[1027] in resnet
Re: WEP and LEAP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Genung)
Tue Mar 26 14:51:04 2002
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=====================_17107699==_.ALT"
Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20020326131237.02acffc8@mail.ilstu.edu>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 13:31:19 -0600
Reply-To: Resnet Forum <RESNET-L@listserv.nd.edu>
From: Scott Genung <sagenung@ILSTU.EDU>
To: RESNET-L@listserv.nd.edu
In-Reply-To: <sca065ba.033@mailsrv.lycoming.edu>
--=====================_17107699==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Jon,
We are using Cisco 340 and 350 APs with Cisco 350 and Apple Airport
clients. Our model is based upon LEAP using dynamic WEP. We briefly
experimented with this topic about a year ago (before Apple announced
support for LEAP) and found no obvious difference in performance between
clients that were using encryption and those that weren't.
After discussing this topic with Cisco, they indicated the 340/350 client
cards performed WEP encryption in hardware while most other wireless
clients did encryption in software. This hardware acceleration minimizes
the impact that encryption has on the overall throughput of a session when
in use.
Having said that, I do not know what impact LEAP has on the Airport cards
or if a new feature called TKIP (unique key per packet) impacts the
performance of Cisco cards. The other question that needs asking surrounds
the impact that TLS (Microsoft's answer to 802.1x) has on other cards part
of the same model.
At 12:12 PM 3/26/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Recently I have been reading up on wireless to prepare for a small pilot
>program that we are going to explore here at Lycoming. I have read that
>on wireless access points, once WEP is activated, you could expect to see
>your connection drop to around 5 or 6 mbps. This is a substantial loss,
>has anyone experienced this? My actual question for all is, If you are
>using Cisco AP's and enable the LEAP on them, what does this do to
>bandwidth? Anyone with experience on this, would greatly appreciate your
>input. Thanks
>
>Jon DeSantis, Staff Technician
>Lycoming College, 700 College Place
>Box 142, Williamsport, Pa 17701
>(570) 321-4397 Fax (570) 321-4051
>
>___________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the ResNet-L mailing list.
>
>To subscribe, unsubscribe or search the archives,
>go to http://LISTSERV.ND.EDU/archives/resnet-l.html
>___________________________________________________
Scott Genung
Manager of Networking Systems
Telecommunications and Network Support Services
124 Julian Hall
Illinois State University
(309)438-8731 http://www.tnss.ilstu.edu
--=====================_17107699==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
Jon,<br>
<br>
We are using Cisco 340 and 350 APs with Cisco 350 and Apple Airport
clients. Our model is based upon LEAP using <b>dynamic</b> WEP. We
briefly experimented with this topic about a year ago (before Apple
announced support for LEAP) and found no obvious difference in
performance between clients that were using encryption and those that
weren't. <br>
<br>
After discussing this topic with Cisco, they indicated the 340/350 client
cards performed WEP encryption in hardware while most other wireless
clients did encryption in software. This hardware acceleration minimizes
the impact that encryption has on the overall throughput of a session
when in use. <br>
<br>
Having said that, I do not know what impact LEAP has on the Airport cards
or if a new feature called TKIP (unique key per packet) impacts the
performance of Cisco cards. The other question that needs asking
surrounds the impact that TLS (Microsoft's answer to 802.1x) has on other
cards part of the same model.<br>
<br>
At 12:12 PM 3/26/2002 -0500, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Recently I have been reading up on
wireless to prepare for a small pilot program that we are going to
explore here at Lycoming. I have read that on wireless access
points, once WEP is activated, you could expect to see your connection
drop to around 5 or 6 mbps. This is a substantial loss, has anyone
experienced this? My actual question for all is, If you are using
Cisco AP's and enable the LEAP on them, what does this do to
bandwidth? Anyone with experience on this, would greatly appreciate
your input. Thanks<br>
<br>
Jon DeSantis, Staff Technician<br>
Lycoming College, 700 College Place<br>
Box 142, Williamsport, Pa 17701<br>
(570) 321-4397 Fax (570) 321-4051<br>
<br>
___________________________________________________<br>
You are subscribed to the ResNet-L mailing list.<br>
<br>
To subscribe, unsubscribe or search the archives,<br>
go to
<a href="http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/resnet-l.html" eudora="autourl">http://LISTSERV.ND.EDU/archives/resnet-l.html</a><br>
___________________________________________________</blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<br>
Scott Genung<br>
Manager of Networking Systems<br>
Telecommunications and Network Support Services<br>
124 Julian Hall<br>
Illinois State University<br>
<br>
(309)438-8731<x-tab> </x-tab><a href="http://www.tnss.ilstu.edu/" eudora="autourl">http</a>://www.tnss.ilstu.<a href="http://www.tnss.ilstu.edu/" eudora="autourl">edu</a></html>
--=====================_17107699==_.ALT--
___________________________________________________
You are subscribed to the ResNet-L mailing list.
To subscribe, unsubscribe or search the archives,
go to http://LISTSERV.ND.EDU/archives/resnet-l.html
___________________________________________________
