We've got wireless cards for our computers,
        but no router, so the cards are useless, so if you'd like to send your
        spare our way... ;)

        -Terri J.

        Patty Gaddis wrote:
        > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
        > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
        > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
        > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
        >
        > Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
        > the building for the different areas?
        >
        > Thanks for any input.
        >
        > Patty
        > Exeter, NH FHC
      • Russell Hltn
        ... Hmmmm. That s a new development. A number of the brand new machines came with wireless cards as at that time the church was rolling out Wireless in the
        Message 3 of 24 , Sep 10, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Patty Gaddis <geneamom@...> wrote:
          > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
          > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
          > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
          > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
          >

          Hmmmm. That's a new development. A number of the brand new machines
          came with wireless cards as at that time the church was rolling out
          Wireless in the different buildings. Since then I think that program
          has stopped and recently turned over to the local level. The
          guidelines I know of stipulate that wireless is to run with
          encryption. Which would seem to preclude using them for patrons.

          I've never heard of anyone getting a wireless router/access point
          before. You may have to call and ask.
        • simonsen
          Are they routers or wireless cards? I bet they are wireless cards. It would not make any sense to send routers. Richard
          Message 4 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Are they routers or wireless cards?
            I bet they are wireless cards. It would not make any sense to send routers.
            Richard


            Patty Gaddis wrote:
            >
            > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
            > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
            > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
            > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
            >
            > Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
            > the building for the different areas?
            >
            > Thanks for any input.
            >
            > Patty
            > Exeter, NH FHC
            >
            >
          • Patty Gaddis
            I ll double check, but I m pretty sure they re wireless routers. They are both exactly the same. Patty
            Message 5 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure they're wireless routers.  They are both exactly the same.

              Patty
              At 03:00 AM 9/11/2008, you wrote:

              Are they routers or wireless cards?
              I bet they are wireless cards. It would not make any sense to send routers.
              Richard

              Patty Gaddis wrote:
              >
              > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
              > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
              > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
              > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
              >
              > Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
              > the building for the different areas?
              >
              > Thanks for any input.
              >
              > Patty
              > Exeter, NH FHC
              >
              >

            • Barb Gruhl
              We have a wireless router in our History center and there for we can take the laptop in the history center anywhere in the building and use it for training.
              Message 6 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                We have a wireless router in our History center and there for we can take the laptop in the history center anywhere in the building and use it for training.
                 
                Barb G. in Indiana

                On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Patty Gaddis <geneamom@...> wrote:

                I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure they're wireless routers.  They are both exactly the same.

                Patty


                At 03:00 AM 9/11/2008, you wrote:

                Are they routers or wireless cards?
                I bet they are wireless cards. It would not make any sense to send routers.
                Richard

                Patty Gaddis wrote:
                >
                > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
                > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
                > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
                > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
                >
                > Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
                > the building for the different areas?
                >
                > Thanks for any input.
                >
                > Patty
                > Exeter, NH FHC
                >
                >




                --
                Who are we without our Families ?
              • Harrison Temple
                At one time, the church was installing wireless Access Points which used the Odyssey Client software. These proved to not be very reliable, and as far as I
                Message 7 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  At one time, the church was installing wireless Access Points which used the Odyssey Client software. These proved to not be very reliable, and as far as I know, they are not being installed now. The Access Point was a hardware device, connected to the Cisco Pix firewall and usually installed in the attic of a church, where it's signals could hopefully reach a wireless computer at any point in the church (as mentioned, this did not work well).
                   
                  A wireless router, on the other hand, is a device that connects to the firewall and routs the signals to wired and wireless computers, usually in the Family History Centers. We have a donated Linksys wireless router connected to the church-provided 8-point switch for patron convenience using a wireless laptop computer, however, the patron can only access the Internet via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network. Perhaps, wireless routers provided by the church can access all devices on the LAN.
                  This is probably more than I know about the topic!
                  H.F. Temple, director, Bartlesville, OK FHC.

                  --- On Thu, 9/11/08, Barb Gruhl <bhgruhl@...> wrote:
                  From: Barb Gruhl <bhgruhl@...>
                  Subject: Re: [fhctech] wireless routers
                  To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 7:43 AM

                  We have a wireless router in our History center and there for we can take the laptop in the history center anywhere in the building and use it for training.
                   
                  Barb G. in Indiana

                  On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Patty Gaddis <geneamom@comcast. net> wrote:
                  I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure they're wireless routers.  They are both exactly the same.

                  Patty

                  At 03:00 AM 9/11/2008, you wrote:

                  Are they routers or wireless cards?
                  I bet they are wireless cards. It would not make any sense to send routers.
                  Richard

                  Patty Gaddis wrote:
                  >
                  > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
                  > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
                  > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
                  > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
                  >
                  > Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
                  > the building for the different areas?
                  >
                  > Thanks for any input.
                  >
                  > Patty
                  > Exeter, NH FHC
                  >
                  >




                  --
                  Who are we without our Families ?
                • Russell Hltn
                  ... It s because you re using the router in the wireless router. Frankly this sounds like a feature, not a bug. While I can see advantages to allowing
                  Message 8 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Harrison Temple <htemp33@...> wrote:
                    > however, the patron can only access the Internet
                    > via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network.


                    It's because you're using the router in the wireless router. Frankly
                    this sounds like a feature, not a bug. <grin>

                    While I can see advantages to allowing some access to the local
                    resources, I think the staff would end up playing tech support as well
                    as the risk of tracking in viruses, etc.
                  • David Wardell
                    Most likely, the wireless segment of the router and the wired part are using different IP ranges. If the two were consolidated, all the resources should be
                    Message 9 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment

                      Most likely, the wireless segment of the router and the wired part are using different IP ranges.  If the two were consolidated, all the resources should be available.

                       

                      However, I wouldn’t do it for the “mischief-related” reasons you mention.

                       

                      We have a wireless network that we operate for patrons separate from both SLC’s 10.xxx WAN (which is required) and our own LAN.  The setup has been running for some time and works fine.  According to the 2006 FHC Computer Policy document, opening the local network for appropriate patron use is a local option.

                       

                      BTW:

                       

                      As an aside, I don’t know very many people who thought that installing wireless networks in meetinghouses(not just within the FHC) was going to work very well.  A number of us said so at the time.

                       

                      All the best,

                       

                      David Wardell

                      McLean Virginia FHC

                       

                       

                      From: fhctech@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fhctech@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Hltn
                      Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:40 PM
                      To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                       

                      On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Harrison Temple <htemp33@...> wrote:

                      > however, the patron can only access the Internet
                      > via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network.

                      It's because you're using the router in the wireless router. Frankly
                      this sounds like a feature, not a bug. <grin>

                      While I can see advantages to allowing some access to the local
                      resources, I think the staff would end up playing tech support as well
                      as the risk of tracking in viruses, etc.

                    • Skip Taylor
                      I installed one of the Cisco Wireless Access Points into one of our FHC s about 2 or 3 months ago. Used the Odyssey Client to connect to the FHC computers
                      Message 10 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I installed one of the Cisco Wireless Access Points into one of our
                        FHC's about 2 or 3 months ago. Used the Odyssey Client to connect to
                        the FHC computers (Linksys USB Wifi Adapter). We are also using it
                        wirelessly for the Stake Presidency in their meetings (LDS Extended
                        Access). Works well and good signal. The FM Group installed it about
                        6 feet up on a wall in the FHC's computer room. In the attic around
                        here (desert area) would be certain death for all electronics due to
                        temperatures.

                        The first WAP was a used one that was deader than a doornail though.
                        They reshipped a brand new one and no problem as I said above.

                        Skip

                        On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:20 PM, Harrison Temple <htemp33@...> wrote:
                        > At one time, the church was installing wireless Access Points which used the
                        > Odyssey Client software. These proved to not be very reliable, and as far as
                        > I know, they are not being installed now. The Access Point was a hardware
                        > device, connected to the Cisco Pix firewall and usually installed in the
                        > attic of a church, where it's signals could hopefully reach a wireless
                        > computer at any point in the church (as mentioned, this did not work well).
                        >
                        > A wireless router, on the other hand, is a device that connects to the
                        > firewall and routs the signals to wired and wireless computers, usually in
                        > the Family History Centers. We have a donated Linksys wireless router
                        > connected to the church-provided 8-point switch for patron convenience using
                        > a wireless laptop computer, however, the patron can only access the Internet
                        > via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network. Perhaps,
                        > wireless routers provided by the church can access all devices on the LAN.
                        > This is probably more than I know about the topic!
                        > H.F. Temple, director, Bartlesville, OK FHC.
                        >
                        > --- On Thu, 9/11/08, Barb Gruhl <bhgruhl@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > From: Barb Gruhl <bhgruhl@...>
                        > Subject: Re: [fhctech] wireless routers
                        > To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                        > Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 7:43 AM
                        >
                        > We have a wireless router in our History center and there for we can take
                        > the laptop in the history center anywhere in the building and use it for
                        > training.
                        >
                        > Barb G. in Indiana
                        >
                        > On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Patty Gaddis <geneamom@comcast. net> wrote:
                        >>
                        >> I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure they're wireless routers. They are
                        >> both exactly the same.
                        >>
                        >> Patty
                        >> At 03:00 AM 9/11/2008, you wrote:
                        >>
                        >> Are they routers or wireless cards?
                        >> I bet they are wireless cards. It would not make any sense to send
                        >> routers.
                        >> Richard
                        >>
                        >> Patty Gaddis wrote:
                        >> >
                        >> > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
                        >> > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
                        >> > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
                        >> > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
                        >> >
                        >> > Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
                        >> > the building for the different areas?
                        >> >
                        >> > Thanks for any input.
                        >> >
                        >> > Patty
                        >> > Exeter, NH FHC
                      • Dan
                        Actually, allowing Patron access to any wireless device was strictly prohibited until the Spring of 2008, when the new guidelines were issued. I know some of
                        Message 11 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Message
                          Actually, allowing Patron access to any wireless device was strictly prohibited until the Spring of 2008, when the new guidelines were issued. I know some of you were doing it under a mis-interpretation of the old guidelines, but having had meetings personally at Church headquarters with the staff there specifically about this issue, I can assure you that wireless patron access has always been prohibited until the
                          Spring of this year. It's a moot point now, but don't kid yourself into thinking you've been doing this within the guidelines. You haven't. Allowing patron access with HARDWIRED access was permitted under the old guidelines, but certainly not WIRELESS access. If I dug through my email archive, I could find the emails from CHQ that specifically address this issue and stated unequivicoly (sp?) that wireless access to partons was absolutely prohibited, it was never a 'local option' that was given to any local priesthood leader. Those thinking that this was a local option simply are mis-interpreting the policy in a way that was never intended by SLC.
                           
                          Even under the new guidelines issued in the spring of 2008, any patron access wireless networks must be set up with WPA access (not WEP, it must be WPA), with the password (passphrase) controlled to prevent unauthorized access. If any Family History Center is running an unsecured or WEP protected network, it is in violation of current, and previous, church policy. The ONLY Family History facility that is authorized to run an unsecured wireless network for patron access (or any other reason) is the Family History Library in Salt Lake City at temple square.
                           
                          Also under the new policy, any patron access wireless networks must not interfere with any existing wireless networks that are being operated under the Odyssey Client services, which is how wireless access was done (and still is) in many FHC's, including ours. The intention of the new guidelines released in the spring of 2008 is to provide INTERNET access only to members, leaders, clerks, and library patrons. The new guidelines are not meant to provide access to the portal services (Heritage quest, footnotes, etc.). Those services are only to be provided to library patrons through church owned computers running Landesk. Salt Lake is using IP tracking now to verify that Landesk is only being accessed through church ISP connections. Emails were recently sent to quite a few FHC's that were in violation of this.
                           
                          Fortunately, at one of my recent meetings at CHQ, I was shown the IP tracking for our FHC, and in doing so we discovered that one of our staff had installed Landesk on his personal computer and was accessing the portals from at home. I was kindly warned that this needed to be corrected before the audits started, or our FHC would run the risk of having access to the portal services from all of our FHC computers revoked. The audits are now underway. I got the problem corrected upon my return home from that trip.
                           
                          This is a licensing issue for the church.. Allowing patron access in violation of these policies (i.e. running unsecured wireless networks for patron access) can potentially place the Church in a very embarassing position. If any of you are running unsecured (or WEP secured) networks, I would strongly encourage you to cease immediately, and get your networks in compliance with the established and published policies.
                           
                          Why is WEP no longer acceptable, why is WPA now required? Because the information is readily available on the internet to anyone who wants it on how to hack a 128bit WEP key in a little under 20 minutes while parked on the street outside your facility with a laptop. Several million teenagers (most of whom know far more about networking than 99% of us on this forum) can now do this, and they do so on a very regular basis.
                           
                          All it would take to place the church, your stake president, your FHC directory, and other church members in a very bad light is for some local newspaper reporter with malice towards the church to get a local teenager to hack (or use your unsecured network) into your WEP secured network, and then use if for some unsavory purpose (easily done in spite of the firewall-pix box) and run the story in the paper.
                           
                          Come on folks, don't place us in that position. The policies are there for a reason, quit trying to skate around them, you're only risking damage to all the rest of us... it's just not worth it.
                           
                          Dan Vester
                          Prescott Arizona FHC STS
                           
                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: fhctech@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fhctech@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Wardell
                          Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 2:44 PM
                          To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: RE: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                          Most likely, the wireless segment of the router and the wired part are using different IP ranges.  If the two were consolidated, all the resources should be available.

                          However, I wouldn’t do it for the “mischief-related” reasons you mention.

                          We have a wireless network that we operate for patrons separate from both SLC’s 10.xxx WAN (which is required) and our own LAN.  The setup has been running for some time and works fine.  According to the 2006 FHC Computer Policy document, opening the local network for appropriate patron use is a local option.

                          BTW:

                          As an aside, I don’t know very many people who thought that installing wireless networks in meetinghouses( not just within the FHC) was going to work very well.  A number of us said so at the time.

                          All the best,

                          David Wardell

                          McLean Virginia FHC

                          From: fhctech@yahoogroups .com [mailto:fhctech@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Russell Hltn
                          Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:40 PM
                          To: fhctech@yahoogroups .com
                          Subject: Re: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                          On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Harrison Temple <htemp33@yahoo. com> wrote:
                          > however, the patron can only access the Internet
                          > via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network.

                          It's because you're using the router in the wireless router. Frankly
                          this sounds like a feature, not a bug. <grin>

                          While I can see advantages to allowing some access to the local
                          resources, I think the staff would end up playing tech support as well
                          as the risk of tracking in viruses, etc.



                          __________ NOD32 3436 (20080911) Information __________

                          This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
                          http://www.eset.com
                        • Gary Templeman
                          ... From: Dan ... Seems to me that the Church ought to be providing directors a regular report of the IP tracking then. It should be
                          Message 12 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: "Dan" <dvester@...>


                            >Fortunately, at one of my recent meetings at CHQ, I was shown the IP
                            >tracking for our FHC, and in doing so we discovered that one of our staff
                            >had installed Landesk on his personal computer and was accessing the
                            >portals
                            >from at home. I was kindly warned that this needed to be corrected before
                            >the audits started, or our FHC would run the risk of having access to the
                            >portal services from all of our FHC computers revoked. The audits are now
                            >underway. I got the problem corrected upon my return home from that trip.

                            Seems to me that the Church ought to be providing directors a regular report
                            of the IP tracking then. It should be easy to generate, and can be sent
                            electronically to the unit email address. Rather than being punitive to a
                            FHC that is totally unaware of a problem, the FHC director should be
                            informed so he/she can correct it. You were lucky that you were visiting
                            CHQ. The rest of us do not usually have that luxury.

                            >All it would take to place the church, your stake president, your FHC
                            >directory, and other church members in a very bad light is for some local
                            >newspaper reporter with malice towards the church to get a local teenager
                            >to
                            >hack (or use your unsecured network) into your WEP secured network, and
                            >then
                            >use if for some unsavory purpose (easily done in spite of the firewall-pix
                            >box) and run the story in the paper.

                            >Come on folks, don't place us in that position. The policies are there for
                            >a
                            >reason, quit trying to skate around them, you're only risking damage to all
                            >the rest of us... it's just not worth it.

                            >Dan Vester
                            >Prescott Arizona FHC STS

                            And while I totally agree that the rules should be followed, I think the
                            real odds of such a scenario are slim. I have seen many examples of people
                            being prosecuted for hacking into networks, or stealing someone's Internet
                            connection. And while businesses that have allowed security breaches
                            (release of credit card numbers, etc) have gotten in trouble, I am not aware
                            of any cases where home users or small organizations such as a church have
                            had problems because someone ELSE piggybacked off of their network and did
                            something illegal without their knowledge. Any reporter who got someone to
                            do unsavory things in order to publish a story risks having that person
                            arrested, and them at minimum losing their job for ethical malfeasance. Yes,
                            we need to have things secured so that the Church does not become liable for
                            not exercising due diligence, but sometimes I think there is a bit of
                            excessive paranoia in the Church regarding our relationship with the world.
                            In most cases our bad publicity comes when we shoot ourselves in the foot.

                            Gary Templeman
                          • David Wardell
                            Well, Dan Please forgive my ignorance, but I have a very hard time following what you re saying, as there seem to be several messages mixed in different ways.
                            Message 13 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment

                              Well, Dan

                               

                              Please forgive my ignorance, but I have a very hard time following what you’re saying, as there seem to be several messages mixed in different ways.

                               

                              You seem to be saying that there is a policy published somewhere that “absolutely” prohibits patron wireless access.

                               

                              Chapter and verse, please (meaning—where can I reference to read that).

                               

                              Then, you seem to be saying that some sort of patron access is permitted, assuming a WPA access key is provided.  If that’s true, why are you scolding me for having patron access?  I don’t believe I explained how we do it in that level of detail.

                               

                              Again, chapter and verse, please.

                               

                              Later, you seem to be saying that there is a licensing issue drifting about somewhere.  What might that be?  We have never allowed any sort of patron access (wireless or otherwise) to the “portal” apart from equipment used in, and owned by, the FHC—in strict “hand over the heart” compliance with SLC’s LANDesk instructions.   My apologies, but I thought that was clear from my earlier post.   The sole and only thing we have done is allow patrons to have controlled access to “Internet Only” which in no way touches, interferes with, annoys, troubles, or has any sort of physical or spiritual access to SLC’s WAN or the FHC services portal.

                               

                              I can’t tell whether you’re trying to say that is something we should not be doing or whether we can.

                               

                              On related topics:

                               

                              Your SLC sources have a different interpretation than mine do.  As this is not uncommon, that’s why I’d like to see the communications referenced in their entirety.  Once again, we are not discussing unrestricted access to the FHC services portal (there is no disagreement on that point), just Internet-Only access.  I will just say that, if SLC means to proscribe all types of patron wireless access, it would be very helpful if they said so.

                               

                              Finally,

                               

                              One reason I (and I suspect a number of people) are rather hesitant to say anything on this list is that I am downright weary of being scolded.  May I humbly suggest that people take time to understand and ask specifically what others are doing before telling them how wrong they are and what an embarrassment they are going to become.

                               

                              I’m going to find a pine box and lay in it so I won’t embarrass anyone further.

                               

                              DW

                               

                              From: fhctech@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fhctech@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dan
                              Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:50 PM
                              To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: RE: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                               

                              Actually, allowing Patron access to any wireless device was strictly prohibited until the Spring of 2008, when the new guidelines were issued. I know some of you were doing it under a mis-interpretation of the old guidelines, but having had meetings personally at Church headquarters with the staff there specifically about this issue, I can assure you that wireless patron access has always been prohibited until the
                              Spring of this year. It's a moot point now, but don't kid yourself into thinking you've been doing this within the guidelines. You haven't. Allowing patron access with HARDWIRED access was permitted under the old guidelines, but certainly not WIRELESS access. If I dug through my email archive, I could find the emails from CHQ that specifically address this issue and stated unequivicoly (sp?) that wireless access to partons was absolutely prohibited, it was never a 'local option' that was given to any local priesthood leader. Those thinking that this was a local option simply are mis-interpreting the policy in a way that was never intended by SLC.

                               

                              Even under the new guidelines issued in the spring of 2008, any patron access wireless networks must be set up with WPA access (not WEP, it must be WPA), with the password (passphrase) controlled to prevent unauthorized access. If any Family History Center is running an unsecured or WEP protected network, it is in violation of current, and previous, church policy. The ONLY Family History facility that is authorized to run an unsecured wireless network for patron access (or any other reason) is the Family History Library in Salt Lake City at temple square.

                               

                              Also under the new policy, any patron access wireless networks must not interfere with any existing wireless networks that are being operated under the Odyssey Client services, which is how wireless access was done (and still is) in many FHC's, including ours. The intention of the new guidelines released in the spring of 2008 is to provide INTERNET access only to members, leaders, clerks, and library patrons. The new guidelines are not meant to provide access to the portal services (Heritage quest, footnotes, etc.). Those services are only to be provided to library patrons through church owned computers running Landesk. Salt Lake is using IP tracking now to verify that Landesk is only being accessed through church ISP connections. Emails were recently sent to quite a few FHC's that were in violation of this.

                               

                              Fortunately, at one of my recent meetings at CHQ, I was shown the IP tracking for our FHC, and in doing so we discovered that one of our staff had installed Landesk on his personal computer and was accessing the portals from at home. I was kindly warned that this needed to be corrected before the audits started, or our FHC would run the risk of having access to the portal services from all of our FHC computers revoked. The audits are now underway. I got the problem corrected upon my return home from that trip.

                               

                              This is a licensing issue for the church.. Allowing patron access in violation of these policies (i.e. running unsecured wireless networks for patron access) can potentially place the Church in a very embarassing position. If any of you are running unsecured (or WEP secured) networks, I would strongly encourage you to cease immediately, and get your networks in compliance with the established and published policies.

                               

                              Why is WEP no longer acceptable, why is WPA now required? Because the information is readily available on the internet to anyone who wants it on how to hack a 128bit WEP key in a little under 20 minutes while parked on the street outside your facility with a laptop. Several million teenagers (most of whom know far more about networking than 99% of us on this forum) can now do this, and they do so on a very regular basis.

                               

                              All it would take to place the church, your stake president, your FHC directory, and other church members in a very bad light is for some local newspaper reporter with malice towards the church to get a local teenager to hack (or use your unsecured network) into your WEP secured network, and then use if for some unsavory purpose (easily done in spite of the firewall-pix box) and run the story in the paper.

                               

                              Come on folks, don't place us in that position. The policies are there for a reason, quit trying to skate around them, you're only risking damage to all the rest of us... it's just not worth it.

                               

                              Dan Vester

                              Prescott Arizona FHC STS

                               

                              -----Original Message-----
                              From: fhctech@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fhctech@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Wardell
                              Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 2:44 PM
                              To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: RE: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                              Most likely, the wireless segment of the router and the wired part are using different IP ranges.  If the two were consolidated, all the resources should be available.

                              However, I wouldn’t do it for the “mischief-related” reasons you mention.

                              We have a wireless network that we operate for patrons separate from both SLC’s 10.xxx WAN (which is required) and our own LAN.  The setup has been running for some time and works fine.  According to the 2006 FHC Computer Policy document, opening the local network for appropriate patron use is a local option.

                              BTW:

                              As an aside, I don’t know very many people who thought that installing wireless networks in meetinghouses(not just within the FHC) was going to work very well.  A number of us said so at the time.

                              All the best,

                              David Wardell

                              McLean Virginia FHC

                              From: fhctech@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fhctech@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Hltn
                              Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:40 PM
                              To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: Re: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                              On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Harrison Temple <htemp33@...> wrote:
                              > however, the patron can only access the Internet
                              > via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network.

                              It's because you're using the router in the wireless router. Frankly
                              this sounds like a feature, not a bug. <grin>

                              While I can see advantages to allowing some access to the local
                              resources, I think the staff would end up playing tech support as well
                              as the risk of tracking in viruses, etc.



                              __________ NOD32 3436 (20080911) Information __________

                              This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
                              http://www.eset.com

                            • Russell Hltn
                              ... I agree with most of your post except that quoted back above. It s my understanding that the church is moving away from the Odyssey Client. So as long as
                              Message 14 of 24 , Sep 11, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Dan <dvester@...> wrote:
                                > Also under the new policy, any patron access wireless networks must not
                                > interfere with any existing wireless networks that are being operated under
                                > the Odyssey Client services, which is how wireless access was done (and
                                > still is) in many FHC's, including ours.

                                I agree with most of your post except that quoted back above. It's my
                                understanding that the church is moving away from the Odyssey Client.
                                So as long as all the users are taken care of, there's no problem with
                                removing it (with the help of GSD(?)) from the Access Points and from
                                the machines and using WPA instead.
                              • slw
                                Dan Do you have access to the guidelines in writing, if so would you please provide a copy to the list so so we may review them to insure compliance. Thanks
                                Message 15 of 24 , Sep 12, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dan
                                   
                                  Do you have access to the guidelines in writing, if so would you please provide a copy to the list so so we may review them to insure compliance.
                                   
                                  Thanks
                                   
                                  Sterrie
                                   
                                  Newport News, VA  FHC


                                  From: fhctech@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fhctech@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dan
                                  Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:50 PM
                                  To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: RE: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                                  Actually, allowing Patron access to any wireless device was strictly prohibited until the Spring of 2008, when the new guidelines were issued. I know some of you were doing it under a mis-interpretation of the old guidelines, but having had meetings personally at Church headquarters with the staff there specifically about this issue, I can assure you that wireless patron access has always been prohibited until the
                                  Spring of this year. It's a moot point now, but don't kid yourself into thinking you've been doing this within the guidelines. You haven't. Allowing patron access with HARDWIRED access was permitted under the old guidelines, but certainly not WIRELESS access. If I dug through my email archive, I could find the emails from CHQ that specifically address this issue and stated unequivicoly (sp?) that wireless access to partons was absolutely prohibited, it was never a 'local option' that was given to any local priesthood leader. Those thinking that this was a local option simply are mis-interpreting the policy in a way that was never intended by SLC.
                                   
                                  Even under the new guidelines issued in the spring of 2008, any patron access wireless networks must be set up with WPA access (not WEP, it must be WPA), with the password (passphrase) controlled to prevent unauthorized access. If any Family History Center is running an unsecured or WEP protected network, it is in violation of current, and previous, church policy. The ONLY Family History facility that is authorized to run an unsecured wireless network for patron access (or any other reason) is the Family History Library in Salt Lake City at temple square.
                                   
                                  Also under the new policy, any patron access wireless networks must not interfere with any existing wireless networks that are being operated under the Odyssey Client services, which is how wireless access was done (and still is) in many FHC's, including ours. The intention of the new guidelines released in the spring of 2008 is to provide INTERNET access only to members, leaders, clerks, and library patrons. The new guidelines are not meant to provide access to the portal services (Heritage quest, footnotes, etc.). Those services are only to be provided to library patrons through church owned computers running Landesk. Salt Lake is using IP tracking now to verify that Landesk is only being accessed through church ISP connections. Emails were recently sent to quite a few FHC's that were in violation of this.
                                   
                                  Fortunately, at one of my recent meetings at CHQ, I was shown the IP tracking for our FHC, and in doing so we discovered that one of our staff had installed Landesk on his personal computer and was accessing the portals from at home. I was kindly warned that this needed to be corrected before the audits started, or our FHC would run the risk of having access to the portal services from all of our FHC computers revoked. The audits are now underway. I got the problem corrected upon my return home from that trip.
                                   
                                  This is a licensing issue for the church.. Allowing patron access in violation of these policies (i.e. running unsecured wireless networks for patron access) can potentially place the Church in a very embarassing position. If any of you are running unsecured (or WEP secured) networks, I would strongly encourage you to cease immediately, and get your networks in compliance with the established and published policies.
                                   
                                  Why is WEP no longer acceptable, why is WPA now required? Because the information is readily available on the internet to anyone who wants it on how to hack a 128bit WEP key in a little under 20 minutes while parked on the street outside your facility with a laptop. Several million teenagers (most of whom know far more about networking than 99% of us on this forum) can now do this, and they do so on a very regular basis.
                                   
                                  All it would take to place the church, your stake president, your FHC directory, and other church members in a very bad light is for some local newspaper reporter with malice towards the church to get a local teenager to hack (or use your unsecured network) into your WEP secured network, and then use if for some unsavory purpose (easily done in spite of the firewall-pix box) and run the story in the paper.
                                   
                                  Come on folks, don't place us in that position. The policies are there for a reason, quit trying to skate around them, you're only risking damage to all the rest of us... it's just not worth it.
                                   
                                  Dan Vester
                                  Prescott Arizona FHC STS
                                   
                                  -----Original Message-----
                                  From: fhctech@yahoogroups .com [mailto:fhctech@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of David Wardell
                                  Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 2:44 PM
                                  To: fhctech@yahoogroups .com
                                  Subject: RE: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                                  Most likely, the wireless segment of the router and the wired part are using different IP ranges.  If the two were consolidated, all the resources should be available.

                                  However, I wouldn’t do it for the “mischief-related” reasons you mention.

                                  We have a wireless network that we operate for patrons separate from both SLC’s 10.xxx WAN (which is required) and our own LAN.  The setup has been running for some time and works fine.  According to the 2006 FHC Computer Policy document, opening the local network for appropriate patron use is a local option.

                                  BTW:

                                  As an aside, I don’t know very many people who thought that installing wireless networks in meetinghouses( not just within the FHC) was going to work very well.  A number of us said so at the time.

                                  All the best,

                                  David Wardell

                                  McLean Virginia FHC

                                  From: fhctech@yahoogroups .com [mailto:fhctech@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Russell Hltn
                                  Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:40 PM
                                  To: fhctech@yahoogroups .com
                                  Subject: Re: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                                  On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Harrison Temple <htemp33@yahoo. com> wrote:
                                  > however, the patron can only access the Internet
                                  > via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network.

                                  It's because you're using the router in the wireless router. Frankly
                                  this sounds like a feature, not a bug. <grin>

                                  While I can see advantages to allowing some access to the local
                                  resources, I think the staff would end up playing tech support as well
                                  as the risk of tracking in viruses, etc.



                                  __________ NOD32 3436 (20080911) Information __________

                                  This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
                                  http://www.eset. com

                                • Ed Gowen
                                  Over a year ago the Church contracted with a group to install wireless access in our Ward Meeting House. We are in a third phase building with only one Ward
                                  Message 16 of 24 , Sep 12, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Over a year ago the Church contracted with a group to install wireless access in our Ward Meeting House.  We are in a third phase building with only one Ward and they installed two access points in both side hallways about half-way down the hallway.  For a long time there was absolutely no use of these APs although they were powered 24 x 7. Our Ward clerk's computer is now connected wirelessly through these access points to the DSL in the FHC.  If it had been up to me, I'd have just extended the wired connection another 40 feet or so and skipped the access points at least for the time being.  The APs are heavily securred and it takes Stake Presidents approval to add a client.  Right now the ward computer is the only active wireless client.  We actually have a wireless laptop but I've turned off the wireless client and use an ethernet cable to attach the laptop to the network in the FHC because the FHC is so far from the APs.  All of our other computers are connected using ethernet cables.  It might be handy if the laptop were to be used to teach a class away from the FHC but this has not happend as yet.
                                     
                                    Right now I'm just scratching my head wondering what the long term plan is.  Every time I get to thinking about the cost of the APs, the power they've been using and the potential exposure to hackers I remember the elevator shafts in the Salt lake Temple and figure I'd better wait and see what happens.  ;-)

                                    Regards,

                                    Ed
                                    - - - - - - - - - -
                                    Ed Gowen
                                    Work Email: egowen@...
                                    Personal Email: ed@...


                                    On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Barb Gruhl <bhgruhl@...> wrote:

                                    We have a wireless router in our History center and there for we can take the laptop in the history center anywhere in the building and use it for training.
                                     
                                    Barb G. in Indiana

                                    On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Patty Gaddis <geneamom@...> wrote:

                                    I'll double check, but I'm pretty sure they're wireless routers.  They are both exactly the same.

                                    Patty

                                    At 03:00 AM 9/11/2008, you wrote:

                                    Are they routers or wireless cards?
                                    I bet they are wireless cards. It would not make any sense to send routers.
                                    Richard

                                    Patty Gaddis wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Does anyone know if we are supposed to be using the wireless routers
                                    > that we've received? SLC has sent us two of them over the past six
                                    > months or so. No instructions ever with them. One just came in a
                                    > box alone and one came with a cascaded computer we received.
                                    >
                                    > Are they for patrons to connect to our system? Or, to be used within
                                    > the building for the different areas?
                                    >
                                    > Thanks for any input.
                                    >
                                    > Patty
                                    > Exeter, NH FHC
                                    >
                                    >




                                    --
                                    Who are we without our Families ?


                                  • Russell Hltn
                                    ... In several of the cases I ve heard about, they did install a jack in the clerk s office as well.
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Sep 12, 2008
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:32 AM, Ed Gowen <egowen@...> wrote:
                                      > If it had been up to me, I'd have just extended the wired
                                      > connection another 40 feet or so and skipped the access points at least for
                                      > the time being.

                                      In several of the cases I've heard about, they did install a jack in
                                      the clerk's office as well.
                                    • Bill Henderson
                                      I write this with some trepidation because of all the commentary it generates. However, here goes...   I have attached two files to this message: one
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Sep 27, 2008
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        I write this with some trepidation because of all the commentary it generates. However, here goes...
                                         
                                        I have attached two files to this message: one graphically displaying how my FHC is setup to use wireless networking with laptops and wireless printing. The other is a user agreement, explaining their usage, limitations, and the WEPs encryption key to be used if they want to connect to our wireles net.  More about these later.
                                         
                                        A couple years ago the church sent out PCs with wireless network connections to be plugged into FHC computers and used with Cisco Aironet wireless access points and Odessey encription software, similar to what is used on college campuses.  The reason for the wireless setup is because most FHC sites are not prewired for ethernet cable access. So, wireless was to be used to avoid people from tripping over ethernet cables.  PIX firewalls and the Aironet access point hardware were to be installed and managed by LDS' Global Services (GSD).  However, the Aironet installations took a year or more to get installed. 
                                         
                                        About the same time the Church established a Virtual Private Network (VPN) using the 10.xxx.xxx.xxx IP addresses.  Each FHC should have their own unique set of addresses ( about 60 per FHC unless the FHC is huge).  Also the PIX firewall was limited to 10 licenses (a license is permision to use an IP address).  This can be increased to 50 licenses by request (and justification) to GSD.  Not having really studied the Aironet hardware, it may or may not have routing capabilities.  If not, then all it does is convert ethernet cable addresses and data to wireless (radio waves) for use by a wireless transceiver.  
                                         
                                        A router (wireless or not) possesses a Network Address Translator (NAT) which translates one IP address received from outside of it to another IP address used within the local net supported by the router.  Most IP addresses are public (i.e. Internet addresses.  www.yahoo.com is actually 76.xxx.xxx.xxx.  DNS servers translate www... names to IP addresses and vice versa. Further esplanation here is beyond the scope of this letter).  Three IP address groups are private addresses (they cannot be sent beyond the router supporting that local net).  They are 10.xxx.xxx.xxx, 172,16.xxx.xxx, and 192.168.xxx.xxx. 10.xxx... can contain around 7 million IP addresses (the Church uses it thru a VPN to reach your FHC).  172.16... has about 1 million available addresses, and 192.168... has about 65,000 addresses (unless you know how to configure a router, the available 192... addresses is limited to 256 which is more than enough for most of us).  Your PIX firewall is a router. It has two primary functions.  1) restricting undesireable transmission and receptions from the Internet. 2) pass the Church's private network stuff between the Church and the FHCs.  Remember the 10... network normally cannot be sent outside of the router. But, since it is a VPN, the entire Church network is one great big local network.
                                         
                                        So, the PIX connects to the Internet and to the Church VPN and is sent to the PC requesting the info.  Internet stuff can't get to the Church's VPN (they are isolated from each other). 
                                         
                                        After carefully reading the memos and guidelines sent out to the FHC, I determined that users can use their personal devices for FHC purposes so long as they don't/can't connect to the Church's VPN.  In order to do this, the wireless network I set up was restricted to the 192.168... subnet.  The wireless router translates the incoming info from the Internet to 192.168... net and local 192.168... wireless info is sent to the Internet and cannot touch the 10... VPN, thus fulfilling the restriction by the church.  My FHC also has a wireless printserver connected to an ethernet printer permitting our wireless user to print their files. We have successfully, operated this way for two years.  
                                         
                                        I ran a field strength test on our wireless net and verified that the wireless signals ended about 30 beyond the FHC's front door (about where the first row of cars are parked outside in the ward's parking lot.  Inside the church, the signal faded at he first hallway inside the meeting hall.  You can use a wireless laptop as a field strenght tool.  Just connect to the wireless net and walk outward from the wireless router and see when the connection fails.  The walls of our meeting house is reinforced concrete blocks (they contain reinforcing bars and concrete in all the block holes) and is a limiter of radio (wireless) signals.  Since the wireless signal barely gets out the door, a WEP encryption is all that is needed, and that mainly to restrict access to our net without first signing a usage agreement.  The MAC address of the users device is also part of the agreement.  Originally that was in order to restrict access only to those signed the agreement.  But, I found that I didn't use those MAC addresses, they weren't needed.  However, if I choose to I can use the MAC address to deny access to that device (and theorethically that user) if he/she has been found to abuse our service.  Changing to WPA (a stronger encryption) would not prove a difficult chore as mentioned.  The reason for WEP vs WPA is because older laptops did not have that level of encryption.  Almost everyone's laptop has it now.
                                         
                                        We use a Belkin Wireless router, but any name brand will do.  The wireless printserver comes from D-Link. 
                                         
                                        As far as the ending of prohibition mentioned by brother Vester, I would like to see a copy of any documentation he has on it.  I have a System Admin Manual (SAM) and would like a copy to incude in it.  Everyone reading this should keep a copy too. 
                                         
                                        The issue concerning possible interfering with existing wireless net, is not a problem either.  The church uses the 10... net. So, setting up a 192.168... net solves that issue.  They won't see each other or talk to each other.  Both can be connected to the back of the PIX.  Since the PCs in my FHC are hardwired ethernet there is no problem with users connecting to Heritage Quest or other software thru our wireless net (unless they have purchased their own license).  Even if I installed an Aironet/Odessey wireless network there would be no cross connection or interference.  If your wireless signal extends outside of the FHC grounds,  the stronger WPA is strongly suggested.  Our FHC is for the benefit of our patrons only and that is how we will keep it.

                                        --- On Thu, 9/11/08, Dan <dvester@...> wrote:
                                        From: Dan <dvester@...>
                                        Subject: RE: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.
                                        To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                                        Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 8:50 PM

                                        Actually, allowing Patron access to any wireless device was strictly prohibited until the Spring of 2008, when the new guidelines were issued. I know some of you were doing it under a mis-interpretation of the old guidelines, but having had meetings personally at Church headquarters with the staff there specifically about this issue, I can assure you that wireless patron access has always been prohibited until the
                                        Spring of this year. It's a moot point now, but don't kid yourself into thinking you've been doing this within the guidelines. You haven't. Allowing patron access with HARDWIRED access was permitted under the old guidelines, but certainly not WIRELESS access. If I dug through my email archive, I could find the emails from CHQ that specifically address this issue and stated unequivicoly (sp?) that wireless access to partons was absolutely prohibited, it was never a 'local option' that was given to any local priesthood leader. Those thinking that this was a local option simply are mis-interpreting the policy in a way that was never intended by SLC.
                                         
                                        Even under the new guidelines issued in the spring of 2008, any patron access wireless networks must be set up with WPA access (not WEP, it must be WPA), with the password (passphrase) controlled to prevent unauthorized access. If any Family History Center is running an unsecured or WEP protected network, it is in violation of current, and previous, church policy. The ONLY Family History facility that is authorized to run an unsecured wireless network for patron access (or any other reason) is the Family History Library in Salt Lake City at temple square.
                                         
                                        Also under the new policy, any patron access wireless networks must not interfere with any existing wireless networks that are being operated under the Odyssey Client services, which is how wireless access was done (and still is) in many FHC's, including ours. The intention of the new guidelines released in the spring of 2008 is to provide INTERNET access only to members, leaders, clerks, and library patrons. The new guidelines are not meant to provide access to the portal services (Heritage quest, footnotes, etc.). Those services are only to be provided to library patrons through church owned computers running Landesk. Salt Lake is using IP tracking now to verify that Landesk is only being accessed through church ISP connections. Emails were recently sent to quite a few FHC's that were in violation of this.
                                         
                                        Fortunately, at one of my recent meetings at CHQ, I was shown the IP tracking for our FHC, and in doing so we discovered that one of our staff had installed Landesk on his personal computer and was accessing the portals from at home. I was kindly warned that this needed to be corrected before the audits started, or our FHC would run the risk of having access to the portal services from all of our FHC computers revoked. The audits are now underway. I got the problem corrected upon my return home from that trip.
                                         
                                        This is a licensing issue for the church.. Allowing patron access in violation of these policies (i.e. running unsecured wireless networks for patron access) can potentially place the Church in a very embarassing position. If any of you are running unsecured (or WEP secured) networks, I would strongly encourage you to cease immediately, and get your networks in compliance with the established and published policies.
                                         
                                        Why is WEP no longer acceptable, why is WPA now required? Because the information is readily available on the internet to anyone who wants it on how to hack a 128bit WEP key in a little under 20 minutes while parked on the street outside your facility with a laptop. Several million teenagers (most of whom know far more about networking than 99% of us on this forum) can now do this, and they do so on a very regular basis.
                                         
                                        All it would take to place the church, your stake president, your FHC directory, and other church members in a very bad light is for some local newspaper reporter with malice towards the church to get a local teenager to hack (or use your unsecured network) into your WEP secured network, and then use if for some unsavory purpose (easily done in spite of the firewall-pix box) and run the story in the paper.
                                         
                                        Come on folks, don't place us in that position. The policies are there for a reason, quit trying to skate around them, you're only risking damage to all the rest of us... it's just not worth it.
                                         
                                        Dan Vester
                                        Prescott Arizona FHC STS
                                         
                                        -----Original Message-----
                                        From: fhctech@yahoogroups .com [mailto:fhctech@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of David Wardell
                                        Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 2:44 PM
                                        To: fhctech@yahoogroups .com
                                        Subject: RE: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                                        Most likely, the wireless segment of the router and the wired part are using different IP ranges.  If the two were consolidated, all the resources should be available.

                                        However, I wouldn’t do it for the “mischief-related” reasons you mention.

                                        We have a wireless network that we operate for patrons separate from both SLC’s 10.xxx WAN (which is required) and our own LAN.  The setup has been running for some time and works fine.  According to the 2006 FHC Computer Policy document, opening the local network for appropriate patron use is a local option.

                                        BTW:

                                        As an aside, I don’t know very many people who thought that installing wireless networks in meetinghouses( not just within the FHC) was going to work very well.  A number of us said so at the time.

                                        All the best,

                                        David Wardell

                                        McLean Virginia FHC

                                        From: fhctech@yahoogroups .com [mailto:fhctech@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Russell Hltn
                                        Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 4:40 PM
                                        To: fhctech@yahoogroups .com
                                        Subject: Re: [fhctech] Wireless routers, access points, etc.

                                        On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Harrison Temple <htemp33@yahoo. com> wrote:
                                        > however, the patron can only access the Internet
                                        > via this method and not the devices on the Local Area Network.

                                        It's because you're using the router in the wireless router. Frankly
                                        this sounds like a feature, not a bug. <grin>

                                        While I can see advantages to allowing some access to the local
                                        resources, I think the staff would end up playing tech support as well
                                        as the risk of tracking in viruses, etc.



                                        __________ NOD32 3436 (20080911) Information __________

                                        This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
                                        http://www.eset. com

                                      • register
                                        Good morning, I am looking for additional information re LANDesk updates. Let me try a few questions to focus my concerns: 1. Do my FHC computers check in
                                        Message 19 of 24 , Oct 25, 2008
                                        • 0 Attachment

                                           

                                          Good morning, I am looking for additional information re LANDesk updates.  Let me try a few questions to focus my concerns:

                                           

                                          1.  Do my FHC computers check in with LANDesk or does LANDesk check in with the FHC computers?

                                          2.  How often and at what time does the above check in occur?

                                          3.  What is your advice regarding leaving our computers running or turning them off?

                                           

                                          Thanks for your help.

                                           

                                          Eric Abell

                                          Director, Victoria FHC

                                          Victoria, BC, Canada

                                           

                                          No virus found in this incoming message.
                                          Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                                          Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.7.3/1693 - Release Date: 9/26/2008 6:55 PM

                                        • Russell Hltn
                                          We may have to wait until Monday for official word from Lynn, but my understanding is that the computers check-in with LANDesk. It s not at a fixed time and
                                          Message 20 of 24 , Oct 25, 2008
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            We may have to wait until Monday for official word from Lynn, but my
                                            understanding is that the computers check-in with LANDesk. It's not
                                            at a fixed time and day but on a periodic schedule - for example if
                                            it's been more then a week since the last check-in.

                                            My advice on the computers is to start them up when the center is
                                            opened and shut them down when you close up.

                                            Everything *should* work OK with that, but I know there's been times
                                            that LANDesk fails to update itself and things stagnate. But that's a
                                            different topic.


                                            On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 2:24 AM, register <emregister@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Good morning, I am looking for additional information re LANDesk updates.
                                            > Let me try a few questions to focus my concerns:
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > 1. Do my FHC computers check in with LANDesk or does LANDesk check in with
                                            > the FHC computers?
                                            >
                                            > 2. How often and at what time does the above check in occur?
                                            >
                                            > 3. What is your advice regarding leaving our computers running or turning
                                            > them off?
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Thanks for your help.
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Eric Abell
                                            >
                                            > Director, Victoria FHC
                                            >
                                            > Victoria, BC, Canada
                                            >
                                            >
                                          • Alan Whitcomb
                                            My understanding was that the computers checked in with LANDesk and got updates, etc. when they first connected to the internet. That is why sometimes people
                                            Message 21 of 24 , Oct 25, 2008
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              My understanding was that the computers checked in with LANDesk and got updates, etc. when they first connected to the internet.  That is why sometimes people have commented in the past about the system acting really slowly (it's busy getting it's updates) after turning it on.
                                               
                                              Alan

                                               
                                              On 10/25/08, Russell Hltn <RussellHltn@...> wrote:

                                              We may have to wait until Monday for official word from Lynn, but my
                                              understanding is that the computers check-in with LANDesk. It's not
                                              at a fixed time and day but on a periodic schedule - for example if
                                              it's been more then a week since the last check-in.

                                              My advice on the computers is to start them up when the center is
                                              opened and shut them down when you close up.

                                              Everything *should* work OK with that, but I know there's been times
                                              that LANDesk fails to update itself and things stagnate. But that's a
                                              different topic.

                                              On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 2:24 AM, register <emregister@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Good morning, I am looking for additional information re LANDesk updates.
                                              > Let me try a few questions to focus my concerns:
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > 1. Do my FHC computers check in with LANDesk or does LANDesk check in with
                                              > the FHC computers?
                                              >
                                              > 2. How often and at what time does the above check in occur?
                                              >
                                              > 3. What is your advice regarding leaving our computers running or turning
                                              > them off?
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Thanks for your help.
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Eric Abell
                                              >
                                              > Director, Victoria FHC
                                              >
                                              > Victoria, BC, Canada
                                              >
                                              >


                                            • James W Anderson
                                              That s odd, I was switching one off at my FHC the other night, and it said there were Windows updates, it had not gotten the updates the rest of them had
                                              Message 22 of 24 , Oct 25, 2008
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                That's odd, I was switching one off at my FHC the other night, and it said there were Windows updates, it had not gotten the updates the rest of them had gotten the night before, even though that one had been on that night as well (I saw it on then).



                                                --- On Sat, 10/25/08, Alan Whitcomb <alan.whitcomb@...> wrote:
                                                From: Alan Whitcomb <alan.whitcomb@...>
                                                Subject: Re: [fhctech] LANDesk
                                                To: fhctech@yahoogroups.com
                                                Date: Saturday, October 25, 2008, 1:30 PM

                                                My understanding was that the computers checked in with LANDesk and got updates, etc. when they first connected to the internet.  That is why sometimes people have commented in the past about the system acting really slowly (it's busy getting it's updates) after turning it on.
                                                 
                                                Alan

                                                 
                                                On 10/25/08, Russell Hltn <RussellHltn@ gmail.com> wrote:

                                                We may have to wait until Monday for official word from Lynn, but my
                                                understanding is that the computers check-in with LANDesk. It's not
                                                at a fixed time and day but on a periodic schedule - for example if
                                                it's been more then a week since the last check-in.

                                                My advice on the computers is to start them up when the center is
                                                opened and shut them down when you close up.

                                                Everything *should* work OK with that, but I know there's been times
                                                that LANDesk fails to update itself and things stagnate. But that's a
                                                different topic.

                                                On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 2:24 AM, register <emregister@shaw. ca> wrote:
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > Good morning, I am looking for additional information re LANDesk updates.
                                                > Let me try a few questions to focus my concerns:
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > 1. Do my FHC computers check in with LANDesk or does LANDesk check in with
                                                > the FHC computers?
                                                >
                                                > 2. How often and at what time does the above check in occur?
                                                >
                                                > 3. What is your advice regarding leaving our computers running or turning
                                                > them off?
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > Thanks for your help.
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > Eric Abell
                                                >
                                                > Director, Victoria FHC
                                                >
                                                > Victoria, BC, Canada
                                                >
                                                >



                                              • Russell Hltn
                                                ... There s probably truth to that. I d expect it to tend to check in on start-up or shortly thereafter, but only if it s been too long since the last
                                                Message 23 of 24 , Oct 25, 2008
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Alan Whitcomb <alan.whitcomb@...> wrote:
                                                  > My understanding was that the computers checked in with LANDesk and got
                                                  > updates, etc. when they first connected to the internet. That is why
                                                  > sometimes people have commented in the past about the system acting really
                                                  > slowly (it's busy getting it's updates) after turning it on.
                                                  >
                                                  > Alan


                                                  There's probably truth to that. I'd expect it to tend to check in on
                                                  start-up or shortly thereafter, but only if it's been "too long" since
                                                  the last check-in. For example, I wouldn't expect it to check-in
                                                  after the first boot-up of the day. But by the time the next time the
                                                  FHC is open, it may be "too-long" and it checks in when first booted.

                                                  As for slow startup part of it I'm sure is Symantec AV. It tends to
                                                  do a quick scan on boot-up All that disk activity really drains the
                                                  machine
                                                • Russell Hltn
                                                  On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:37 AM, James W Anderson ... Windows update is a different story. Yes, different machines tend to get theirs at different times. I m
                                                  Message 24 of 24 , Oct 25, 2008
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:37 AM, James W Anderson
                                                    <genealogy248@...> wrote:
                                                    > That's odd, I was switching one off at my FHC the other night, and it said
                                                    > there were Windows updates, it had not gotten the updates the rest of them
                                                    > had gotten the night before, even though that one had been on that night as
                                                    > well (I saw it on then).
                                                    >
                                                    >

                                                    Windows update is a different story. Yes, different machines tend to
                                                    get theirs at different times. I'm sure it's deliberate or else
                                                    Internet connections would overload from all the machines checking at
                                                    the same time. That would really tick off the corporate users - and
                                                    Microsoft knows better then that.
                                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.