From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lb0-x233.google.com (mail-lb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE04E3B2B7; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 10:15:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lb0-x233.google.com with SMTP id bc4so240531564lbc.2; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 07:15:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=NCFBMbShG8U5E+YOTkfR5/g2me7r+Bu6fWFvP7UoyPY=; b=UmEGB4yec/pHJugETOAr3Ep2xJnU6fTtbfMqstX8GGMdVTRB4KtjcmPSMgLuol4quG IyTpuWfxYl4XiNzCUH2yj+R5g7QvEzEQyqSsr00j0cWfAGRBzMl7Oxognxpkj/sig70U OXuiqgthN+VbzgqwLTwop8f2e9kKtlzC9BoTf036p3xf1oga/cJ3ShEmltednxKkqUod DXCHSEzMIM/EKGBrwsaYAaySnLtSDEgcDkJ9hu192W6/qXoUulSZZtevJwBVPSEvu8n3 dQlTAE5lmd1alIy2FN3OrpQl6C+F2S79c1TCxIpQl8l342wd7I7sgcFqr1FNB0yA536W Hunw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=NCFBMbShG8U5E+YOTkfR5/g2me7r+Bu6fWFvP7UoyPY=; b=mjPTOyTV9CIFU4Fy+umRDtZbsZRjOtY+dykCEwItiUTImX8//sbgdGimaDI+JhJCZl L0GFAQbB4V4pNqvdzJvqL3o76hCTbR5WxAJ5w5yVwrZZviWSP2LaVpsH15QQndvT9IQq 821izD2FsDjbPcmqyHd+MzLJfcahPFz79mJNbiVE3sZg9cXd3JwdVFgJFk/5uaCctrdz kNL2y2daNGQhdTfMIaeepmPFfCLdnylPb1HdiEhSNlY+J0byf5sOHpU+ndlMclMdg8E8 74JFapnlAbKew/ZJh4lapADw96tI+EVfsDLgnmj12V4VioyQyQqzXG8HAJljz/BqJQcK 8P8g== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLHGtHW+hgv6EZg3SsBCojr4UQwQqXRQQ1se0jGLX0Ez+132iUd7BH+tgGwk/P+Cw== X-Received: by 10.112.149.73 with SMTP id ty9mr6271028lbb.48.1457964924706; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 07:15:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bass.home.chromatix.fi (37-33-67-252.bb.dnainternet.fi. [37.33.67.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l142sm3728885lfe.5.2016.03.14.07.15.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 14 Mar 2016 07:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\)) From: Jonathan Morton In-Reply-To: <1457964158.79616218@mobile.rackspace.com> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:14:58 +0200 Cc: David Lang , make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, bufferbloat-fcc-discuss , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7E8F9D99-38F8-47CD-960E-45100844B161@gmail.com> References: <1457964158.79616218@mobile.rackspace.com> To: dpreed@reed.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112) Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Make-wifi-fast] [bufferbloat-fcc-discuss] arstechnica confirmstp-link router lockdown X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 14:15:28 -0000 > On 14 Mar, 2016, at 16:02, dpreed@reed.com wrote: >=20 > The WiFi protocols themselves are not a worry of the FCC at all. = Modifying them in software is ok. Just the physical emissions spectrum = must be certified not to be exceeded. >=20 > So as a practical matter, one could even satisfy this rule with an = external filter and power limiter alone, except in part of the 5 GHz = band where radios must turn off if a radar is detected by a specified = algorithm. >=20 > That means that the radio software itself could be tasked with a = software filter in the D/A converter that is burned into the chip, and = not bypassable. If the update path requires a key that is secret, that = should be enough, as key based updating is fine for all radios sold for = other uses that use digital modulation using DSP. >=20 > So the problem is that 802.11 chips don't split out the two functions, = making one hard to update. To put this another way, what we need is a cleaner separation of ISO = Layers 1 (physical) and 2 (MAC). The FCC is concerned about locking down Layer 1 for RF compliance. = We=E2=80=99re concerned with keeping Layer 2 (and upwards) open for = experimentation and improvement. These are compatible goals, at the fundamental level, but there is a = practical problem with existing implementations which mix the layers = inappropriately. - Jonathan Morton