<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Configure AirPort Extreme MAC filter ACL</title>
	<atom:link href="http://arfore.com/2009/04/03/configure-airport-extreme-mac-filter-acl/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://arfore.com/2009/04/03/configure-airport-extreme-mac-filter-acl/</link>
	<description>welcome to the foremind</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 23:17:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Baris</title>
		<link>http://arfore.com/2009/04/03/configure-airport-extreme-mac-filter-acl/comment-page-1/#comment-1137</link>
		<dc:creator>Baris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:26:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arfore.com/?p=174#comment-1137</guid>
		<description>I had been using Mac Filtering on airport extreme until all the pcs and macs started to loose connection in every 10 minutes. I wonder if anyone else had this issue. Any advices are welcome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had been using Mac Filtering on airport extreme until all the pcs and macs started to loose connection in every 10 minutes. I wonder if anyone else had this issue. Any advices are welcome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://arfore.com/2009/04/03/configure-airport-extreme-mac-filter-acl/comment-page-1/#comment-1121</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 17:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arfore.com/?p=174#comment-1121</guid>
		<description>The Mac Access Control doesn&#039;t seem to affect the ethernet connections on my Airport Extreme. I have 2 unlisted units attached and they access without a problem. My old Linksys (Ethernet wired) router worked effectively with feature enabled.

Also, I have another Airport Extreme (Older) hooked up as a client on the ethernet port of the new one and I can&#039;t find the wireless unit (G4 OS X 10.4 Original Airport card 801.11b WEP security) connected to the older one to share files (This may need to go on a different topic, perhaps).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Mac Access Control doesn&#8217;t seem to affect the ethernet connections on my Airport Extreme. I have 2 unlisted units attached and they access without a problem. My old Linksys (Ethernet wired) router worked effectively with feature enabled.</p>
<p>Also, I have another Airport Extreme (Older) hooked up as a client on the ethernet port of the new one and I can&#8217;t find the wireless unit (G4 OS X 10.4 Original Airport card 801.11b WEP security) connected to the older one to share files (This may need to go on a different topic, perhaps).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: arfore</title>
		<link>http://arfore.com/2009/04/03/configure-airport-extreme-mac-filter-acl/comment-page-1/#comment-1116</link>
		<dc:creator>arfore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 06:39:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arfore.com/?p=174#comment-1116</guid>
		<description>@Rob:  Thanks for your insightful comment. Dang it, the sarcasm tag still isn&#039;t an html standard.

Actually without knowing how I use my own network you can&#039;t easily make such pronouncements.  Enabling WPA security on my network has more to do with encrypting the wireless traffic itself than keeping other people off the network.  I realize that the &quot;program&quot; says that my method is redundant, however the AEBS has a guest network functionality built-in that allows me to have separate network configurations, one for permanent &quot;guests&quot; (i.e., those people that use the network regularly, but don&#039;t reside in my apartment) and those that may drop by on an occasional basis (i.e., people like yourself, however from your tone, I am not sure that I would want you in my apartment).

In case you haven&#039;t used one before, there are some devices that still need to see the SSID in order to connect, whether they have been explicitly allowed or not, besides it&#039;s much more convenient to select a network name from a menu than it is to have to type it in every time.

As for moderating the comments, I do, however I have nothing against allowing comments that disagree with my own opinions, hence the approval of your own comment.  Before you go assuming that I would purposefully delete comments that might come in on the other side of the issue, you might do well to learn something about the moderator of the blog.  In point of fact, you are the sole commenter to have had a truly negative and worthless comment to post.

Thanks for playing the friendly game of &quot;There&#039;s more than one way to configure a computer peripheral&quot; and while you are at it you might want to play &quot;Let&#039;s all try to be civil and not jump to conclusions.&quot;  Oh, and if you are in the market for the proper attire for the second game ty this on for size:

http://www.thinkgeek.com/books/humor/8e6c/images/2070/

And while we are at it, you might want to rethink your third paragraph.  The point of MAC filtering is to keep unauthorized devices from connecting.  The point of WPA encryption is to keep nefarious individuals from sniffing your traffic.  I never said that I was broadcasting the SSID to allow the great unwashed into my network.  The word guest has many meanings, none of which I would readily apply to you if you showed up at my door.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Rob:  Thanks for your insightful comment. Dang it, the sarcasm tag still isn&#8217;t an html standard.</p>
<p>Actually without knowing how I use my own network you can&#8217;t easily make such pronouncements.  Enabling WPA security on my network has more to do with encrypting the wireless traffic itself than keeping other people off the network.  I realize that the &#8220;program&#8221; says that my method is redundant, however the AEBS has a guest network functionality built-in that allows me to have separate network configurations, one for permanent &#8220;guests&#8221; (i.e., those people that use the network regularly, but don&#8217;t reside in my apartment) and those that may drop by on an occasional basis (i.e., people like yourself, however from your tone, I am not sure that I would want you in my apartment).</p>
<p>In case you haven&#8217;t used one before, there are some devices that still need to see the SSID in order to connect, whether they have been explicitly allowed or not, besides it&#8217;s much more convenient to select a network name from a menu than it is to have to type it in every time.</p>
<p>As for moderating the comments, I do, however I have nothing against allowing comments that disagree with my own opinions, hence the approval of your own comment.  Before you go assuming that I would purposefully delete comments that might come in on the other side of the issue, you might do well to learn something about the moderator of the blog.  In point of fact, you are the sole commenter to have had a truly negative and worthless comment to post.</p>
<p>Thanks for playing the friendly game of &#8220;There&#8217;s more than one way to configure a computer peripheral&#8221; and while you are at it you might want to play &#8220;Let&#8217;s all try to be civil and not jump to conclusions.&#8221;  Oh, and if you are in the market for the proper attire for the second game ty this on for size:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thinkgeek.com/books/humor/8e6c/images/2070/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thinkgeek.com/books/humor/8e6c/images/2070/</a></p>
<p>And while we are at it, you might want to rethink your third paragraph.  The point of MAC filtering is to keep unauthorized devices from connecting.  The point of WPA encryption is to keep nefarious individuals from sniffing your traffic.  I never said that I was broadcasting the SSID to allow the great unwashed into my network.  The word guest has many meanings, none of which I would readily apply to you if you showed up at my door.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://arfore.com/2009/04/03/configure-airport-extreme-mac-filter-acl/comment-page-1/#comment-1115</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 02:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arfore.com/?p=174#comment-1115</guid>
		<description>This blog entry comes up in early google search results and it&#039;s absolutely wrong to use MAC filtering and WPA security on a home network, it&#039;s redundant, and by telling anyone that it is a sound thing to do, you&#039;re giving out bad advice.  From the looks of the comments here, I&#039;m guessing you moderate comments and have not posted the many people before me who have told you this as well.

Your reasoning for using both because you broadcast your SSID the convenience of guests would be irrelevant because you&#039;re going to have to go in to your airport software to make a configuration change to allow them to access your network!  What convenience is it to a guest to say &quot;Yes you can use my wifi when you give me your mac address&quot; ... sheesh!  Turning on your SSID for the convenience of guests is unnecessary, just make your SSID something easy to type in.

The point behind MAC filtering is that you don&#039;t need to secure the network any other way, and all this other stuff is to make things user friendly.  If you have to go in and make all these changes to your system to allow a guest, then it&#039;s not easy or user friendly.  Get with the program man and don&#039;t go giving out nerdy advice like this!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This blog entry comes up in early google search results and it&#8217;s absolutely wrong to use MAC filtering and WPA security on a home network, it&#8217;s redundant, and by telling anyone that it is a sound thing to do, you&#8217;re giving out bad advice.  From the looks of the comments here, I&#8217;m guessing you moderate comments and have not posted the many people before me who have told you this as well.</p>
<p>Your reasoning for using both because you broadcast your SSID the convenience of guests would be irrelevant because you&#8217;re going to have to go in to your airport software to make a configuration change to allow them to access your network!  What convenience is it to a guest to say &#8220;Yes you can use my wifi when you give me your mac address&#8221; &#8230; sheesh!  Turning on your SSID for the convenience of guests is unnecessary, just make your SSID something easy to type in.</p>
<p>The point behind MAC filtering is that you don&#8217;t need to secure the network any other way, and all this other stuff is to make things user friendly.  If you have to go in and make all these changes to your system to allow a guest, then it&#8217;s not easy or user friendly.  Get with the program man and don&#8217;t go giving out nerdy advice like this!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Website outage</title>
		<link>http://arfore.com/2009/04/03/configure-airport-extreme-mac-filter-acl/comment-page-1/#comment-1107</link>
		<dc:creator>Website outage</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 02:18:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arfore.com/?p=174#comment-1107</guid>
		<description>[...] Post: Configure AirPort Extreme MAC filter ACL [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Post: Configure AirPort Extreme MAC filter ACL [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
