On Sun, 19 Aug 2007, Andy Green wrote: > Somebody in the thread at some point said: > > >> It might be worth noting that the instructions are for an unsecured > >> network only. > >> > >> The generally accepted minimum security used on Wifi nowadays is > >> WPA. > > > > i do actually mention that. and i'm naturally assuming that, once the > > Sorry, I must have missed it. > > > interface is up and running unsecured, it's a simple matter to start > > adding security on top of that. but that's outside the scope of that > > recipe. > > Well it's true that if you can't get the wireless device to work > with an unencrypted AP it doesn't stand much chance with an > encrypted one. But an AP that has WEP or WPA enabled won't let you > 'associate' at all unless you have the right encryption stuff sorted > out, so it is not quite that you can somehow associate to an > encrypted AP with your existing recipe and then sort out the > encryption. > > FWIW I had good luck with wpa_supplicant whenever I used it, it's > not to hard to set up either on the APs I tried it with. ah, good point. from what i see, system-config-network only lets me configure the WEP key, is that right? this means that i might have to break down and recommend starting NetworkManager[Dispatcher] after all, which allows WPA configuration. or do the configuration manually with "iwconfig". or try wpa_supplicant, which i've never used but i'm guessing it can't be that hard. in any event, your point is well taken -- i clearly have to handle a secured AP right from the beginning. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca ======================================================================== -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
