[176831] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Comcast thinks it ok to install public wifi in your house
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Dec 11 19:36:32 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <548A2E78.1050208@alvarezp.ods.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 16:33:03 -0800
To: Octavio Alvarez <alvarezp@alvarezp.ods.org>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This thread is out of control... I will attempt to summarize the salient =
points in hopes we can stop arguing about inaccurate minutiae.
I don't like the way Comcast went about doing what they are doing, but I =
do like the general idea...
Reasonably ubiquitous free WiFi for your subscribers when they are away =
from their home location is not a bad idea.
The way Comcast has gone about it is a bit underhanded and sneaky. The =
flaws in their plan are not technical, they are ethical and =
communication-oriented in nature.
To wit:
There's nothing wrong with Comcast adding a separate SSID with =
dedicated upstream bandwidth on a WAP I rent from them[1].
There's no theft of power, as the amount of additional power =
used is imperceptible, if any.
There's no theft of space, climate control, or other overhead as =
this is performed by existing CPE.
There's probably no legal liability being transferred by this to =
the subscriber.
In short, the only thing really truly wrong with this scenario is that =
Comcast is using equipment that the subscriber should have exclusive =
control over (they are renting it, so while Comcast retains ownership, =
they have relinquished most rights of control to the "tenant") how the =
device is used.
As I see it, there are a couple of ways Comcast could have made this an =
entirely voluntary (opt-in) program and communicated it to their =
customers positively and achieved a high compliance rate. Unfortunately, =
in an action worthy of their title as "America's worst company", instead =
of positively communicating with their customers and seeking cooperation =
and permission to build out something cool for everyone, they instead =
simply inflicted this service on chosen subscribers without notice, =
warning, or permission.
In short, Comcast's biggest real failure here is the failure to ask =
permission from the subscriber before doing this on equipment the =
subscriber should control.
Arguing that some obscure phrase in updated ToS documents that nobody =
ever reads permits this may keep Comcast from losing a law suit (though =
I hope not), but it certainly won't improve their standing in the court =
of public opinion. OTOH, Comcast seems to consider the court of public =
opinion mostly irrelevant or they would be trying to find ways not to =
retain their title as "America's worst company".
I will say that my reaction to this, if Comcast had done it to me would =
be quite different depending on how it was executed...
Scenario A: Positive outcome
CC "Mr. DeLong, we would like to replace your existing cablemodem =
with a DOCSIS 3.0 unit and give you faster service
for free. However, the catch is that we want to put up an =
additional 2.4Ghz WiFi SSID on the WAP built into the modem
that will use separate cable channels (i.e. won't affect your =
bandwidth) that our other subscribers can use once they
authenticate when they are in range. Would you mind if we did =
that?"
ME "Well, since I currently own my modem, and it's already DOCSIS =
3, I don't want to give up any of my existing functionality
and I have no desire to start paying rental fees. If you can =
provide the new one without monthly fees and it will do everything
my current one does (e.g. operating in transparent bridge mode), =
then I don't see any reason why not."
Scenario B: Class Action?
CC ""
ME -- Discovers Xfinity WiFi SSID and wonders "WTF is this?"
-- Tracks down source of SSID and discovers CC Modem in my =
garage is doing this.
-- Calls Comcast "WTF?"
CC "blah blah blah, updated ToS, you agreed, blah blah"
ME Starts calling lawyers
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Unfortunately, it seems to me that Comcast (and apparently other Cable =
WiFi assn. members) have chosen Scenario B. Very unfortunate, =
considering how much easier and more productive scenario A could be.
Owen
