Last Post: June 6, 2011:
while we are dissing the book...
the entire radio section stressed me out, especially the VSWR discussion. I'm a radio guy from way back and I can't reconcile what I read with what I know.
I didn't view this as a "dissing the book" post, but can you tell us exactly what part of the VSWR section is contrary to your experience?.
This is an old post so you probably already have it nailed now. Sry, just getting back into CWNP forums.
My take is as you described: WPA is a certification. RSNA is what the certification is based on.
WPA2 is a term that describes a certification handed out by the wi-fi alliance, that says it meets their criteria for being 802.11-2007 clause 8 (formerly 802.11i) compliant.
On the other hand Clause 8 of the IEEE standard describes the components of an RSNA network in great depth, in terms of protocols, key exchanges, 802.1x, etc. It is the authoritive guidance, and states *exactly* what is required.
While I like the CWNP books very much, I also think there is a lot of value in reading the IEEE standard for 802.11, if you haven't already, it helped me A LOT.
Most people use the term WPA instead of RSNA. But imo it is technically incorrect...almost synomynous but not quite. For example, I can have an RSNA that the alliance has not certified. Or, the WiFi Alliance may elect to certify a product that does not meet all RSNA requirements. (They are a reputable group that imo help interoperability in the industry a lot; just sayin its possible.)
My take anyhow, if any help. =)