Talk:Network Access Control

message: The controversy section seems to suspiciously lack any controversies.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.130.219.209 (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: This article is far too narrow in its description of NAC.  While it is true that one goal of some NAC solutions is to keep insecure or infected endpoints off the LAN, some solutions don't have this aim at all.  Some NAC solutions rely on authenticating the user or computer (e.g., to make network access auditable on a per-user/per-machine basis) without any particular eye toward the security of the known endpoint.  A University I formerly attended used such a solution -- they authenticated users who accessed their network, but didn't rely on their NAC product to do any policy enforcement.  Rather, policy enforcement was done by a desktop anti-virus program installed in a "managed" mode.
72.129.254.72 (talk) 06:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Dispute (Technology Neutrality) 

message: As of this afternoon, a substantial fraction of this entire article was a simple list of vendor names. 
Wikipedia is not a directory. Wikipedia is not an advertising service. I am sorry if the WP page for NAC is in the top results for NAC on Google, but that is not Wikipedia's problem. This article must remain encyclopedic. 
Please consult the following WP rules BEFORE writing about your company on this page:
* WP:COI lays out the guidelines for writing things you may have a conflict of interest about
* WP:ISNOT explains what this article should not be 
* WP:N explains what WP considers "notable". Non-notable details belong off the Wikipedia.
* WP:V explains the standards WP uses to judge sources for content in articles. 
--- tqbf 00:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's going to help clean this up? 

message: Wikipedia has a policy on external links: WP:EL. 
The best way to read that policy is, "Wikipedia is parsimonious with external links".
There is zero chance --- none --- that a link to a VAR/deployment consultancy is going to survive on a page that is already tagged for POV and advertising. 
Since I work in the field, and this is the first I've ever heard of the consultancy we're discussing, and a user here seems particularly interested in making sure that consultancy has a link off this article, I'd also like to ask that user to disclose whether they have a relationship with the consultancy they're linking to. 
--- tqbf 19:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for not re-adding this link to the article. Since you obviously have NAC expertise, maybe you could contribute to the article text? --- tqbf 20:51, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Network World is a publication, with editors. "Secure Access Central" is a promotional vehicle for a consultancy. --- tqbf 01:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: With all due respect, I have neither the time nor the interest to debate this topic with you, and you've done nothing to convince me; instead, you seem intent on yelling at me, presumably until I cave in and allow you to paste external links to sites you run into the Wikipedia. I'm going to keep deleting these links; they violate WP:EL, which you should read. If you have more questions, consider taking them to WP:HELPDESK. --- tqbf 01:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Er... what is all this rant about? The external link was not that bad (certaintly more comprehensible than the article as it is). If you care to drop the trolling for a bit and consider what is good for this article, I'm restoring the external link.--DustWolf (talk) 13:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link to consultancy 

message: Is there any evidence of NAC solution vendors proposing that Internet service providers use their NAC products, or has it been limited to use within organizations? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 18:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Home ISPs? 

message: one thing in this article I do not like is a reference that requires me to 'sign up' to see more.  under the referances number 5 fits this description.  When it takes me to the location http://www.fieldtechnologiesonline.com/download.mvc/Mobile-Network-Access-Control-Extending-0001.  I find this similar to having a wiki point to lexus/nexus.  If I have to sign up I feel that it is not a valid reference.  thank you for your time.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.155.154.172 (talk) 03:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Reference (log-in for info issue) 

message: I came to read up on network admission methods for NAC systems. I found a couple of things which I tried to clean up a bit. Firstly, there are two articles which would be nice to merge, Network Admission Control and this one. I think that Network Admission Control does not seem to be much different from Network Access Control. Also someone from Netclarity Marketing had some misleading information that Netclarity was the only vendor not to require 802.1x for network access. This appears to be untrue. I tried to balance this. 68.110.6.194 (talk) 16:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible merge 

message: Hello,
I try to follow the web link  Tutorial: Network Access Control (NAC) Mike Fratto,.
I got error 'Page Not found'.
The new link is tutorial-network-access-control-nac/page/1/0
Can you check and improve the web page?
Best Regards
--Blamal (talk) 06:38, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tutorial: Network Access Control (NAC) Mike Fratto goes to the wrong web page