Wireless Network

<p>isnt it safer neways to just be plugged in? i mean, in ur dorm, are u goinna be walking around the room while u surf the net?? not so hard to just plug it into the wall</p>

<p>Now I'm confused. If you setup a wireless network within a dorm, as sparticus suggested, what is the source of this connection?</p>

<p>ok, i feel like some people haven't been reading what has already been written, as perro suggested.</p>

<p>As said above the post questioning it, the central person plugs by wire into the router.</p>

<p>As said above the post questioning it, we are discussing implementing wireless in non wireless equipped dorms</p>

<p>lastly, as said above the post questioning it, the source of the connection is some hall member's ethernet hookup.</p>

<p>Martinez: it's safer to use a wire, this is true, but I'm not too worried about the kids in my hall running malicious programs on my computer, stealing my credit card information or identity, etc. If you're concerned about that, theres nothing preventing you from plugging into the wall in your room. Or you could just wire-up for when you want to purchase something online, etc.</p>

<p>While it's true you won't be "walking around surfing the internet," it's a great convenience to be able to sit on your bed or in a chair in your room but still have the internet, or to go to a friends room or lounge and be able to go online for a project or something (2 or 3 computers for one ethernet hookup won't work unless you have a wired router, which you won't unless you buy one). Hell, if the TV is taken by some Sex and the City addict, I'd be more than glad to stream the Red Sox game for kids in my hall in a lounge from my MLB.com subscription :D</p>

<p>That could cost much money to the person whose Ethernet connection is used, though.</p>

<p>AAAAH PERRO THEY'RE KILLING ME, KILLING ME! WHY WON'T THEY READ!!!!!!!</p>

<p>from my first post in this thread:
[quote]
Also, if theres still the wireless=no bandwith charge loophole

[/quote]
And the following post of mine clarifying it:
[quote]
In the past, wireless usage was supposed to be not counted against the bandwidth limitations--my aforementioned loophole.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>must breath, must breath :D</p>

<p>Ok, then my first question comes in: why have one person do it when anyone can just connect directly into the wireless infrastructure already in place?</p>

<p>sparticus: Are you sure the wireless loophole applies, because isn't that only for computers accessing the Red Rover network. It you were to use a router into someones connection, all traffic would still go through the connection and be charged to that person. Sure your laptop would incur no charges, but the person that has the router could have 2 extra dollars times 30 users per month for the extra bandwidth usage (just estimating, could be more or less).</p>

<p>towerpumpkin: the suggestion of the router is for dorms that do not have the Red Rover access installed</p>

<p>Yeah then the problem is who gets stuck with the bill? There needs to be a source for that connection; if its not Red Rover, then its through someone's Resnet connection which means someone gets billed...LOL that's why I've been asking all these questions because none of it makes sense.</p>

<p>Back in the day there was a LOOPHOLE. LOOP HOLE. This means that someone going through the proverbial HOLE can by slip through whatever the proverbial material in which the hole was cut. In this case, the loophole was that if you just took ethernet cable and plugged it into wireless router, you wouldnt get a bandwidth charge. Think about it. How do the NUBB bandwidth nazis know how much you are using? It's not like with water...there isnt a flow meter connected to the "pipe" or in this case the cable coming out of your wall. They know how much you are using based on the IP address assigned to your computer. It's called a static IP; it doesnt change. They just keep track of how much data is sent to that address. If you plug in a wireless router, the bandwidth isnt going to the IP address your computer has. They haven't a clue where its going. The wireless router is like a black hole. Bandwidth is just flowing somewhere. And in the past, no one noticed or cared about this, so you could keep the router going. So, to clarify this, this is how it works: Person plugs wireless router into wall. Wireless router sits on shelf, or empty beer case, or floor. Bandwidth flows out of wall and into wireless router. CIT people dont have clue where it's going. CIT people don't care where its going. Bandwidth goes out of router into air and travels through luminiferous ether into nearby computers with wireless cards. Said people use bandwith to do homework/play Halo/download the entire "Hustler: Barely Legal" collection. Entire dorm floor is happy. Clear? </p>

<p>I hope your questions are solved. I've got to go fetch the defibrillator for poor sparticus.</p>

<p>Ah ok...that makes complete sense...thanks! I thought somehow CIT tracked your usage through how much was going through the physical line in your dorm, not through your IP address.</p>

<p><em>cough</em>choke<em>wheeze</em> is there still any confusion? Because I'm not sure how after answering it like 4 times ppl aren't getting the fact that we're discussing implementing wireless in NON-WIRELESS EQUIPPED DORMS, and also that we're discussing a way to give wireless to everyone through a LOOPHOLE THAT MEANS WHOEVER SUPPLIES IT WON'T GET CHARGED. </p>

<p>Whew.....hurry perro <em>cough</em>choke*</p>

<p>Yeah...you didn't explain exactly what that loophole entailed (that Cornell won't charge you because it cannot identify who is using the connection); that's why we were all confused. No need to get so...agitated...</p>

<p>I always thought that the loophole meant you can go use RedRover and download anything without getting charged. This is much better, however...</p>

<p>agitated? no way, i'm just refreshed haha, that wasn't really directed toward you personally, when phrased that way your question is more legit. it was phrased toward the masses who asked dumb questions which had already been answered. sorry for the misunderstanding.</p>

<p>Lol...its ok...and I just couldn't think of a better word...</p>