[174859] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Marriott wifi blocking
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lyle Giese)
Fri Oct 3 18:44:25 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 17:44:07 -0500
From: Lyle Giese <lyle@lcrcomputer.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <D0547236.D40E1%mvn@ucla.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 10/03/14 17:34, Michael Van Norman wrote:
>>>> My reading of this is that these features are illegal, period. Rogue AP
>>>> detection is one thing, and disabling them via network or
>>>> "administrative" (ie. eject the guest) means would be fine, but
>>>> interfering with the wireless is not acceptable per the FCC regulations.
>>>>
>>>> Seems like common sense to me. If the FCC considers this 'interference',
>>>> which it apparently does, then devices MUST NOT intentionally interfere.
>>> I would expect interfering for defensive purposes **only** would be
>>> acceptable.
>> What constitutes "defensive purposes"?
> Since this is unlicensed spectrum, I don't think there is anything one has
> a right to defend :)
>
> /Mike
>
>
If you charge for access and one person pays and sets up a rogue AP
offering free WiFi to anyone in range. I can see a defensive angle there.
Lyle Giese
LCR Computer Services, Inc.
