Tech Forum

We are running cat5e cable from a locked closet which will have the DSL modem and cisco router to the clerks offices: I have the following questions;
1. Does MLS automatically reconize it is connected to the internet for send & receive transmissions?
2. Sould I run a static IP or use the cisco router dhcp.
3. Do I need to change the name and workgroup of the ward computers

I plan to added a wireless router plugged into the cisco and will limit access by mac address and WPA2 password. I will also add a timer that will turn on the wireless only during approved hours of operation.

Thanks.

pricer wrote:We are running cat5e cable from a locked closet which will have the DSL modem and cisco router to the clerks offices: I have the following questions;
1. Does MLS automatically reconize it is connected to the internet for send & receive transmissions?
2. Sould I run a static IP or use the cisco router dhcp.
3. Do I need to change the name and workgroup of the ward computers

I plan to added a wireless router plugged into the cisco and will limit access by mac address and WPA2 password. I will also add a timer that will turn on the wireless only during approved hours of operation.

Thanks.

Welcome to the forum -- we hope you get some good answers and can also make some helpful contributions (and every question is a good contribution!).

As for your specific questions:
1. For MLS, check the setting in System Options > System > Dialer Options. It can be "Use Modem", "Use Internet", or "Auto Detect". Starting with MLS 2.8, the Auto Detect setting works pretty well, but you can also select "Use Internet" if your Internet connection will be reliable and you don't need dial-up as a backup. You must be an MLS administrator to see or change this option.
2. DHCP works fine -- I would certainly recommend it.
3. Do NOT change the name of the ward computers. Some posts on this forum have indicated that certain operations the Church does will depend on the name being LU-<unit number>. I don't know if you can change the workgroup, but it is irrelevant for the Internet connection anyway.

Alan_Brown wrote:I don't know if you can change the workgroup, but it is irrelevant for the Internet connection anyway.

You would only need to change the workgroup if you were trying to create some kind of network between the different unit computers, which I don't see any need for (probably more of a security concern than anything). In fact, if each computer is already on the default "Workgroup", then they may already be able to see each other...

Would it be worth trying to make each computer have a different workgroup, like the unit number or name?

pricer wrote: I will also add a timer that will turn on the wireless only during approved hours of operation.

While this sounds like a good idea you may find that some clerks may have to come in and do work and send updates at their convenience to SLC. This could cause some problems. You may want to poll the unit clerks to see if this will be a problem.
- Just a thought.

jdlessley wrote:While this sounds like a good idea you may find that some clerks may have to come in and do work and send updates at their convenience to SLC. This could cause some problems. You may want to poll the unit clerks to see if this will be a problem.
- Just a thought.

Sending updates to SLC would only be a problem if the ward computers were on wireless access. I got the impression that they were running ethernet to each of the offices.

mkmurray wrote:Sending updates to SLC would only be a problem if the ward computers were on wireless access. I got the impression that they were running ethernet to each of the offices.

You're right. I did not read what pricer said correctly.

mkmurray wrote:Would it be worth trying to make each computer have a different workgroup, like the unit number or name?

I don't think it makes any difference unless you wanted to create shares - which I wouldn't recommend for security purposes. From a security standpoint, having them in different Workgroups would be like a screen door - the most trivial of obstacles.

Hmmm, I wonder how Desktop 5.5 is set up, since it has a firewall as part of the image. I wonder if any of the hidden shares are there ( \\{machine name}\c$ )? That could pose a security risk since each machine runs the same login/password. That would allow one ward to get into another ward's machine. Does anyone know if the Administrative computers are at all visible to other machines on the network?

RussellHltn wrote:From a security standpoint, having them in different Workgroups would be like a screen door - the most trivial of obstacles.

I agree; however, it is comforting to know that the average person can't just walk through a screen door!

mkmurray wrote:I agree; however, it is comforting to know that the average person can't just walk through a screen door!

If a screen door is the only defense from an "average person" something is very wrong. In that sense I guess I'm against it because it create a sense of security where there is none.

RussellHltn wrote:If a screen door is the only defense from an "average person" something is very wrong. In that sense I guess I'm against it because it create a sense of security where there is none.

True; I suppose it would be better to importune the developers to update the Desktop image, than for us to bandage it with a pretty ineffective work-around.

So we need someone to test if they can see the clerk PC's on the network or not; it very well could be the Church has already thought about this and taken it into account...