Saturday, July 11, 2009

walking on city air

I was looking over the memo that outlined the city's concerns with allowing people to access their internet service in order to do live blogs.
The concerns were raised by the IT manager, and brought up by Lane Massey.
Ill share them with you and you can decide whether its legitimate or not.
Of course, they do not "have to" let anyone access their internet service. We can use an Air Card or some such other device for live blogging, so overall, it's not that big of a deal.
First there is a bandwidth concern. If enough people were on there, it could slow their system dwon and that could disrupt police functions, fire - ems functions, and regular IT maintenance.
There were two people - organizations - using their wireless. I had heard there were more making requests, but how many could that have been?
Second, there is the concern that a virus could spread from a person's computer to the city's system. We did not have access to the actual network or the city's actual system.
Third was power and heat consumption. They added a concern about people wanting to plug into the wall for power in addition to the internet. The concern was people tripping - a safety hazard. So they may want us to sit by a power outlet to plug in.
As I said, it's not that big of a deal to get access in some other way.
Just my opinion: I think their first concern is legitimate, No. 2 is questionable, and No. 3 is just coming up with a No. 3.

Kill Lice the Safe Way!

9 comments:

  1. First, it is all or none. If AC.net is going to be allowed access to the wireless then all should be allowed. All or none!!!

    Second,I say if you want to continue with the live blogs get an altenate source. Just my opinion? They will still oppose you being there live bloging. IMO it is censorship....you can put a collar on a skunk and call it a kitty cat but the truth is....it is still a skunk!!

    Third, don't let them slow you down.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Third was power and heat consumption." Honestly, this would be funny if it wasn't meant to be serious. I mean...a supposedly sane person came up with this???

    Want my opinion, jj? It's you they don't like. You've fallen from their grace. None of this was a problem as long as you worked for the Traveler, was it?
    hmmmm

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought the traveler was having troubles too?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Actually I should give credit where credit is due.
    City people have been very cooperative with me.
    Copies of things come to me just as easily as they did with Brand X.
    Now the schools - usd 470 - is a different matter.
    But so far anyways, the city has treated me just like any other news organization since I left Brand X.

    ReplyDelete
  5. thx for the clarify.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Usd 470 is really lacking on release of information to the public in my opinion. The website they put up for the district and especially the HS is very poorly done, often with info that is 1-3 years out of date. Very poor and makes the town look foolish. Look around at Winfield or Wichita's district to see how info should be presented.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The only concern they should really have would be about accessing the network due to virus concerns. Even if you aren't in the same domain/workgroup, you still have the potential for a network worm to infect things. It works of MAC addresses just as easily as IP and Domain Names. There are solutions around that such as a gateway host or some other forms of technology. In the end it would be simple to secure their network and make things simple.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ralph
    how is it different than when you are at a hotel, and you can hook on to their wireless connection?
    Im sure hotels have a lot of security issues with their software, concerning credit cards of customers etc.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Any network engineer/administrator would be able to segregate the wireless into public/non-public domains, as Ralph said. You put the right solution in, virii and worms will not transverse the domains. Also, said network guru would also be able to throttle down the bandwidth to the public side (quality of service) so the non-public side (Police, FD, etc) would not be affected when the Traveler reporter starts to stream live video during the meeting :-). So, I don't any of their excuses fly. they must have a toad for a net admin if they can't do the first two (if you're going to do wireless, you better know how to configure it). Sounds like they are more trying to throttle you.
    Worse case, by a wireless card for your laptop to plug into ATT or Sprint. I use my blackberry as a modem, and "almost" get DSL speeds while online.

    ReplyDelete