Byron L. Bacher, Unwired Access
Mon, 13 Sep 2004 06:59:47 -0700
Ken, Just for arguments sake, what if the University changed its reasoning? Instead of saying it is an interference issue they claimed it is an access control issue? Would that change your view point?
Byron L. Bacher | E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: byronbach YAHOO: byronbacher ICQ: 246543093 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken DiPietro Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 7:56 AM To: WiFi Hotspot Discussion List Subject: Re: [WISPDir-Hotspots] Univ of Texas andtheir"hotspot-ban" coverage... Byron, While I agree with you in principle, the university has forbid the use of any 802.11b/g access points. It was my understanding that the reason for this was not access control (there are other and more effective ways of handling this) but more of an issue of "their" spectrum having trouble with interference. In fact, (upon rereading the article) the issue doesn't seem to be one of controlling access, as the university is allowing the use of 802.11a access points. This is what I am objecting to. If the issue is one of interference the university should instead (in my opinion, of course) institute a policy of only using channels 1 and 11 (with both antenna polarizations) leaving channel six for the students to use. This would be a good use of working with other users of unlicensed spectrum and also in line with the FCC policy. Or, at least, that's how I would handle it, Respectfully, Ken DiPietro New-ISP NextGenCommunications Byron L. Bacher, Unwired Access wrote: >My understanding of the situation is kids plugging a router and then an AP >of their connection being provided to them by the University. The >University there losing control (depending on how things are done) of who >has access to their network and their bandwidth. > >If that is the actual case then I don't think they are so much trying to >regulate unlicensed spectrum but are regulating who gets access or not. > > > >Byron L. Bacher | >E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: byronbach >YAHOO: byronbacher ICQ: 246543093 > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken DiPietro >Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 7:39 AM >To: WiFi Hotspot Discussion List >Subject: Re: [WISPDir-Hotspots] Univ of Texas andtheir"hotspot-ban" >coverage... > >Kory Mohr, WISP Directory wrote: > > > >>Ouch. If I understand what you're saying, Ken, are you suggesting that a >>provider, university, whatever entity providing the bandwidth doesn't have >>the final say on what is being done with that bandwidth? If so, will >>provider TOS' fly out the window? >> >> >> >> > >I am equating the university as the upstream provider, which they are >reselling to the students. I realize this is a bit of a stretch but the >fact is that the students are paying for the connection (even if it is >indirectly) and they are within the university's TOS (as in they are not >reselling it) yet the university feels it has the authority to challenge >the unlicensed rules we all live by. If they don't like the Part-15 >rules they should have opted for a licensed network where they wouldn't >have this problem - at a much higher price. > >However, if the university can issue a policy that the 2.4GHz band is >off-limits I can see the city of Philadelphia also claiming the same >thing for the good of their network. And if I were a WISP in either area >I wouldn't be happy with anyone thinking they own all of our spectrum. >They way it works is we all agree to put up with interference when we >deploy unlicensed. I do not what to see that changed. > >Byron L. Bacher, Unwired Access wrote: > > > >>Well my thought process is because it is a University providing the >>bandwidth it is a very different situation than a WISP or a Hot Spot >>operator. I look at it similar to a corporation and its employees running >>rogue APs. >> >> > > >Interesting perspective. > >However, I would be very interested in your response to my comments >above. Why should a university (or any other entity) be allowed to >change the rules we all knowingly agreed to when we installed Part-15 >devices? > >Respectfully, > >Ken DiPietro >New-ISP >NextGenCommunications > >_______________________________________________ >WISP Directory WiFi Hotspot Discussion mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.wispdirectory.com/ > > >_______________________________________________ >WISP Directory WiFi Hotspot Discussion mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.wispdirectory.com/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ WISP Directory WiFi Hotspot Discussion mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wispdirectory.com/ _______________________________________________ WISP Directory WiFi Hotspot Discussion mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wispdirectory.com/