[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: wireless recommendations



On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 11:55, Jesse Meyer wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, nori heikkinen wrote:
> 
> > hey all,
> > 
> > my roommate (who has a laptop) and i are thinking about either running
> > cables all the way around our apartment, or setting up a wireless
> > point from my debian box.  i'd enjoy doing the latter, but before i
> > buy the hardware, i thought i'd check with my most valuable
> > information source about what debianites are happy with in terms of
> > brands, models, &c.
> > 
> > any particular suggestions / references / aversions?
> 
> You should google for more information, but from what I've seen, 
> orinoco and prisms are the most popular and widely supported wireless
> cards.
> 
> I've looked into it, but there was several factors that made me stay
> away from it:
> 
> 1) cost - wireless is more expensive then wired
> 2) security - even with `strong' WEP, a wireless link is easily 
> 	compromized.  If you really care about your security, 
> 	wireless needs either an encrypted tunnel or IPSEC, and the 
> 	wireless segment should be firewalled.[1]
> 3) speed - 100mbit twisted pair will be faster then wireless.
> 
> ~ Jesse Meyer, tripping over cables left around the house
> 
> [1] I'm overly paranoid, I know.

Running cable around attics, dropping it through walls, etc can
be a hassle, but Jesse's 3 points are still valid, especially 
since you could probably get a LUG member to connect the wires
to jacks for a case or 2 of beer...

And if you run Cat5e, then you are ready for gigabit ethernet,
and wireless will never touch that.

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr.        Home: ron.l.johnson@cox.net           |
| Jefferson, LA  USA                                            |
|                                                               |
| "Man, I'm pretty.  Hoo Hah!"                                  |
|    Johnny Bravo                                               |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+




Reply to: