EDITOR'S NOTE: Windows & .NET Magazine welcomes feedback from readers about the magazine. Please send comments to letters @winnetmag.com and include your full name, email address, and daytime phone number with your letter. We edit all letters and replies for style, length, and clarity.

The Answer to VoIP Security?
I read John D. Ruley's "Voice over IP" (August 2003, InstantDoc ID 39520) with interest. Is the author aware of any companies actively pursuing or trying wireless Voice over IP (VoIP) for internal telephony needs? Is WiFi security the key barrier to adoption of wireless VoIP? If security is the problem, is 802.11i the answer? Thanks to the author for sharing his perspective—and an excellent article!

—Scott B. Deutschman
sbdeutschman@starpower.net

Thanks for writing. I don't know of any companies using wireless VoIP for internal telephony, but based on the activity in newsgroups, I think companies are interested in pursuing it. (To see a list of related newsgroups, go to http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&edition=us&q=wireless+VOIP&btnG=Google+Search.) Wireless security is a big concern regardless of your application, but I don't think VoIP presents any special risk. Of course, any factor that slows Internet traffic, such as the recent SoBig and MSBlaster virus-related traffic, could potentially interfere with VoIP performance. You could probably mitigate the effects of a traffic slowdown by implementing a Quality of Service plan that gives VoIP traffic precedence over file downloads or email. I'm not sure that 802.11i is a total solution to wireless security, although the book "Real 802.11 Security: Wi-Fi Protected Access and 802.11i" (Edney and Arbaugh, Addison-Wesley, 2004) makes a powerful case for 802.11i. I think the best way to ensure wireless security is to employ an educated wireless network administrator who understands and uses all the security tools available, including 802.11i, the Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) standard, or media access control (MAC) address filtering. The most (theoretically) secure hardware in the world is no good if you leave the default settings.

—John D. Ruley

More Wireless Support
In Letters to the Editor: "Going Wireless" (August 2003, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 39609), Michael Abramovitch writes that only the Symbol Technologies' Wireless Networker CompactFlash (CF) card is available for Windows desktop machines. I have D-Link Systems' D-Link DCF-660W CF wireless network card that Windows 2000 supports on a notebook computer. The required driver is available on D-Link's drivers FTP site at ftp://ftp.dlink.com/wireless/dcf660w/drivers. (The windows driver is DCF660WK_DRIVERS_101.EXE.) Although the D-Link Web site states that no driver for Win2K is available, a D-Link technical support representative told me about the FTP site. In my case, I've found that the DCF-660W wireless card is more compatible with many Windows programs than some other PC Card wireless cards that I've tried.

—David Rounds
drounds@jvlnet.com

The Real Cost of SAN and NAS
I was interested in Mark Smith's examination of Network Attached Storage (NAS) and Storage Area Network (SAN) usefulness in "SAN and NAS: Better Together" (July 2003, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 39189). However, I think the SAN and NAS vendors have done an excellent job of obscuring the true costs of these technologies. Direct Attached Storage (DAS) gets little respect these days, but it is still an extremely cost-effective solution for most small to mid-sized IT organizations that are Windows-centric. We have a Dell (Clariion) SAN, but after living with it for a couple of years, I have yet to see reduced costs, either in purchase price, maintenance costs, or administrative costs. I seldom see realistic implementation costs in articles about SANs. The fibre channel drives are typically double the cost of equivalent SCSI drives. Fibre channel HBAs are typically about $2000 to $3000 per server (for redundant host bus adapters—HBAs). Fibre switches are about $750 to $1000 per port, and redundant configurations require two ports per server and two switches (minimum) per SAN.

The added complexity of SANs is a significant concern. Typically, only a few people in an IT organization will be able to master the nuances and details of SAN configuration. And although the storage vendors talk a good game about the system being redundant, we have found many instances where the recommendation is to "restart the SAN" after maintenance. If I have many clients/servers depending upon a massive central storage device, they are all affected by any downtime on that device.

Using low-cost NAS technology for disk-to-disk backups is useful. However, it doesn't replace tape for archiving because tape is designed to retain data for decades. Tape cartridges can also be easily taken offsite to provide protection against physical disasters. I understand that special requirements can mandate the choice of a NAS or SAN. However, I think DAS is not getting credit for continuing to be a cost-effective solution for many IT shops.

—David Martin
dmartin@ci.las-vegas.nv.us

Not All Microsoft Patches Are Perfect
Mark Minasi's article "MSBlaster: The Post-Game Wrap-Up" (Windows & .NET Magazine UPDATE, August 29, 2003, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 40074) was interesting, but I think the author is being too easy on Microsoft. Yes, individuals need to be more active in patching their systems, but not all Microsoft patches are perfect. Some patches break things, and some don't do what they're supposed to. Large corporations know this, and most need to test patches before applying them. Some large corporations have to establish guidelines based not on what the network administrator wants but on what the federal government or the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) require. Microsoft has made improvements in securing its software, but the company has a long way to go.

—Dave Shipman
dave@shipmanhome.net

In Search of .NET
Regarding Mark Smith's "In Search of .NET," (July 2003, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 39178), I work for a large telecommunications firm with more than 80,000 employees, but my 14-person workgroup is more like a small business. I am the server administrator, DBA, and application developer. Since upgrading to SQL Server 2000, Visual Studio .NET 2003, and Windows Server 2003, my personal productivity has exploded. Now that I've clicked with .NET as a developer, the ideas for redesigning old apps and databases and creating new ones just keep coming. I don't know how to measure the ROI in dollars, but I feel more valuable as an asset. Implementing .NET has helped me increase my contribution to the business by providing improved service to the knowledge workers I support. Plus, it is invaluable to me to feel renewed enthusiasm for my work after 21.5 years at the same company.

—Tim Bodie
timbodie@hotmail.com

Need Advice on Desktop Management
I enjoyed reading Ed Roth's "Enterprise Management Options" (May 15, 2003, http://www.winnetmag.com, InstantDoc ID 38735). I'm looking for advice before I make a decision for my company to purchase a tool to manage desktops more efficiently. I'm looking for a product that's user-friendly, that we'll be able to use with add-on improvements year after year, that will let me manage hardware and software inventory, and that will deploy patches, service packs, and software. I'd like the product to have other features, of course, but I mainly want to eliminate desk-side visits. Because my company is a Windows shop, does it make sense for us to stick with a Microsoft product such as Microsoft Systems Management Server (SMS)? We're also looking at products from Configuresoft, OnDemand Software, and PatchLink.

—Michael J. DeLassio
michael.delassio@jwt.com

You didn't mention the size of your company, which will be a factor in your product choice. SMS is certainly an attractive option for companies that use Windows because SMS integrates easily, and many such companies already have licensing in place that makes SMS relatively affordable. SMS also is integrated with Microsoft Software Update Services (SUS) to simplify patch and update delivery to desktops and servers. One knock SMS gets is that it's cumbersome to administer. I think this criticism applies to most management applications: If the product is powerful enough to do what you want, it's by definition not simple to manage. I would suggest that you also look at ManageSoft and Altiris products to assess their capabilities as standalone applications and as add-ons to SMS. Good luck in your decision-making process and implementation.

—Ed Roth

Magazine Hosts New Conference
To meet the growing need for technical information about administering Exchange Server, Windows & .NET Magazine is expanding its Connections 2003 conference to include a concurrent conference about Exchange and Outlook administration: Exchange Connections 2003. The conference is set for November 2 through 6, 2003, at the Hyatt Regency Grand Cypress, Orlando, Florida. Keynote speaker for the Exchange Connections conference will be Kevin McCuistion, Microsoft's director of Exchange, and Tony Redmond, vice president and chief technology officer for HP Services. Sue Mosher, a consultant who directs the Slipstick Systems Outlook and Exchange Solutions Center, will be a featured speaker.

Exchange Connections will include sessions such as "Backup and Recovery Essentials for Exchange," "Exchange 2003 Security Enhancements," and "Exchange and Clustering: The Whole Story" along with numerous presentations about fighting spam, enhancing OWA, and deploying Exchange and Outlook. Pre-conference workshops include "Exchange 2000 and 2003 Administration Essentials," a full-day session about installing Exchange Server, preparing Active Directory (AD) for an Exchange Server installation, securing servers against viruses and attacks, managing system resources, and performing basic backup and recovery and disaster-recovery operations.

Windows & .NET Magazine senior contributing editor Mark Minasi will deliver the keynote address, "Windows Server 2003 Report Card," at the concurrent Windows & .NET Magazine Connections conference. For more information, go to http://www.winconnections.com.