Very true. I wasn't talking about ideal solutions. I was talking about current state of FCC regulations.
Further, you seem to assume a level of control over client behavior that is rare in my experience. Owen > On Oct 4, 2014, at 13:44, Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 10/04/2014 01:33 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 12:39 , Brandon Ross <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 4 Oct 2014, Michael Thomas wrote: >>>> >>>> The problem is that there's really no such thing as a "copycat" if the >>>> client doesn't have the means of authenticating the destination. If that's >>>> really the requirement, people should start bitching to ieee to get >>>> destination auth on ap's instead of blatantly asserting that somebody owns >>>> a particular ssid because, well, because. >>> In the enterprise environment that there's been some insistence from folks >>> on this list is a legitimate place to block "rogue" APs, what makes those >>> SSIDs, "yours"? Just because they were used first by the enterprise? That >>> doesn't seem to hold water in an unlicensed environment to me at all. >> Pretty much... Here's why... >> >> If you are using an SSID in an area, anyone else using the same SSID later >> is causing harmful interference to your network. It's a >> first-come-first-serve situation. Just like amateur radio spectrum... If >> you're using a frequency to carry on a conversation with someone, other hams >> have an obligation not to interfere with your conversation (except in an >> emergency). It's a bit more complicated there, because you're obliged to >> reasonably accommodate others wishing to use the frequency, but in the case >> of SSIDs, there's no such requirement. >> >> Now, if I start using SSID XYZ in building 1 and someone else is using it in >> building 3 and the two coverage zones don't overlap, I'm not entitled to >> extend my XYZ SSID into building 3 when I rent space there, because someone >> else is using it in that location first. >> >> I can only extend my XYZ coverage zone so far as there are no competing XYZ >> SSIDs in the locations I'm expanding in to. >> >>> If the Marriott can't do this, I don't think anyone can, legally. >> If I set up something on an SSID Marriott is already using, then my bad and >> they have the right to take appropriate defensive action to protect their >> network. > > No. Seriously, no. Biggest come, biggest serve doesn't do a damn bit of good > dealing with the actual problem which is > one of authentication. Think of this with the big I internet without TLS. > What you're asking for is complete chaos. > > Stomping on other AP is an arms race in which nobody wins. If I want to > guarantee that I only connect to $MEGACORP > AP's, I should be using strong authentication, not AP neutron bombs to clear > the battlefield. > > Mike
