iPhone and Network Disruptions ...

Mon Jul 23 01:53:07 UTC 2007

Sean Donelan wrote:
> Since neither Apple, Cisco nor Duke seems willing to say exactly what 
> the problem was or what they fixed; not very surprising; it was 
> probably a "Duh" problem unique to Duke's network.
Sean, Nanogers:

Thank you, for your responses. 

Given the world of NDAs and other legal instruments, it was attempting 
to understand if there were certain folks here in NANOG - that were 
aware of any particular technical shortcomings, which could have caused, 
or contributed to the problem.   Naturally, I say this based on a 
personal conjecture that NANOG members may be LESS inclined to spend 
nearly $600 on a product they knew little about, in order to simply 
satisfy a "coolness factor."  :-)

Seriously, while I wish to not speculate, in the absence of technical 
details on the situation, at least on the surface, it is troubling to me 
that a mass marketed, personal, consumer device could have a potential 
such as this - to disrupt an otherwise (seemingly?) stable networked 
institutional environment.    In a document titled: " How to Plan for 
User Interest in the Apple iPhone," on 27 June 2007, Gartner had issued 
a negative recommendation to organizations WRT to accommodating iPhone 
use within enterprises based on their analysis of the product lacking 
hooks for Outlook/Notes, and necessary security applications.  Gartner 
also cited Apple's commitment to focus iPhone support for individual 
consumers rather than organizational users as a basis for issuing its 
negative recommendation.   Gartner also went on to issue another 
document on 10 July 2007, titled: "iPhone First-Generation Security Is 
Too Weak for Enterprises," which might be of interest (at least in an 
informational sense) to some here as well.

> Otherwise it would be a shame for Apple, Cisco and Duke to not let 
> other network operators that might have the same problem to know how 
> to prevent it from recurring elsewhere.
Duke CIO - Tracy Futhey's statement that "...a particular set of 
conditions made the Duke wireless network experience some minor and 
temporary disruptions in service," where the/ "deployment of a very 
large Cisco-based wireless network that supports multiple network 
protocols"/ (*) seems to have been a key issue -- is frankly MORE 
confusing that illuminating.   Is Duke, the only U.S. university campus, 
which has deployed a "very large Cisco-based campus wireless network" 
that support "multiple network protocols" ?

Besides, is the 'multiple protocol' issue a 'red herring' ?  By what 
novel/errand protocol could the iPhones flood the Duke University Wi-Fi 
network?    NOT owning an iPhone, and lacking a technical familiarity 
with all of its inner workings, leaves me at a disadvantage, I am 
afraid.  I  do happen to own a nicely featured smart-phone among other 
Wi-Fi devices however, and remain well acquainted on just how 'that 
device' is likely to interfaces with Wi-Fi nets.  In this respect, is 
the *Apple iPhone an extra-ordinary device?*  I ask that question to 
seek clarity into the statement made by the Duke CIO, if anyone cares to 
comment.

Quite frankly, my interest is to understand the range of *"failures in 
interoperability"* --  either at the device level, or at the enterprise 
level.

Separately, I fail to see why no one is talking;  particularly due to 
the fact that this event is effecting a first of a kind product release 
by Apple, and also on account of the fact that there is wide publicity 
now of an existing flaw in a Cisco product.  I would have thought that 
transparently resolving this cryptogram would have built greater public 
confidence in those companies and respective products involved. 

All the best,
Robert.
--

* "Update on Duke's wireless network and Apple's iPhones" [see: 
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2007/07/cisco_apple.html  Friday, July 20] 
2007]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20070722/2e310d8d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mathews.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 922 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20070722/2e310d8d/attachment.vcf>