Re: [Bloat] ESR's comment popped up on slashdot

[David Collier-Brown <davec-b@rogers.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1798 bytes --]

Solandri wrote, at 
http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8141531&cid=50686089
> So based on a few vague comments, I managed to track down what the 
> issue is since neither this nor the previous/. article nor the sites 
> opposed to it (who seem to want to portray it as a Big Evil Government 
> conspiracy to take away your freedom) delve into it.
>
> Several airports useTerminal Doppler Weather Radar 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_Doppler_Weather_Radar>[wikipedia.org] 
> for high-resolution maps of storms, rainfall, and most importantly 
> (for airports)microbursts 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microburst>[wikipedia.org]. TDWR 
> operates at frequencies from 5.60 - 5.64 GHz. That's smack dab in the 
> middle of the5 GHz band used by 802.11a, n, and ac 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels#5.C2.A0GHz_.28802.11a.2Fh.2Fj.2Fn.2Fac.29.5B16.5D>[wikipedia.org]. 
> You'll notice use of those specific frequencies (channels 120, 124, 
> 128) are prohibited in the U.S. and Canada for this reason.
>
> Based on that, it sounds like the issue is that you can buy a 5 GHz 
> device off the shelf, then hack the firmware to re-enable those 
> frequencies. And the FCC is proposing this action because people have 
> been doing exactly that and the FCC has received reports from the 
> airports of such interference on those frequencies.

If this is correct, it argues for various of our proposals and opens up 
some new questions...
- is it a vendor that's scewed it up?
- was there a bad DD-WRT athe solution is enforcement...  anyone
t any time?


--dave

-- 
David Collier-Brown,         | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
davecb@spamcop.net           |                      -- Mark Twain


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 10572 bytes --]