Authorized use of existing CCN

Discussions about Internet service providers (ISPs), the Meetinghouse Firewall, wired and wireless networking, usage, management, and support of Meetinghouse Internet
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20767
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Authorized use of existing CCN

Postby russellhltn » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:59 pm

I'm not sure if you saw my PM or not. We've been having a discussion in a different section.

At the heart of the discussion is the question of who may connect to a church network (CCN) if the stake president has NOT received the letter talked about in the February 29, 2008 notice?

Is the greater latitude given to the stake president to determine local Internet connection policy from the February 29, 2008 notice or before?

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14693
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Wed Apr 02, 2008 6:26 pm

RussellHltn wrote:I'm not sure if you saw my PM or not. We've been having a discussion in a different section.

At the heart of the discussion is the question of who may connect to a church network (CCN) if the stake president has NOT received the letter talked about in the February 29, 2008 notice?

Is the greater latitude given to the stake president to determine local Internet connection policy from the February 29, 2008 notice or before?


As I read the letters, I don't see how the February 29 notice has anything at all to do with connecting to an existing CCN. That was covered in the February 11 letter, which was sent to everyone. So to my eye:

February 11 letter addresses every stake president who oversees an existing CCN. That letter authorizes any administrative computer to be connected to the existing CCN. The stake does bear any costs of wireless cards, WAPs, wiring, etc. But no other specific authorization is needed. The February 29 letter has nothing to do with existing CCNs.

February 29 letter gives a heads up that authorization will be coming to selected areas to put broadband in buildings that don't have a CCN. Again, the stake bears all the costs. But only the North America Southwest area was initially authorized, and everyone else has to wait until they are given specific instruction.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20767
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:54 pm

Alan_Brown wrote:As I read the letters, I don't see how the February 29 notice has anything at all to do with connecting to an existing CCN. That was covered in the February 11 letter, which was sent to everyone. So to my eye:

February 11 letter addresses every stake president who oversees an existing CCN. That letter authorizes any administrative computer to be connected to the existing CCN. The stake does bear any costs of wireless cards, WAPs, wiring, etc. But no other specific authorization is needed. The February 29 letter has nothing to do with existing CCNs.

February 29 letter gives a heads up that authorization will be coming to selected areas to put broadband in buildings that don't have a CCN. Again, the stake bears all the costs. But only the North America Southwest area was initially authorized, and everyone else has to wait until they are given specific instruction.


Absolutely no disagreement there. And it's now been [url=http://www.lds.org/Static%20Files/PDF/STS/Letters/English/06908_000_notice[1].pdf][color="Blue"]opened up to Utah[/color].[/url]

What I had understood is that you wanted to incorporate some of the elements of [color="Blue"]Meeting House Internet[/color] to an existing CCN before the letter referenced in the February 29 policy had been received. With the MHI link, I think I found the tie between what's desired and what the effective date is.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14693
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:20 am

RussellHltn wrote:What I had understood is that you wanted to incorporate some of the elements of Meeting House Internet to an existing CCN before the letter referenced in the February 29 policy had been received. With the MHI link, I think I found the tie between what's desired and what the effective date is.


Actually, I never confused the two issues -- I never tried to apply the February 29 letter to buildings with existing CCNs. The February 29 letter announced the Meetinghouse Internet policy, but it clearly applies only to buildings without CCN connections. Therefore it is irrelevant to any discussion of access to CCN connections.

The point of confusion came when tsheffield and rmarchant referred on this forum to a new policy regarding non-Church computers connecting to Church-owned Internet connections. This policy is not yet published anywhere that I know of, except messages on this forum. The question of non-Church computers applies to both existing CCN connections (which may be in any stake and exist will before Feb 29, since they have nothing to do with the Feb 29 letter) and to new broadband connections under the Meetinghouse Internet policy (which applies only to authorized stakes and will only be after Feb 29).

One point that may have mingled the issues is the term "LDS Access". This refers to:
  1. A wireless profile which can be pushed out to WAPs on existing CCNs to allow broader access to either Church-owned or non-Church computers without the need of the Odyssey client -- there is only one filtering option available in this case (the filtering set for the CCN); or
  2. The filtering options that are part of the Meetinghouse Internet policy and are provided by the new filtering device available to authorized stakes. It comes in two flavors: LDS Restricted Access or LDS Extended Access.
The first option is what I was talking about for existing CCNs, and has nothing to do with the Feb 29 letter. If the Church would publish this policy, either in a letter, or at least in one clear post on clerk.lds.org or on this forum, I think a lot of the confusion would go away.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20767
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:12 am

Alan_Brown wrote:The point of confusion came when tsheffield and rmarchant referred on this forum to a new policy regarding non-Church computers connecting to Church-owned Internet connections. This policy is not yet published anywhere that I know of, except messages on this forum. The question of non-Church computers applies to both existing CCN connections (which may be in any stake and exist will before Feb 29, since they have nothing to do with the Feb 29 letter) and to new broadband connections under the Meetinghouse Internet policy (which applies only to authorized stakes and will only be after Feb 29).


<whew> I thought we were going to disagree on what we disagree on!

Since this forum is titled "Meetinghouse Internet" and "Meetinghouse Internet" is what the Feb 29 letter is about, then I'd have to assume that anything posted here only applies to those who have received the Feb 29 letter unless stated otherwise.

But lacking any documentation, the confusion remains, since all the documents I've seen make no suggestion of what exactly can be done or not done with the connection. Taking a strict reading it seems that only church computers can be connected. But even then we could have questions of what a "church computer" is. For example, can the stake obtain a computer and put one in the library?

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14693
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:34 am

RussellHltn wrote:Since this forum is titled "Meetinghouse Internet" and "Meetinghouse Internet" is what the Feb 29 letter is about, then I'd have to assume that anything posted here only applies to those who have received the Feb 29 letter unless stated otherwise.


However, the term Meetinghouse Internet can easily refer to Internet connections in meetinghouses, which is a far broader subject than the topic of the Feb 29 letter, which is a specific initiative for adding Internet access to meetinghouses that do not already have Internet access via a CCN.

Using the clear meaning of the words "Meetinghouse Internet" (not the specific initiative of the same name), I felt that a discussion of CCN-related issues is appropriate, particularly since some people have confused the scope and meaning of the Feb 29 and Feb 11 letters.

SheffieldTR
Community Moderators
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Utah, USA

Postby SheffieldTR » Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:26 pm

As the policy steward for this topic of personal computer use in meetinghouses, I have asked for permission to post that for your viewing. I will get back to you with the official word saying that it is OK to connect personal laptops to networks within the meetinghouse for both stake sponsored and CCN sites. Stay tuned....

User avatar
jeromer7
Member
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 11:46 am
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska

Status?

Postby jeromer7 » Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:32 pm

tsheffield wrote:I will get back to you with the official word saying that it is OK to connect personal laptops to networks within the meetinghouse for both stake sponsored and CCN sites. Stay tuned....

Just wondering if there is any update on this??
JLR

lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 6144
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: US

Postby lajackson » Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:21 pm

tsheffield wrote:I will get back to you with the official word saying that it is OK to connect personal laptops to networks within the meetinghouse for both stake sponsored and CCN sites. Stay tuned....


In a discussion I had with the Family History Department, they emphasized that personal computers should not, under any circumstances, be left in the meetinghouse. They thought it would be ok to bring them and use them, but never leave them, even in a "locked" classroom or office.


Return to “Meetinghouse Internet”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest