[175034] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: wifi blocking [was Re: Marriott wifi blocking]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (joel jaeggli)
Wed Oct 8 16:37:59 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 13:37:39 -0700
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: Larry Sheldon <larrysheldon@cox.net>, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>,
Roy <r.engehausen@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <54359EB3.9090909@cox.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--a3CUUVJnMb2dNDhGUTInsg3INbCjeIqUv
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 10/8/14 1:29 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 10/8/2014 08:47, William Herrin wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Roy <r.engehausen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/7/2014 10:35 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>>>> On 10/7/2014 23:44, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 23:10:15 -0500, Larry Sheldon said:
>>>>>> The cell service is not a requirement placed upon them, I am prett=
y
>>>>>> sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, once having chosen to provide it, and thus create an
>>>>> expectation
>>>>> that cellular E911 is available, they're obligated to carry through=
on
>>>>> that.
>>>>>
>>>> Obligated by what law, regulation, rule or contract?
>>>
>>> Obligated by the FCC license
>>
>> Hi Larry, Roy:
>>
>> BART would not have had an FCC license. They'd have had contracts with=
>> the various phone companies to co-locate equipment and provide wired
>> backhaul out of the tunnels. The only thing they'd be guilty of is
>> breach of contract, and that only if the cell phone companies decided
>> their behavior was inconsistent with the SLA..
>=20
> OK that makes more sense than the private answer I got from Roy. I
> wondered why the FCC didn't take action if there was a license violatio=
n.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/technology/fcc-reviews-need-for-rules-t=
o-interrupt-wireless-service.html?_r=3D0
--a3CUUVJnMb2dNDhGUTInsg3INbCjeIqUv
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iEYEARECAAYFAlQ1oJMACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrKq9wCff3DDPm/xpfr3+qEm7pXwC/7j
7pUAniywrkDHs3SFJaPeAcUEnvGFit0d
=NMim
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--a3CUUVJnMb2dNDhGUTInsg3INbCjeIqUv--
