Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > So I think a constructive approach would be to try to say how the FCC > concern can be solved or at least mitigated in a FOSS world. Do we have > any ideas? The FCC needs to think bigger: restricting who can make/design/update (fundamentally: 'own') wifi devices leads to millions of compromised devices attacking the Internet. If you think of the wifi spectrum as a small component of a bigger "Internet" spectrum, and that FCC really cares about all of it, then it makes no sense to manage each part in isolation. Or to put it differently: if company X's locked down wifi device is attacking the Internet, then maybe their wifi license should be revoked. > Because I can understand that regulators whose job it is to make sure > devices follow the rules have a problem with FOSS code that lets people > do whatever they want. Manufacturer devices that have security holes in them let black hats do whatever they want with the device. > Do we really want for regulators to bring back the vans who might roll > around and impose a fine because you were running OpenWRT and happened > to set the output power too high for whatever local regulation was in > place? Yes, actually, I do. I'm starting to be convinced that the Bell FIBE "wireless TV" eats more than it's fair share of wifi. I have no way to prove it without that Van. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [