[174964] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Marriott wifi blocking
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Clay Fiske)
Mon Oct 6 18:03:17 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Clay Fiske <clay@bloomcounty.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAP-guGV7iYMt=w=yoD_=TwH3xmzjXqp17xywXXQ0mpeHBms+QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 15:03:06 -0700
To: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Oct 6, 2014, at 1:16 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
>=20
> Hi Clay,
>=20
> It isn't that simple. Marriott offended against multiple laws and
> regulations in multiple jurisdictions.
>=20
> The FCC's concern is use of the spectrum. This they addressed --
> intentionally preventing others' use of the spectrum gets you spanked.
Hi Bill,
Right. So I think I was approaching it a different way, and I probably =
wasn=92t clear enough about that. My question wasn=92t meant to justify =
the response (deliberately booting people from non-Marriott SSIDs), it =
was about whether they had any legitimate right to claim that other wifi =
networks were impacting their own network=92s performance, specifically =
based on the FCC=92s position that a new transmitter should not disrupt =
existing operations. I was not in any way intending to say that their =
-response- was legitimate.=20
Anyway, I think the departed horse has been suitably tenderized. =
Apologies for not being clearer, nothing to see here, etc.
Thanks,
-c=
