[175041] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: wifi blocking [was Re: Marriott wifi blocking]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Oct 8 18:44:06 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAAwwbX8QoeKaCZKAPE1Ph6NCRoqOtTESibYxGMk-+GtUtvgZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 15:39:10 -0700
To: Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Oct 7, 2014, at 6:10 PM, Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Keenan Tims <ktims@stargate.ca> wrote:
>> I don't think it changes much. Passive methods (ie. Faraday cage) =
would
>> likely be fine, as would layer 8 through 10 methods.
>=20
> Well... actually... passive methods are probably fine, as long as
> they are not breaking reception to nearby properties, BUT it might
> result in some proceedings or investigations regarding anticompetitive
> behaviors --- also, if there are other businesses nearby, it could
> lead to some objections when you go seeking permits to build this
> giant faraday cage. The local authorities might eventually require
> some modifications. :)
Actually, if you turn your building into a faraday cage, I=92m not sure =
there=92s
any legal basis on which to tell you that you have to permit RF through,
even if it blocks the signal downstream.
Creating a shadow is very different from actively emitting =93harmful =
interference=94
and I don=92t know of any laws or regulations which could be used to =
prevent you
from doing so.
Owen
