The post with the options was at an unavoidably high technical level for reasons explained in that post. Either I posted at that technical level, or I could offer no solutions.

The follow-up post about pfSense was in reply to someone who identified himself as comfortable with that technical level, and who expressed an interest.


I've heard your complaint that the technical level of my contributions to this thread is too high because you don't understand them despite the obvious technical ability as indicated by your degree. As you acknowledged yourself, things have progressed fast in networking - a lot has changed since the original development of Ethernet, though that work remains important and seminal today. Just Googling many of the abbreviations will illustrate my reply.

I notice you haven't offered a solution of your own to the problem posed, let alone one at a lower technical level. I've tried to encourage anyone who wishes to experiment with my suggestions by lowering the barrier to entry (suggesting the use of a free GUI driven system rather than a 'bare bones' operating system, offering some pointers to relevant information and making a suggestion for inexpensive equipment from eBay that I know from personal experience will work). Unfortunately, unless I've missed something, we're in an area that's either DIY with self-education or involves a high price tag.


These forums contain everyone from those who class themselves as IT novices through to engineers with far greater expertise than me. We are in a technical discussion sub-forum here, and I don't see anything wrong with using the lowest level of technical content appropriate to the question asked.

If I see a post that I don't understand on these (or any other) forums, I ignore it, carry out my own research in an attempt to understand it, or ask a relevant follow-up question.

You can ignore my posts silently without adding to the noise in this thread, as I wasn't replying to you. As you will see elsewhere on the forums, I try to keep the technical level in my posts down wherever possible.

In reply to a post by David_W:

I notice you haven't offered a solution of your own to the problem posed......

Er.....

In reply to a post by Stevenage_Neil:

I think, (dangerous I know), that we can keep hypothesising til the cows come home or, we get answer to ian72's question in Post#2.

Note the word hypothesising.

Here's a simple solution: Get all residents to use Windows and install Networx on all machines.

Edited by deleted (Mon 07-Oct-13 15:04:58)

In reply to a post by Stevenage_Neil:

In reply to a post by Stevenage_Neil:

I think, (dangerous I know), that we can keep hypothesising til the cows come home or, we get answer to ian72's question in Post#2.

Note the word hypothesising.

I did. Even if the OP is on a mobile network, the answer I gave remains valid.

If going down any pfSense route, most USB mobile broadband devices just work - plug the device into a USB port on the pfSense box and fill in the details on the cellular and interface pages of the pfSense interface. If that approach doesn't work, either move the SIM to a pfSense compatible device (if using a SIM based service), or interpose pfSense in a bridged configuration between the mobile broadband device and the client network (use an Ethernet cable to the existing router if you can, otherwise a wireless bridge if the mobile device is purely wireless).

If going down the wireless LAN with RADIUS accounting route, the best option is to configure RADIUS accounting on the existing wireless LAN if you can, though it's unlikely a consumer grade device has the necessary support. If you need to use a separate access point for the clients that has RADIUS accounting support, connect that access point to the mobile device using an Ethernet cable (preferred solution), a dual band enterprise access point in a client / access point configuration (in some cases you can use a dual band access point in a 2.4GHz client and 5GHz access point configuration - or vice versa if the mobile device has 5GHz support), or use a wireless bridge against the mobile device's wireless.


Again, this is only a high level answer. Moreover, these details don't matter much. My original answer gave some broad approaches that were equally applicable to a fixed, wireless or mobile service. If the original poster gives more information, it will be possible to eliminate many of these options and give a more precise answer.

For what it's worth, I join those who believe the best answer is an unlimited tariff, rather than any of these technically complex solutions. However, as we appear to be talking about a foreign country, such a tariff may not be available at an affordable price.

In reply to a post by Stevenage_Neil:

Here's a simple solution: Get all residents to use Windows and install Networx on all machines.

Will that monitor the phones and tab?

Amazed you lot are still discussing this after no responses from original poster.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Stevenage_Neil:

Here's a simple solution: Get all residents to use Windows and install Networx on all machines.

Will that monitor the phones and tab?

It won't. This approach is my second bullet point back in my earlier reply, where I discussed other drawbacks.


stevenage_neil's point that I'm ultimately responding to here, with the addition of BatBoy's commentary, was edited into the post after I read and responded to it.

As MrSaffron says, there's nothing more we can do without the original poster. This thread is rapidly heading for my wombat filter if he doesn't come back. (wombat (slang) - waste of money, brains and time).

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Amazed you lot are still discussing this after no responses from original poster.

Didn't I say that earlier?

In reply to a post by Stevenage_Neil:

I think, (dangerous I know), that we can keep hypothesising til the cows come home or, we get answer to ian72's question in Post#2.

Maybe other people are interested in the answers? After all, if the discussions are only for the OP it would be better to use PM's like the mods do on the BT Community forums.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Stevenage_Neil:

Here's a simple solution: Get all residents to use Windows and install Networx on all machines.

Will that monitor the phones and tab?

Only Windows based machines as far as I know.

Edited by deleted (Mon 07-Oct-13 18:15:29)

Well, that's not going to meet the requirements of the OP whereas the posts you didn't comprehend will.