On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 07:50:37 +0000, John Dann wrote:

OK, to be 100% clear: The connection on the 6555 logger is a standard
cabled RJ45 Ethernet socket,

As i thought. B-) KISS applies, cabled LAN connections "just work" and
are more flexable, three options spring immediatly to mind, straight cable
to tyour LANS switch, wireless via a wireless bridge or powerline ethernet
(uses the mains power wiring to link ethernet devices).

And I can't see any reason - though haven't actually tested this yet -
why the 6555 can't be connected to the WiFi equivalent of a hub/switch
(is that a wireless access point - I get a bit confused with the
terminology of WiFi LANs,

Not helped by the rather generic marketing terms used for devices that
include, ADSL modem, firewall, router, ethernet switch and wireless access
point all in one box.

they seem perversely different from cabled LANs to no great advantage

The only advantage is that you don't need a cable for your laptop or PDA
you can just "use it" anywhere within a few tens of metres of the Access
Point. The payment for this is lack of security of your network unless you
take action (change default users/passwords, enable or strengthen
encryption etc) and reliability/speed.

though I dare say there are technical niceties as to why something doing
an apparently similar job should be called something different)

A wireless Access Point provides access to a LAN via a wireless interface,
more than one remote device can access the LAN via a single Access Point.
To connect this new VP logging device wirelessly you'd need a wireless
bridge to plug the ethernet port of the logger into.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail