Tech Forum

RussellHltn wrote:Can you elaborate? It's not listed in the original memo for the states. It came along afterwords to fulfill a need. If someone is reading the original memo, they might conclude it's not authorized, but I don't know any reason why it would be.

I can't really, I was simply advised by local ICS and facilities people that it is not approved at present, and that was enough for me. Subsequent conversations have suggested that it has something to do with the fact that there is a download limit on our meetinghouse connections, and so reasonably there needs to be tight control on the access to those connections (not sure what that limit is, but we were able to stream 4 of the Conference sessions without any capping to our download speed). In addition, I understand that the current meetinghouse Internet connections are there primarily to support the Family History Centres, so that being the case, the wards and stakes are just "borrowing" the connections for MLS transfers.

lionelwalters wrote:Subsequent conversations have suggested that it has something to do with the fact that there is a download limit on our meetinghouse connections, and so reasonably there needs to be tight control on the access to those connections (not sure what that limit is, but we were able to stream 4 of the Conference sessions without any capping to our download speed).

I have no clue how Internet access is sold in other countries. In the US, that doesn't happen for DSL or Cable users, but it can happen for those using a wireless ISP.

lionelwalters wrote:I understand that the current meetinghouse Internet connections are there primarily to support the Family History Centres, so that being the case, the wards and stakes are just "borrowing" the connections for MLS transfers.

Ummm, yes and no. That was the original reasons for the installs - to support official FHCs. Then wards and stakes were allowed to borrow it. Now in North America, it's permissible for the stake to install Internet as use it and they see fit. (But the stake pays.)

RussellHltn wrote:To add to the fun, LDS Access was a profile created to more closely emulate the access needed by FHCs. So on one hand you're telling me you're not allowed to use that profile, but on the other hand the primary user is the FHC which needs the broader access.

Maybe you've got an older PIX 501 box that only has one profile. LDS Access wouldn't apply to that. But the good news is that you've already got the least restrictive access.

Umm, sorry to have to remind you again, but you are confusing a filtering level with a wireless access security profile. LDSAccess is a wireless security profile loaded on Cisco Aironet WAPs, which replaces the Odyssey client. It has nothing to do with the "General Access" filtering level used in FHCs.

So the problem described in this thread seems to be a question of the number of connections allowed on the LAN side of the Internet connection. It's conceivable that this could be a legal limitation for the particular service provided to that building. If so, allowing wireless connections could easily cause the installation to exceed that number; using only wired connections is more controlled. Usually that limit could be controlled at the router, which seems like a better way to enforce it. But the earlier post seemed to say that it was a local Church policy to restrict how the limited bandwidth is used. In any case, it sounds like the local authorities have a clear plan and policy.

Alan_Brown wrote:In any case, it sounds like the local authorities have a clear plan and policy.

That's really the point that I was trying to get at earlier. All of the above is possible and may even be made available here sometime in the future, but we need to respect and adhere to the local policies in place.

Alan_Brown wrote:Umm, sorry to have to remind you again, but you are confusing a filtering level with a wireless access security profile. LDSAccess is a wireless security profile loaded on Cisco Aironet WAPs, which replaces the Odyssey client.

Dang. You're right.

Yes, there's a couple of possibilities as to why the limitation. Since that's for a different area, I'm not sure what policies apply.