Database Develop

Asterisks IAX2 Client

Does anyone know of any IAX2 Client VOIP software for the Dream Google G1
IAX2 Cuts through the firewalls just like skype does so its reliably easy for when you are on the go to be able to connect with less hassle (unlike SIP mucking around with forward ports)
Could I not port some sort of IAX2 client from some Linux project or has someone already done this?
I am on the road allot and encounter many different types of wifi networks. I carry a laptop now with a headset and connect where ever I can to check messages and make calls sometimes even receive some. I love the fact that my small business runs asterisks allowing me to use many different voip providers (that use sip or IAX2) I have 2 numbers in bound giving me 4 different channels of call into a cheap $12 a month professional phone system. I even recently been using a provider that gives me $0.00348 cents a min for Canadian outbound.
(I scoured the threads for keywords like trixbox, asterisks, IAX, IAX2, Elastics, freepbx and was unable to find any serious discussion on this)

Why do you need to forward ports for SIP? Just keep a connection open to the SIP server and it will signal you there.

I use to spend most of my free time in my car trying to get a open connection then attempting to get my sip client to connect to my home server. A pain in the butt. When it worked its nice to get your voicemails and heck catch a call once in a while pickup a job on the run. Even make all your calls if you got a clear enough connection.
Seems they make it easy to connect to your sip provider but when it comes to your own asterisk server at home you have to fight with the provider. Sympatic o seems to block the rtp ports or disrupt the communication in some way allowing only the sip 5060 ports to connect make the phone ring but not let you talk. they play all sorts of games. It worked fine up to march 2008 when all thr providers (big boys Rogers Sympatico) Upgraded to the world of packet level control. Things got fun from there. All home extension to business PBX's I setup for clients stopped working with no changes. (all sorts of different providers spead out around ontario)
I was one of the few voip asterisk consultants till voip started to take off
Does not matter if you manage to prove it and make it past the supastars ( ISP tech the PBX is on or client is connected with)to someone who actually has some control or packet level understanding to clear you a route to your home box. Unless you pay for static ip your ip will change (bell charges a ransom for a static ip) I also noticed if you setup a pbx in a major data center they seem to have a clear route. but anything DSL or Business Cable type connection there is something wrong .that use to work for 2 years prior.
Not to mention what ever router you seem to connect with might not pass things proper .
IAX2 is a dream come true it is supported by many providers and cuts through all the mess of games and such using only one port thats not tcp but udp and slices through your average router and provider with no hassle just like skype but with the freedom of your own setup. the jitter controls work wounders compared to SIP giving you a better voip experience when your wireless.
skype is very limited and very controlled when it comes to receiving calls and sending them especially when you travel.
I am not here to argue with anyone over the finer points of the more common sip. but unless I run a vpn (using sip) IAX2 is the simplest breath of fresh air in the world of voip especially if your savvy enough to build your own asterisk server and would like to take advantage of all sorts of voip providers in one box. Or heck hook one of your clients up hassle free to his Business/home phone system you setup for them.
I really just want to know if anyone has a decent IAX2 client for the G1
If you want to argue VOIP head over to voip-info.org [remove this space] /wiki/view/IAX

so i guess no software for iax2 clients.
Any ware I can pay someone to write one?

Nice found a project...
thought I would update anyone who is interested!
code.google.com/p/androvoip/wiki/Roadmap

I would be interested in such a software. However this project doesn't look very active at the moment.

warenlikesfreedom said:
so i guess no software for iax2 clients.
Any ware I can pay someone to write one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you tried Zoiper? it supports both of SIP & IAX2 .... wwwDOTzoiperDOTcom

Reverse-Tethering on a Vogue with Android (Share Windows PC's Internet with phone)

I have done the NAND install method on my Vogue with Myn's Warm Donut RLS3 from 2010-02-20. Since I do not have a data plan, and have the XV6900, which comes without WiFi, I cannot just connect to a local network to get internet access, so how do I get access over the USB cable or via Bluetooth? This would basically be like "Reverse-tethering", that you can do in Windows via ActiveSync (when you are hooked up you can use the desktop PC's internet connection)
So, how do we do this now on Android?
Thanks,
-C

Short version: we don't. Do you want details?

Well, without looking very hard... I know this is possible, since you can do almost anything on Linux. Here's a brief description of how this is done, although it may need some modification for our builds:
http://www.htc-android.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=154
OR
http://forums.androidandme.com/topic/internet-over-usb
Search for android ifconfig usb and see what you can find.

polyrhythmic said:
Well, without looking very hard... I know this is possible, since you can do almost anything on Linux. Here's a brief description of how this is done, although it may need some modification for our builds:
http://www.htc-android.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=154
OR
http://forums.androidandme.com/topic/internet-over-usb
Search for android ifconfig usb and see what you can find.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We certainly could if it was supported in our kernel, but our only USB drivers are adb and mass storage. I believe dzo and mssmison are working on some other. cdc, ethernet, rndis, etc. aren't currently supported.

mrkite38 said:
Short version: we don't. Do you want details?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm bummer. Most people with cell service are STILL not paying for data plans, and only about 50% of people with smartphones have data plans yet. Heck...I got a data plan and then got rid of it after 6 months...that alone was $180 worth that was totally wasted for what...the convenience of checking email on my lunch break....yeah that's worth it. At least ATT is only $10 a month now if you are on a shared plan with your family for unlimited data. To bad I an on VZW, lol...
So anyway, it seems like this would almost be a must. I would gladly pay a developer here $50 if he came up with a widget to do it. He'd make a lot more than that on the market too if he developed that.

crobs808 said:
So anyway, it seems like this would almost be a must. I would gladly pay a developer here $50 if he came up with a widget to do it. He'd make a lot more than that on the market too if he developed that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
'Real' android phones can do it, our kernel can't. Plus, you can't download from market or use youtube, etc, over bluetooth tethering (I've tried) or via usb from what I've read. Only the cellular data connection and wifi are considered 'valid' by Android. So the dev would have to fix that, too, to make it worthwhile.

mrkite38 said:
'Real' android phones can do it, our kernel can't. Plus, you can't download from market or use youtube, etc, over bluetooth tethering (I've tried) or via usb from what I've read. Only the cellular data connection and wifi are considered 'valid' by Android. So the dev would have to fix that, too, to make it worthwhile.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would be happy just to have WiFi, but the XV6900 (Verizon Touch) doesnt even have WiFi at all. I am considering getting the Nexus when it comes to Verizon in a few months.

crobs808 said:
I would be happy just to have WiFi, but the XV6900 (Verizon Touch) doesnt even have WiFi at all. I am considering getting the Nexus when it comes to Verizon in a few months.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, and the mogul might be a good solve but it only has a 64 MB ROM... I know, been through it all in my head before, too.

Thanks
Thanks. It can sure take some time searching to find some of this info, but even with the NO it won't work I'll still be searching
I want the Bluetooth PAN on Android!
It does not make any sense that Google would know I'm connecting via Bluetooth PAN vs. WiFi to my PC since this occurs behind my Router??? The IP is set at the Router level, my phone should not be visible.
edit... misread post above.
I guess Android itself would know, but that seems odd. But Odd rules sometimes.

Any updates on possibilities yet ??? or there is still no way to use internet on Vogue Andriod without having data plan ?

gogodj said:
Any updates on possibilities yet ??? or there is still no way to use internet on Vogue Andriod without having data plan ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not yet... the reasons posted above are still true.

Are there any plans to add this feature to future ROMS? The only reason I haven't switched to android from windows mobile is because of this.

damaph said:
Are there any plans to add this feature to future ROMS? The only reason I haven't switched to android from windows mobile is because of this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think so. It's a kernel thing, not a rom thing, and it requires a lot of driver work. But even if it did work, android wouldn't recognize it as a valid connection.

rfcomm + pppd to tether both ways?
I am new to android, but I have networking experience with Linux. I am running Myn's latest Warm Donut on my Sprint Touch. And it seems that hciconfig/hcitool are working to associate the phone with another bluetooth interface. Also, rfcomm seems to be working. And lastly, pppd is installed and (indeed) necessary for the 3g/edge connection as evidenced by the ppp0 in ifconfig. Also, reviewing dmesg, I see L2CAP and BNEP are compiled into the kernel. And pand is also compiled and running. I am not familiar with these, but it seems to offer another route for maybe getting a bluetooth IP link established.
So, my question is simply this. Can we not use the hci commands to associate the phone to another bluetooth adapter on, say, a networked Linux system? Then use rfcomm to build a bluetooth serial connection between the two systems, and finally establish a ppp interface on each end of that serial link? Once that is done, the two systems will share a point-to-point IP link over BT over which they can communicate. Then it is simply a matter of establishing gateways, proxies, iptables NAT, DNS, and routes to make either forwarded or reversed tethered connections. I am reasonably confident I can do that. With a Class 1 bluetooth interface on the Linux server side, the range could be extended for reverse tethering...perhaps making it useful as a moderate range wifi replacement. Other webpages discuss similar approaches using bluetooth rfcomm/pppd. It might require experimentation to find reasonable baud rates for the serial link, etc., but nothing seems obviously impossible. And bluetooth can provide a 1 Mbps+ speeds...again, not great, but better than Edge or dodgy EVDO.
Likewise, we may be able to build a proper PAN connection. I am not familiar with pand and bnep interfaces, but I could probably figure it out.
As I said, I am new to Android, and I am just starting to test this on my phone. Is there something that I am missing with regard to existing hci/rfcomm/pand functionality? Dmesg reports all of these compiled in and hcitool scan seems to do something...it blinks the blue light and find my laptop. I guess I am just asking if someone can shoot holes in my idea before I waste too much time pursuing it.
Thanks.

mprinkey said:
I am new to android, but I have networking experience with Linux. I am running Myn's latest Warm Donut on my Sprint Touch. And it seems that hciconfig/hcitool are working to associate the phone with another bluetooth interface. Also, rfcomm seems to be working. And lastly, pppd is installed and (indeed) necessary for the 3g/edge connection as evidenced by the ppp0 in ifconfig. Also, reviewing dmesg, I see L2CAP and BNEP are compiled into the kernel. And pand is also compiled and running. I am not familiar with these, but it seems to offer another route for maybe getting a bluetooth IP link established.
So, my question is simply this. Can we not use the hci commands to associate the phone to another bluetooth adapter on, say, a networked Linux system? Then use rfcomm to build a bluetooth serial connection between the two systems, and finally establish a ppp interface on each end of that serial link? Once that is done, the two systems will share a point-to-point IP link over BT over which they can communicate. Then it is simply a matter of establishing gateways, proxies, iptables NAT, DNS, and routes to make either forwarded or reversed tethered connections. I am reasonably confident I can do that. With a Class 1 bluetooth interface on the Linux server side, the range could be extended for reverse tethering...perhaps making it useful as a moderate range wifi replacement. Other webpages discuss similar approaches using bluetooth rfcomm/pppd. It might require experimentation to find reasonable baud rates for the serial link, etc., but nothing seems obviously impossible. And bluetooth can provide a 1 Mbps+ speeds...again, not great, but better than Edge or dodgy EVDO.
Likewise, we may be able to build a proper PAN connection. I am not familiar with pand and bnep interfaces, but I could probably figure it out.
As I said, I am new to Android, and I am just starting to test this on my phone. Is there something that I am missing with regard to existing hci/rfcomm/pand functionality? Dmesg reports all of these compiled in and hcitool scan seems to do something...it blinks the blue light and find my laptop. I guess I am just asking if someone can shoot holes in my idea before I waste too much time pursuing it.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's all correct, and I've done it before. But the issue is that Android only acknowledges TWO kinds of data connections: cellular and wifi. When I setup a pan and iptable'd my way to the internet, I was able to get google maps, but not market. I haven't tried Opera but the android browser didn't work. Etc., etc. So I think the usefulness of pan is limited. The real challenge here is for someone to dig through the source and find out how to ADD bt and USB as 'valid' data interfaces. I've never looked into that.

Cellular connection is ppp0. Have you tried running pppd over rfcomm? Or assign an identical IP address to the pan/pppd interface and set it's metric a notch lower so it is preferred over the ppp0 one? Also, will Android route over a VPN? Setup pan and VPN over it. VPN seems to "own" Internet traffic when it is configured according to this: http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=4205
Also, I've seen posts indicating that the default browser can be configured to use a proxy.
Just ideas and I'd like to know what you've tried so I don't waste my time. Thanks for your input.

mprinkey said:
Cellular connection is ppp0. Have you tried running pppd over rfcomm? Or assign an identical IP address to the pan/pppd interface and set it's metric a notch lower so it is preferred over the ppp0 one? Also, will Android route over a VPN? Setup pan and VPN over it. Also, I've seen posts indicating that the default browser can be configured to use a proxy.
Just ideas and I'd like to know what you've tried so I don't waste my time. Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, didn't try any fancy-pants stuff. When I did all this, I was a total n00b to linux (only a partial n00b now) and it didn't take too long, so I say - give it a try! That's the spirit around here.

mrkite38 said:
Nope, didn't try any fancy-pants stuff. When I did all this, I was a total n00b to linux (only a partial n00b now) and it didn't take too long, so I say - give it a try! That's the spirit around here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great. That is encouraging. The link that I edited into my previous post seems to indicate that ALL traffic gets routed over the VPN when it is established. That would fix any security concerns I'd have about using a high-powered BT adapter. I think I will give it a spin.

USB Ethernet
In my kernel hacking trying to get Debian to run, I managed to enable USB Ethernet (the function driver; USB gadget crashes the phone) working, and I've been using it to SSH into my phone. I've used it to apt-get update without any problems. I believe it's just a kernel config option (although I might have done some code modifications), so the problem isn't the driver, it's with Android's userspace.

gTan64 said:
In my kernel hacking trying to get Debian to run, I managed to enable USB Ethernet (the function driver; USB gadget crashes the phone) working, and I've been using it to SSH into my phone. I've used it to apt-get update without any problems. I believe it's just a kernel config option (although I might have done some code modifications), so the problem isn't the driver, it's with Android's userspace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you enabled USB ether in the kernel config and it's working for you? Against a linux host or Windows? that would be nice, I haven't tried that in ages.
Edit: yes, the 'valid' connection check is definitely in Android userspace. But I either forgot or didn't know that our usb ether func driver worked when enabled.

I just can't get Market to work - "Server Unavailable. Please try again later"

I just can't get Market to work - "Server Unavailable. Please try again later"
This is driving me crazy! Any solutions to this so far? I have tried Nootering (funny word!) the thing three times with different versions, but I get nowhere. Any help would really be appreciated!

Mastiff said:
This is driving me crazy! Any solutions to this so far? I have tried Nootering (funny word!) the thing three times with different versions, but I get nowhere. Any help would really be appreciated!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try using my tutorials and scripts I have 0 complaints or bricks to date.

OK, I'll try that, thanks. So they are something that needs to be done after the new Auto Nooter version 25?

xboxexpert said:
Try using my tutorials and scripts I have 0 complaints or bricks to date.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seconded on this. Had the same issue on my first try (and I've rooted about every device Ive ever owned) and xboxexperts tut's definitely helped.

I had that problem and had to register the unit with BN, search and you can find out how to reregister it with BN. I read somewhere where you can register with BN if you had this problem. try this link
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=887802&highlight=register

This isn't the Q&A section or general section.
Apply your question(s) in the proper sub-forum, cause you picked the wrong one.
Posting in the wrong forum might result in a temporary vacation

xboxexpert, I have run your script (couldn't find any other tutorials amongst your posts, where are they?) and it installed a lot of fun stuff. But unfortunately I still have the same error on Android Market (Server unavailable. Please try again later.). But the Live Wallpapers work now, so thank you for that! I could never get those to work on the regular Nootering.
secfincorp, does that matter for the Android Market? I reran the wizard and it's already registered (I did that before the Auto Nootering, as you're supposed to do according to the instructions on Nootering). You sure you're not thinking about the Barnes & Noble bookstore instead of the Market? That doesn't work here anyway, only in the US.
Mikey1022, your colleague moved it after you closed it. But I would still say this is relevant for the Android development because it is a part of the Nootering process that doesn't work for everybody (I have seen others asking about the same thing in the Nootering thread, but the overwhelming lack of answers have made the others give up, it seems).

SOLVED!!!!
At least for the Nooks part. It's something with my ISP that blocks the market. Gonna have to call them and find out what it is. I tried going outside the house firewall and got nowhere. Then I took it with me up in my family's small zoo shop, and it just worked at once! So there is something at the ISP level that's blocking me.
I'm sure it will be a walk in the park to find out that from the ISP's army of well trained technical experts...not! Gonna have to deal with underpaid idiots reading from a flow chart again. "Have you remembered to plug in your DSL modem? Have you tried to reset your modem? Do you have any cables connected to the modem that were not supplied by us?"

Mastiff said:
At least for the Nooks part. It's something with my ISP that blocks the market. Gonna have to call them and find out what it is. I tried going outside the house firewall and got nowhere. Then I took it with me up in my family's small zoo shop, and it just worked at once! So there is something at the ISP level that's blocking me.
I'm sure it will be a walk in the park to find out that from the ISP's army of well trained technical experts...not! Gonna have to deal with underpaid idiots reading from a flow chart again. "Have you remembered to plug in your DSL modem? Have you tried to reset your modem? Do you have any cables connected to the modem that were not supplied by us?"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could be firewall ports on your router are blocked maybe...are you sure the dsl modem doesn't have a built in router or something?

Nope, it's not. I have a three tier system:
1. First the Thompson 585 DSL modem which is set to bridge mode, so...
2: ...the Linux M0n0wall firewall controls the DSL connection. And I do of course have full control over the firewall in the M0n0wall, and even turning that completely off doesn't help. The M0n0wall connects...
3. ...to a Windows 2003 Server that is the main house server, and the firewall on RAS is disabled. Then a WLAN router (Netgear with DD-WRT Linux firmware) is connected to the server, and it gives wifi access to everything mobile and portable in the house. That's connected as a pure access point, with the WAN port configured as a LAN port and the firewall turned off.
That means that disabling the firewall protection on the M0n0wall turns off all kinds of firewall protection in the house, and I have tried that. I even tried connecting another wifi router as an access point directly to the M0n0wall, bypassing the Windows Server, and that did not change anything either. So I'm very sure this is a problem at my ISP.

OK. So you know what you're doing. Just making sure. Some folks don't know anything about routers except how to plug them in.
I'm on a pair of DD-WRT routers myself (one bridged). I got tired of screwing with firewall port forwarding for PC games, Tivo, Xbox live, ipods, etc... now I leave the hardware firewall off, and just use the firewalls on the Windows boxes.

Yeah, I sort of know what I'm doing... Been working with computers for almost 25 years, so all the way up from DOS 3. And that makes it even more frustrating when I'm stuck on a simple thing like getting Android Market to work!
I actually have two DD-WRT routers in the house too, one Netgear that I use for the in house use and one Buffalo that's connected before the Windows Server to share my Internet connection with a neighbour. And then I have a Buffalo up in the shop, which in addition to giving wifi access also is set up as an always on VPN tunnell from the shop to the house. You can say that my system is a bit overkill for somebody who doesn't run a semibig company, but it's fun! And it's so stable with the hardware and software I've got running on it that you'd have to shoot it with a shotgun to get it to crash!

[Q] Peer based ISP possible?

I'm just curious about how an ISP actually becomes an ISP. I'm still learning networking so these thoughts might be completely idiotic and not possible but here goes.
Given the correct software, could a group of computers act as an ISP? For instance, say an entire cities population has the correct software on their computers, could they act as an ISP. All sharing the load and acting as one giant server. Similar to the group computing that certain organizations (eg. NASA) have done to do large calculations.
The infrastructure is there as far as the cables and such so would something like this be possible? If so, how hard would it be?

Moved to Off-Topic.

Even if the town is all connected, wouldn't they only be accessing each others websites and information? How do they access their neighboring towns? Isn't this known as an intranet or something? Excuse my ignorance I'm just thinking off the top of my head.

That's why I'm asking. I'm wondering how exactly an ISP connect's to the WAN (internet) and if it would be possible for a group of computers working in tandem as one giant server to do the same. I have a pretty good understanding (for my purposes at least) how a LAN/intranet works. Obviously there are certs involved in order to allow an ISP to connect to different servers but that's obviously not the key otherwise we wouldn't need an ISP at all.

An ISP is not a giant server or many small computers acting as a server. An ISP is a conglomerate of routers and switches used to connect many people to the internet. It doesn't really need a server, per se other than authentication of users and control of the switches/routing.
It is just a company with routers and switches with access to a massive pipeline connected to the internet.

So to accomplish something like this, more hardware would be required aside from what most people have (router, computer, etc)? Is there no way software could stand in place of the switches?

KCRic said:
So to accomplish something like this, more hardware would be required aside from what most people have (router, computer, etc)? Is there no way software could stand in place of the switches?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This link may help give you an idea.
http://aacable.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/mikrotik-dmasoftlab-rm-squid-zph-linux-bridgecomplete-guide/

institute scenario

Hi. I'm working in a school, and we're evaluating use the crhomecast to show contents on a tv.
The scenario is --> Have multiple nearby classrooms.
The teacher can connect their classroom Chromecast.
Mainly need if the teacher sends a video, another person cannot interrupt this (teasing the class)
Multiple platform like Android, iOS, Windows, mac, etc...
Is a must root the device?
Is it posible?
I heard something called kiosk mode, is it true?
Thanks

Pranksters can hijack your Chromecast to show whatever they want. It's a feature, not a bug.
Somebody needs to make an AlternativeTo...

This is possible and it does not require the device to be rooted, but it does require you to set up a private WiFi network. You could then hook up the Chromecast to the private network (password protected) and it wouldn't show up for anyone who is not on the network.

I work for the technology consortium at our county ISD. We service about 50 schools and a good deal of them have chromecast in all the classrooms.
We had to deal with this exact problem and right now the only solution was as already pointed out a separate private network for the chromecast. Actually all of our staff devices are on separate networks from the students. The teachers can see the Chromecasts from their issued MacBook, iPad, Chromebooks, desktop PCs etc.
What we've done is to use PSKs for each device so that even if a student were to go to say the teachers Windows based computer for example and steal the network key it wouldn't work for them. We had to go this route because of a projector debacle we had. All of our classroom Epson projectors are networked and the students had figured out the wireless key and used the wireless key along with the Epson wifi remote app to turn off projectors during class lol that is definitely something I would have done when I was in school!
Anyway after that happened we went to separate student and staff networks and everything has a PSK now.
Unfortunately when Google designed the chromecast they were not really thinking classroom. As more and more schools are switching away from iPads and going to Chromebooks and using things like chromecast I would think that at some point they would develop in features for education or have a separate model for education that has these types of securities but right now this is about the best you can do.
I can definitely tell you that whenever we talk to our rep from Google we ***** about the Chromecast not having better security because ultimately we want a solution that allows the students to use them too but not hijack them. We would like each student who's presenting to be able to connect to them when the teacher allows. Unfortunately there's just no management that can do that easily that I'm aware of.

primetechv2 said:
Pranksters can hijack your Chromecast to show whatever they want[/url]. It's a feature, not a bug.
Somebody needs to make an AlternativeTo...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't mean this. Just the opposite

kdoggy said:
I work for the technology consortium at our county ISD. We service about 50 schools and a good deal of them have chromecast in all the classrooms.
We had to deal with this exact problem and right now the only solution was as already pointed out a separate private network for the chromecast. Actually all of our staff devices are on separate networks from the students. The teachers can see the Chromecasts from their issued MacBook, iPad, Chromebooks, desktop PCs etc.
What we've done is to use PSKs for each device so that even if a student were to go to say the teachers Windows based computer for example and steal the network key it wouldn't work for them. We had to go this route because of a projector debacle we had. All of our classroom Epson projectors are networked and the students had figured out the wireless key and used the wireless key along with the Epson wifi remote app to turn off projectors during class lol that is definitely something I would have done when I was in school!
Anyway after that happened we went to separate student and staff networks and everything has a PSK now.
Unfortunately when Google designed the chromecast they were not really thinking classroom. As more and more schools are switching away from iPads and going to Chromebooks and using things like chromecast I would think that at some point they would develop in features for education or have a separate model for education that has these types of securities but right now this is about the best you can do.
I can definitely tell you that whenever we talk to our rep from Google we ***** about the Chromecast not having better security because ultimately we want a solution that allows the students to use them too but not hijack them. We would like each student who's presenting to be able to connect to them when the teacher allows. Unfortunately there's just no management that can do that easily that I'm aware of.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your input

kdoggy said:
I work for the technology consortium at our county ISD. We service about 50 schools and a good deal of them have chromecast in all the classrooms.
We had to deal with this exact problem and right now the only solution was as already pointed out a separate private network for the chromecast. Actually all of our staff devices are on separate networks from the students. The teachers can see the Chromecasts from their issued MacBook, iPad, Chromebooks, desktop PCs etc.
What we've done is to use PSKs for each device so that even if a student were to go to say the teachers Windows based computer for example and steal the network key it wouldn't work for them. We had to go this route because of a projector debacle we had. All of our classroom Epson projectors are networked and the students had figured out the wireless key and used the wireless key along with the Epson wifi remote app to turn off projectors during class lol that is definitely something I would have done when I was in school!
Anyway after that happened we went to separate student and staff networks and everything has a PSK now.
Unfortunately when Google designed the chromecast they were not really thinking classroom. As more and more schools are switching away from iPads and going to Chromebooks and using things like chromecast I would think that at some point they would develop in features for education or have a separate model for education that has these types of securities but right now this is about the best you can do.
I can definitely tell you that whenever we talk to our rep from Google we ***** about the Chromecast not having better security because ultimately we want a solution that allows the students to use them too but not hijack them. We would like each student who's presenting to be able to connect to them when the teacher allows. Unfortunately there's just no management that can do that easily that I'm aware of.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your input