From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-x229.google.com (mail-ig0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E216B21F5EB for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by igkz10 with SMTP id z10so22024256igk.1 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:29:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=IejmSY7U9wB21ApeyG4vc7L5ewZdpvsmneUkPMNwYyg=; b=GPfdGzvTbdsmyNlsjh5D5JOnhzdZIsyZWiVL7A2BvxyA2thBsZsDUgyoCkzX95TTNu 3gjD3qofoEjPn+GBAUAtno5peiGHBLyCyomJMjykjed9rAtTTtmtmhfiYn6nqFKjqHNa 24VHF1QIcxb0qvzU5n+20rMTUmCqXmP/LixNGBnO1JvOYvW3rm5hhjCYySzbfHrWugVQ 6fiVskMLDHqCs/VThoLiRoYuKxoW/NObN8+guqqtlwf8bQB03rRkbtbU6p3Ra3WUKGZw aZLtUYx2kruNUH0PZzxjr2QnjM8rr9U1gdg2wRLs2/uS0SdvKATzf9kkv0nPKQ8EFlQ3 4D2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=IejmSY7U9wB21ApeyG4vc7L5ewZdpvsmneUkPMNwYyg=; b=fuFNnd9+TFJFIFdV09XLrwQRvU/2CtM8UfPaf7TZH91Rut7h7TJR+q3mBLU8vvugXE UY136erf75uF6m8Ynqbo7p1NUQcFOxxH/2h0XjyAvv1z7kahsaAJvUCNWWPd7hkkXPxY vdCy1GFziqBZO3vknO65d+8KSRzUoSBmULG8T3fmbxr0N9e1pMyDisx/YDi5EQ4q7JgY 7T2LmKKDZwRdlpL1n3ARSFC+9znBv4MNkHuc7Cqw92yHWRhv9Wsub1C9wNFCMtYODMaH M4bbwRwvHMuDVCwnhPUlCN7pYFCpIfdqSNFBN6eAbmsxnkxbu1yj+lwM98+IIkHpB8gY lwDw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkvq22Fos65YBqaMWd82vyFO5fWqCW5J3pJ6bEQsbHtJ0iuvYsy3wUM9ZkKZJklb3p4UXQc MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.33.15 with SMTP id n15mr2907528igi.3.1444757395194; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:29:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.5.231 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:29:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <561D2CA1.7040705@superduper.net> References: <5616CE0D.1060309@rogers.com> <561D2CA1.7040705@superduper.net> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:29:55 -0700 Message-ID: From: Matt Mathis To: Simon Barber Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158b2fe541f6f0521ffcb03 Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] Another comment re FTC and weather radar from /. X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:31:40 -0000 --089e0158b2fe541f6f0521ffcb03 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I'm wondering if some of these conflicting uses are important enough to blank them out everywhere, in spite legal use in some areas? Doppler radar may be wanted everywhere some day. Also create an "unknown" geo for default use, which only uses channels that are globally approved. Thanks, --MM-- The best way to predict the future is to create it. - Alan Kay Privacy matters! We know from recent events that people are using our services to speak in defiance of unjust governments. We treat privacy and security as matters of life and death, because for some users, they are. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Simon Barber wrote: > Sounds like DD-WRT should add some IP geo-location code quickly, and let > the FCC know that they have done so! > > Simon > > > On 10/8/2015 1:11 PM, David Collier-Brown wrote: > > From tlkingan at > http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8141531&cid=50686561 > > > And that's what the FCC really wants The problem the FCC is seeing right > now is the modified firmware allows access to frequencies that aren't > allowed to be used for WiFI in the US. This is more than just channels 12 > and 13 on 2.4GHz, but also on the complex 5GHz band. > > The FCC has many complaints already from airports and other entities whose > radar is being interfered with by 5GHz WiFi (the band plan is complex > enough that channels are "locked out" because they're used by higher > priority services like radar). > > And you really can't blame the open firmware guys either - mostly because > they don't know any better and they only build one binary that works for > all devices worldwide. (the available channels on 5GHz vary per country - > depending on the radar in use). > > All the FCC really wants (and they've clarified it in the Notice of > Proposed Rulemaking) is the steps wifi manufacturers are taking to prevent > people from loading on firmware that does not comply with FCC regulations - > i.e., allows transmissions on frequencies they are not allowed to transmit > on. > > It can either take place as hardware (filters blocking out the > frequencies), or software that cannot be modified by the open firmware > (e.g., firmware on wifi chip reads a EEPROM or something and locks out > those frequencies). > > The thing it cannot be is rely on "goodwill" or firmware that respects the > band plan - i.e., you cannot rely on "blessed" open firmware that only uses > the right frequencies (because anyone can modify it to interfere). > > The FCC has all the powers to enforce compliance right now - users of open > firmware who are caught creating interference with higher priority services > can already be fined, equipment seized and all that stuff (and that would > not include just the WiFi router - any WiFi device like PCs can be seized > if they attach to that network). That's the heavy handed legal approach > they have. However, they don't want to do that, because most users probably > don't realize the problem, and the FCC really doesn't want to destroy all > that stuff. So instead, the FCC is working with manufacturers to fix the > issue at the source. > > The problem lies in the fact that most manufacturers are cheap and will > not spend a penny more, so instead of locking out the radio from > interfering, they'll lock out the entire firmware. > > The FCC mentions DD-WRT and all that by name because their investigations > revealed that when they investigate interference, the offending routers run > that firmware (and which doesn't lock out frequencies that they aren't > supposed to transmit on). > > > > -- > David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify > System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the restdavecb@spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing listBloat@lists.bufferbloat.nethttps://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > --089e0158b2fe541f6f0521ffcb03 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm wondering if some of these conflicting uses a= re important enough to blank them out everywhere, in spite legal use in som= e areas?=C2=A0 Doppler radar may be wanted everywhere some day.

Also create an "unknown" geo for default use, w= hich only uses channels that are globally approved.

Thanks,
--MM--
The best way to predict the future= is to create it. =C2=A0- Alan Kay

Privacy matters!=C2=A0 We know fr= om recent events that people are using our services to speak in defiance of= unjust governments. =C2=A0 We treat privacy and security as matters of lif= e and death, because for some users, they are.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Simon Barbe= r <simon@superduper.net> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Sounds like DD-WRT should add some IP geo-location code quickly, and let the FCC know that they have done so!

Simon


On 10/8/2015 1:11 PM, David Collier-Brown wrote:
=20 From tlkingan at http://te= ch.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3D8141531&cid=3D50686561


And that's what the FCC really wants The problem the FCC is seeing right now is the modified firmware allows access to frequencies that aren't allowed to be used for WiFI in the US. This is more than just channels 12 and 13 on 2.4GHz, but also on the complex 5GHz band.

The FCC has many complaints already from airports and other entities whose radar is being interfered with by 5GHz WiFi (the band plan is complex enough that channels are "locked out"= ; because they're used by higher priority services like radar).
And you really can't blame the open firmware guys either - mostly because they don't know any better and they only build one binary that works for all devices worldwide. (the available channels on 5GHz vary per country - depending on the radar in use).

All the FCC really wants (and they've clarified it in the Notic= e of Proposed Rulemaking) is the steps wifi manufacturers are taking to prevent people from loading on firmware that does not comply with FCC regulations - i.e., allows transmissions on frequencies they are not allowed to transmit on.

It can either take place as hardware (filters blocking out the frequencies), or software that cannot be modified by the open firmware (e.g., firmware on wifi chip reads a EEPROM or something and locks out those frequencies).

The thing it cannot be is rely on "goodwill" or firmware = that respects the band plan - i.e., you cannot rely on "blessed&quo= t; open firmware that only uses the right frequencies (because anyone can modify it to interfere).

The FCC has all the powers to enforce compliance right now - users of open firmware who are caught creating interference with higher priority services can already be fined, equipment seized and all that stuff (and that would not include just the WiFi router - any WiFi device like PCs can be seized if they attach to that network). That's the heavy handed legal approach they have. However, they don't want to do that, because most users probably don't realize the problem, and the FCC really doesn= 9;t want to destroy all that stuff. So instead, the FCC is working with manufacturers to fix the issue at the source.

The problem lies in the fact that most manufacturers are cheap and will not spend a penny more, so instead of locking out the radio from interfering, they'll lock out the entire firmware.
The FCC mentions DD-WRT and all that by name because their investigations revealed that when they investigate interference, the offending routers run that firmware (and which doesn't lock out frequencies that they aren't supposed to transmit on).


 
--=20
David Collier-Brown,         | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
davecb@spamcop.net<=
/a>           |                      -- Mark Twain



___________________________________=
____________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@list=
s.bufferbloat.net
=
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat


_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<= /a>
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat


--089e0158b2fe541f6f0521ffcb03--