I just leave the Airport on at work. But I use DHCP at home and work. Are you sure it actually causes any problems? Or, just how serious are these problems? Does the log traffic affect the network or just the internal logs? Perhaps there is an AppleScript or even some script at the command line to turn off the Airport if it's not getting a signal. But I'd like to know how you plan to automate turning the Airport back on (ie, how will it know that you're home?) Suck it up. There has got to be things in your life that cause you more concern than this. :-) On Nov 17, 2003, at 7:13 AM, Justin R. Miller wrote: > Hi all, > > Just curious if anyone has an answer that will let me go from quite > lazy to very lazy... :-) > > I have a 'Home' network location with just Airport enabled, since > that's all I use at home. I use DHCP since I have a router. > > At work, I have a 'Work' location with Ethernet first, then Airport. > I use Ethernet 99.9% of the time, but occasionally I like to just pick > up and take the laptop into the other room and keep my SSH > connections, etc. open. Thus, I have the same static IP configured > for both Ethernet and Airport. I can just unplug and roam and > everything stays the way it was, but is now wireless. > > With me so far? > > Ok, here's the lazy part. At home, when I crack open the laptop, I'd > obviously like to have the Airport card itself switched 'on', but at > work, I'd like it to default to 'off'. This is mostly because having > the same IP address on two interfaces causes a bunch of log traffic > with regard to ARP and partly because it's just bad practice. > > The normal-person solution would be to make two network locations for > work, one for wired and one for wireless. But that involves a > location switch when I want to go wireless. I realize that flipping > the Airport on is about the same amount of effort as switching > locations, but more than anything, I guess I'm curious if you can set > the Airport on/off status based on the network location. Maybe the > answer will prove more useful to someone who would like to know for a > less lazy reason ;-) > > Thanks for any suggestions, including to suck it up and deal :-)