I also have seen "ietf58" as an ad-hoc network (or "Computer to Computer
Network" as Apple calls it) in several locations today, including here
in Salon C.
I have to wonder if this is just cluelessness or malicious behaviour,
someone trying to "steal" packets.
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Tel: +1 408-527-8972 GSM: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Roland Bless wrote:
Hi,
We have been getting some reports of rooted machines (IETF Attendee
machines,
not IETF NOC Machines) that are scanning and causing a lot of traffic on the
network. IP Addresses are:
130.129.139.106
130.129.139.203
Please check your machines for these addresses. If they are yours, please
stop by the terminal room, and ask for help.
It's not only this, but people are still running their cards in ad-hoc mode.
While I'm not an expert on this, I just saw several cards in ad-hoc mode
in Salon B (mip6 session).
There is an ongoing AODV test and I asked the guys at the help desk whether
there may be problems with WLAN infrastructure. They said, "oh no, as long
as the ssid is different from ietf58, there should be no problem". However,
I just saw my card (in managed mode) connecting to a card in ad-hoc mode
with a different ssid than ietf58 (I scanned that with my PDA at the same
time).
My Orinoco card has the latest firmware (8.72) and possibly my linux driver
is broken, but obviously there exists this subtle difference between theory
and practice (at least for my configuration, sorry). This is really annoying,
because it happened several times today.
Besides the fact that I've also seen cards in ad-hoc mode advertising
"ietf58",
I was wondering what others think about interference between ad-hoc mode and
infrastructure mode.
We are monitoring the mailing list 58crew(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org for problems.
Comments, suggestions, issues are very welcome here.
We would rather hear of a problem many times on the list, then not at all or
by way of rumor through the meetings. Please let us know your concerns.
Thanks for your support,
Roland