Odyssey Client Compatability

[aebrown]

One of our FHC's has been given the WAP (Cisco Aironet) and Linksys adapters for their computers by the Family History Support in SLC. We already have the Cisco Pix 501 in place.

When I recently called FH Support, I was told they had to use the Odyssey client to hook up to computers in the FHC and that non-Church computers were locked out.

So does what you are saying mean we no longer have to have the Odyssey client in the FHC and that patrons can use their laptop's wi-fi to hook up to the Internet while in the FHC or is what you are saying only relevant to the Stake/Ward/Branch clerk computers?

Any info appreciated on this!

There are two issues here: technical and local policy.

On the technical side, if you can get the GSD to push the LDSAccess profile to your WAPs, then it is technically possible to connect to the Internet using any computer with an appropriate wireless adapter and the WPA pre-Shared key. The Odyssey client will still work just fine, but it is no longer the only option for connecting wirelessly. There have been mixed results in getting the GSD to push the LDSAccess profile, but we are assured by Church employees on this forum that this should be doable. In my particular case, I had to do some persuading to get the GSD technician to push out the LDSAccess profile, but he did eventually do it.

On the local policy side, the Stake President must make some decisions. First, the LDSAccess profile should not even be requested, unless he approves. Second, he should set the policy as to who is authorized to know the WPA key. There is always a balance between convenience and security, and it is his call.

Speaking now only from my own opinion, I would be wary about letting all FHC patrons know the key. Once the key becomes widely known, it's not much of a security barrier, and as we all know, wireless access extends far beyond the walls of Church buildings. I would limit usage to Priesthood leaders and clerks who have callings where the Internet connection can be helpful. I certainly understand that FHC patrons would benefit from the wireless connection, but I worry about the risks. But that's just my opinion -- I know of no official policy on this topic.

In any case, the Stake President should be given counsel regarding the risks and benefits, and then he makes the decision for his stake.

[russellhltn]

On the local policy side, the Stake President must make some decisions.

Only after he receives the letter giving him authorization. I assume avskip is in the area that has received permission, but that's not the case with most of us.

[aebrown]

Only after he receives the letter giving him authorization. I assume avskip is in the area that has received permission, but that's not the case with most of us.

No, you're confusing two separate issues -- this thread is talking about a totally different situation. You are talking about the program where buildings in limited approved areas with no broadband can now obtain a broadband connection, as described in the 29 Feb 2008 letter.

What we are talking about in this thread is where buildings have an existing CCN with wireless access points and want to make that connection available to more computers, both Church-owned and others. That option requires no additional authorization letter from the Church. It is available now, as long as the stake president approves -- the STS then just needs to ask the GSD to push out the LDSAccess profile to the WAPs.

[russellhltn]

No, ... two separate issues .

Exactly.

What we are talking about in this thread is where buildings have an existing with wireless access points CCN

Understood

and want to make that connection available to more computers, both Church-owned and others.

Computers in the offices of stake and ward clerks can now be connected to
existing broadband connections, such as those that might exist in family history
centers or facilities management offices.

Stakes, districts, wards, and branches are not authorized to order their own
broadband connections. They are only authorized to share existing authorized
broadband connections that are in place for department-sponsored units.

If there are any costs associated with connecting to these CCN
connections, then they are the responsibility of the stake or district,

Available to administrative computers, yes. But I don't see anything about making it available to others. I submit that that option is not available until the second stage when the conditions of the February 11, 2008 letter are satisfied.

PS: Congrats on your promotion!

[aebrown]

Available to administrative computers, yes. But I don't see anything about making it available to others. I submit that that option is not available until the second stage when the conditions of the February 11, 2008 letter are satisfied.

You are reading the written policy correctly. But tsheffield has been quite clear and emphatic in stating that non-Church owned computers can connect to a CCN with the LDSAccess profile pushed out to the WAPs:

For what application are you trying to access Odyssey? You may not be aware that in a collocated facility e.g. FHC in a stake building, Odyssey is no longer required. You can call GSD and ask them to push out the "LDS ACCESS" profile to the Cisco AP's and then they can give you a WPA key so that personal laptops can access the internet.

In response to my post that asked about connecting personal computers rmarchant chimed in as well:
http://tech.lds.org/forum/showpost.php? ... ostcount=5

So two Church employees are saying on this forum quite clearly that buildings with an existing CCN and wireless and request the LDSAccess profile and use personal laptops to connect to the Internet. I raised the issue of why this wasn't documented well in http://tech.lds.org/forum/showpost.php? ... ostcount=4, and rmarchant responded in the next post, "We are working on clarifying our answers and communicating through more official channels."

So that's my source for my claim that we can connect personal PCs to the CCN (always subject to the local policy set by the stake president, of course, which may completely deny this option, or tightly restrict who may connect). I know that both tsheffield and rmarchant have said that they are working to make the documentation for this more official; some people may choose to wait for that, but my stake president has authorized me to press forward with this option, which we have successfully done.

[russellhltn]

I've completely re-read that entire thread. Here's what I'm seeing:

The 11 Feb 2008 letter authorized the connection of administrative computers to existing CCNs. The method being up to the STS, Stake President and FM group. The stake is to bear the costs. In the forum, it was discussed how that could be done with existing church installed wireless networks. The steps needed gave the STS the technical ability to connect any desired computer, but non-church computers were not mentioned by either employee.

The 29 Feb 2008 letter grants much broader power such as installing broadband Internet connections and allows the Stake President to decide who may connect to the network. It's reasonable to believe that is also applies to existing church networks and wireless installs and the steps to do so are identical to connecting the clerks.

In between is a wide gulf. Are stake presidents authorized to decide on connecting non-church computers to existing CCN and only prohibited from installing new broadband until they get the letter? Yes, you have raised the issue, but the response seemed a bit iffy in my opinion. The conservative side of me says we have to either wait for an authorizing letter or further clarification before openly proclaiming that non-Church computers can connect with the stake president's permission.

It's time to call for a referee.

Note that someone outside of the area was taken to task for installing wireless on their own (presumably connecting to authorized broadband). So clearly installing wireless for general use is not currently authorized without that letter.

[aebrown]

The steps needed gave the STS the technical ability to connect any desired computer, but non-church computers were not mentioned by either employee.

I must disagree with your analysis (but I do so with respect and only in a desire to clarify the issue for forum readers). It is undeniable that tsheffield mentioned non-Church computers. I repeat:

For what application are you trying to access Odyssey? You may not be aware that in a collocated facility e.g. FHC in a stake building, Odyssey is no longer required. You can call GSD and ask them to push out the "LDS ACCESS" profile to the Cisco AP's and then they can give you a WPA key so that personal laptops can access the internet.

He said "personal laptops can access the Internet." He set the stage as a FHC in a stake building, which is the precise configuration I am talking about. I don't see how there can be any confusion about what he said. I suppose you can question his authority, but not that he mentioned personal laptops.

It's time to call for a referee.

If there is any confusion remaining, I would join you in requesting a clarification from Church employees. What I would really like is an official statement, which is what I requested a while back. But I do understand that such things can take a while to carefully formulate.

Note that someone outside of the area was taken to task for installing wireless on their own (presumably connecting to authorized broadband). So clearly installing wireless for general use is not currently authorized without that letter.

I don't argue that point. From my understanding, new wireless equipment is only authorized under the 29 Feb 2008 letter, which clearly applies only to those limited areas specifically designated. We're definitely in agreement on that point, and need no referee.

[russellhltn]

He said "personal laptops can access the Internet." He set the stage as a FHC in a stake building, which is the precise configuration I am talking about. I don't see how there can be any confusion about what he said. I suppose you can question his authority, but not that he mentioned personal laptops.

The question I have in mind was what area was he thinking of when he wrote that? Southwest? Since there were no qualifications, I could just as easily claim that it proves that Stake President's approval is not required.

Gee, I haven't had this much fun since engaging in doctrinal speculation.

I have sent a PM asking for clarification. Hopefully we'll hear from them soon.

[tonyduf-p40]

Today or tommorrow we will write a knowledge base article that gives the GSD the information that they need and clarifies the policy. We will post the Knowledge Base # and you can give that # to GSD when you call. That should solve the immediate problem ... and we will continue to work with GSD to improve training and communication regarding the changing policies.

Where/how can we find this knowledge base article? We appreciate your efforts in our behalf.