Re: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps
Lonnie, I have published a Certification FAQ http://ask-wi.com/certification.html that I believe addresses all of these questions. WISPA also has a Certification email list to further address these issues. That list is currently open only to WISPA members. Regarding using a copy of someone else's certified system; an EXACT copy can be legal however this is easier said than done because the company that pays for the certification may choose to keep some information confidential to preclude someone else from making an exact copy. Most well-run businesses would probably want to prevent other businesses from sponging off of them and competing unfairly and would not cooperate with competitor businesses. Of course, a group of WISPs could collaborate to share the certification costs, then agree to build EXACT (hardware and software) copies. Responsible manufacturers or organizations could even choose to publish EXACT descriptions of their already-certified products. Anyone building these exact copies must take responsibility for building an EXACT copy. The FCC can come inspect at any time. They can also request that anyone building a certified system (the original Grantee or someone copying a certified system) provide a sample system for the FCC to test to verify compliance with the originally certified system specs. I can't speak for WISPA but their Certification email list appears to be one possible vehicle that can be used to coordinate equipment needs and share certification costs. Regarding software, AFAIK every software update does not need to be recertified. The original system certification must be done using software that only allows the system to operate in FCC-legal frequency bands and at FCC-legal power levels. For example, a 5.8 GHz system could not ship with software that also allowed operation on 4.9 GHz or even on 5.4 GHz because the certification requirements for those two bands are different than 5.8 GHz. A two-band system would be legal (for example 5.4 and 5.8 GHz) if it was tested and verified to operate within FCC-legal specs on BOTH bands however today this would require a rather long test cycle because only the FCC lab is currently doing 5.4 GHz testing. AFAIK, if a certified system had a software fix come out to add security or to address software reliability issues, that would be legal as long as the RF characteristics weren't changed to allow operation on non-certified bands or on additional frequencies or at higher-than-originally certified power levels. If anyone has additional questions or corrections, please feel free to post them. Thanks, jack P.S. - Earlier tonight I emailed ADI Engineering asking for clarification regarding any fully-certified systems that they offer. Their website says that their MOTHERBOARDS have FCC Part 15 Class B certification but there is no mention of FCC Part 15 Subpart C certification which includes testing the motherboard with the wireless card(s) and the antenna(s). We need to use systems that have been tested and verified to meet both Class B and Subpart C requirements. Lonnie Nunweiler wrote: Are you sure about this? Is this what ADI told you, personally? The Original Manufacturer assembles a system and has it certified with that set of components and construction techniques. As long as the SAME parts and SAME techniques are used then this system should be certified. Of course the manufacturer must take responsibility and certify that proper components and techniques were used. As to software, there is a lot of leeway there. Most systems use Linux and all Atheros code is derived from the source code that people license from Atheros. The free madwifi drivers are still traceable and derived from Atheros source code. If you had to certify the exact software with the system, then it would be a nightmare and I believe that not a single manufacturer would currently be legal after they release a new image unless they would get each and every software release certified, as they must do for each hardware change. That would be excessive and would eventually make everybody illegal since software fixes are brought out rapidly to address security and reliability issues. Lonnie On 4/22/07, Tim Kerns [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matt, Is this latest news? The last I heard was adi had certified their board in their enclosure with a couple different antennas, but never heard what OS they were running. Also, to be certified you would have to purchase the units pre-assembled from ADI. Remember the certification goes to the manufacturer. - Original Message - From: Matt Larsen - Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 4:23 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps Wrong. ADI Engineering has a certified StarOS/War Board combo, with a choice of cards. I am currently evaluating them for my future backhauls. Matt Larsen
RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rick Harnish Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 11:39 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition Mark, This was one of the best emails you have ever written IMHO. Mark- interesting insights and ideas. Maybe Mark would consider running for the board? c -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA]FCC Admits Mistakes
I don't think a renegade attitude and anti government personality on the board of WISPA could possibly further our advancement at WISPA. I am not lashing out, but I have grown so weary of reading that the boogie man is gonna get us all. I sit here and wonder sometimes which Gov't official (friend or foe) is reading all those posts and debating if WISPA is really anything at all but a breeding ground for renegades and cowboys. I don't think that a man ought to make known all he feels every day on a public list and especially not on WISPA's public list as IT IS DETRIMENTAL to what I and so many more of us are trying to accomplish. It is one thing to make a statement, but it appears that recruitment is under way and I don't think our friends at the FCC would appreciate this going on for months with no end in sight. If a person feels so strongly against the Government than why would you still be here? Better than that - why would we allow it? Freedom of speech is a great thing, but try practicing Satanism at your local Baptist church and then come back here and tell me about your freedoms to speak their! I ask that the board to consider my feelings on this matter. Respectfully, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Cooper Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 6:41 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rick Harnish Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 11:39 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition Mark, This was one of the best emails you have ever written IMHO. Mark- interesting insights and ideas. Maybe Mark would consider running for the board? c -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
I think many (half?) don't even know that they have to file. Many don't understand CALEA or know that they need to comply. So $500... it would probably get you about 400 more, but who will pony up the $200k? Peter John Thomas wrote: Pete, you hit on an interesting idea. What if the FCC were to pay the ISP say $500 each year to fill out the 477? Would more ISP's participate? John -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] What about equipment providers?
Where did you see that equipment must be CALEA Compliant? We chose Vantage Point for a TTP, and all they were concerned about was the network layout and how routing was handled. The need to know where to put taps and probes. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 6:19 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] What about equipment providers? If we're to take some of what's been published literally, all wisp equipment providers are going to be required to be CALEA compliant. This is going to lead to some serious compatibility and interoperability issues, if you ask me. HOW equipment maker A, B, and C accomplish stuff is likely going to be different. Thus, a network with mixed equipment may turn out to be almost impossible to put together completely. What about all of us who buy stuff from outside the US?What about the people who have large networks with now out of production equipment? Will CELEA COMPLIANT stickers now be required to get into the WISP business? I don't see anyone addressing this. Nor do I see anyone addressing community and free networks. While WISPA is definitely a WISP association, we're dead in the water if the WISP equipment providers dry up or go away, or we become stuck with one or two equipment providers, and all the compliant stuff is 50% more in price... -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark Koskenmaki wrote: Never say never, they say.What will you do when the FCC or FBI comes and says we want you to help us enforce... blah blah?You're going to have a hard time saying no when you have already made a policy of always saying yes. You will have to blow that non-existent 'goodwill'. It wont' have bought us or anyone else a thing. How many times must I say it? It would be far better to have a solidly honest position of ALWAYS standing up for our industry, in everywhere way, in opposition to EVERYTHING negative. First, let me say that there is no going to DC and standing up for this Industry. It is barely an Industry. And with 200 paid members out of 2000 possible WISP's, it is not very representative. Plus you have Part-15 and its agenda. You have Vendors and their agenda. You have the so-called Big Boys like NextWeb, Clearwire, ELN or whomever - and thiner agenda. And if by some stroke of luck, energy and effort, you could get them all to back your one principle, even then - and with money in the bank - it would be a wasted effort to spend John's, Marlon's and Rick's own money to go to DC to Stand Up. Because someone would break ranks for a deal or good will or whatever. Ask Frank Muto. You have to have Leverage to Stand Up. And a significant number behind you who are willing and demonstrate a willingness to support. Um, we don't have that here. DC is not the Town Hall. DC is layers upon layers of subterfuge. You need a full-time well-connected lobbyist. IN a former life, we hired a well-connected lobbyist to ask Karl Rove if Indie ISP's had a chance (in 2005). This was about the time of Brand-X and Forbearance. The lobbyist gave us the check back with a solemn look. A lobbyist returned money. What does THAT tell you? I hired a PR firm to craft 14 template letters that just needed a signature, a name and an address to be faxed to Congress. Do you know how many times it was downloaded? 15. Yeah. SO tell me again how WISPA with 200 paid members should Stand Up? I'd love to hear the plan, because the one I used obviously did not work. I am not advocating shunning the rules. I am advocating telling those making up the rules as they go, TO BACK OFF BECAUSE THEY ARE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE!It is both our privilege and our duty to tell them to back off when they cross their proper boundaries. And we should be utterly unafraid to do so. Actually all your speeches have been about shunning the rules and you have stated you will not comply. That may not be your message, but that is what you have written. No one is tar and feathering you. But look at this perspective: You want people to spend their time and money to travel to DC to do something for you. When they want to go to DC and become Advocates and open doors for WISPA to work with the gov't. (Which is a worthwhile endeavor). You could go to DC and say we want money to comply - or something like that. But you might as well phone it in and save the money for all it will do. One more point: When we have sessions on DC and Lobbying at ISPCON, NO ONE SHOWS UP! When ISP-CEO discusses politics, it empties the room. (So, Frank, no politics this May, okay?) Just my 25 cents worth, Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Municipal Consultant Rips Broadband Activists
*Municipal Consultant Rips Broadband Activists http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21010 * -- Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps
Jack, I am aware of your website, and also that you are available, on a paid basis, to help people with this process. It is a new business for you and I wish you well on it. As for the certs, yes, if a company chooses to keep some part of the process secret or proprietary, then the system cannot be built in an identical manner. That is simply not the case with the ADI Metro system, since they wish to help people. They will soon have the case for sale and they have assured me that the rest of the components will also be readily available. As I said, for software, the Atheros driver in conjunction with the cards controls the RF portion, thus almost any Linux software would be the same and would not need to be recertified. Atheros publish the country codes and part of the data structure is the allowable channels and power for each channel. If those are not modified, then the system is per Atheros already certified specifications. As for the 4.9 GHz bands, it was my understanding that the cards are the big thing and have to be certified. Again, the software merely puts the card into the band and it is up to the card for power and such. Not many common cards can exceed FCC guidelines, so it becomes a matter of an ability to reduce power below FCC allowable and not really an ability to set power above, since most cards cannot do that anyway. It is my stated belief that nobody needs more power anyway, unless of course they do not know what they are doing, and then they need all the power they can get. Lonnie Lonnie On 4/22/07, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I have published a Certification FAQ http://ask-wi.com/certification.html that I believe addresses all of these questions. WISPA also has a Certification email list to further address these issues. That list is currently open only to WISPA members. Regarding using a copy of someone else's certified system; an EXACT copy can be legal however this is easier said than done because the company that pays for the certification may choose to keep some information confidential to preclude someone else from making an exact copy. Most well-run businesses would probably want to prevent other businesses from sponging off of them and competing unfairly and would not cooperate with competitor businesses. Of course, a group of WISPs could collaborate to share the certification costs, then agree to build EXACT (hardware and software) copies. Responsible manufacturers or organizations could even choose to publish EXACT descriptions of their already-certified products. Anyone building these exact copies must take responsibility for building an EXACT copy. The FCC can come inspect at any time. They can also request that anyone building a certified system (the original Grantee or someone copying a certified system) provide a sample system for the FCC to test to verify compliance with the originally certified system specs. I can't speak for WISPA but their Certification email list appears to be one possible vehicle that can be used to coordinate equipment needs and share certification costs. Regarding software, AFAIK every software update does not need to be recertified. The original system certification must be done using software that only allows the system to operate in FCC-legal frequency bands and at FCC-legal power levels. For example, a 5.8 GHz system could not ship with software that also allowed operation on 4.9 GHz or even on 5.4 GHz because the certification requirements for those two bands are different than 5.8 GHz. A two-band system would be legal (for example 5.4 and 5.8 GHz) if it was tested and verified to operate within FCC-legal specs on BOTH bands however today this would require a rather long test cycle because only the FCC lab is currently doing 5.4 GHz testing. AFAIK, if a certified system had a software fix come out to add security or to address software reliability issues, that would be legal as long as the RF characteristics weren't changed to allow operation on non-certified bands or on additional frequencies or at higher-than-originally certified power levels. If anyone has additional questions or corrections, please feel free to post them. Thanks, jack P.S. - Earlier tonight I emailed ADI Engineering asking for clarification regarding any fully-certified systems that they offer. Their website says that their MOTHERBOARDS have FCC Part 15 Class B certification but there is no mention of FCC Part 15 Subpart C certification which includes testing the motherboard with the wireless card(s) and the antenna(s). We need to use systems that have been tested and verified to meet both Class B and Subpart C requirements. Lonnie Nunweiler wrote: Are you sure about this? Is this what ADI told you, personally? The Original Manufacturer assembles a system and has it certified with that set of components and construction techniques. As long as the SAME parts and SAME techniques are used then this system
[WISPA] FCC Auction Of Low-Range Spectrum Could Open Broadband Doors
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/index.htm?job=service_homeid=lower700 http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/default.htm?job=auction_summaryid=N2 The Lower 700 MHz Band is comprised of spectrum ranging from 698 MHz to 746 MHz. The spectrum is divided into five blocks. (http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/data/bandplans/700lower.pdf) FCC 03-236 7/26/2002 PUBLIC NOTICE (DA 02-1829) Auction of Licenses for 747-762 and 777-792 MHz Bands (Auction No. 31) is Rescheduled FCC Auction Of Low-Range Spectrum Could Open Broadband Doors Coalitions are lobbying to limit what spectrum carriers' can buy in aid of new business models By Elena Malykhina InformationWeek http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199000970 April 14, 2007 12:00 AM (From the April 16, 2007 issue) Will U.S. consumers get a third pipe for broadband--a wireless option that can go toe-to-toe with cable and DSL? Will public safety workers get the wireless network that's gotten lip service since Sept. 11, 2001? Those are the stakes when the Federal Communications Commission in the coming weeks sets rules for this year's auction of the 700-MHz spectrum for wireless broadband. Congress is forcing TV broadcasters to go digital by 2009, freeing the precious low-range spectrum, which covers large distances, penetrates walls, and reaches into basements. Historically, big telecom carriers snatch up such spectrum. But several coalitions are lobbying to restrict how carriers can buy spectrum, claiming that will give new business models a chance. Save Our Spectrum, formed by consumer advocacy groups, is lobbying the FCC for rules favoring the creation of a high-speed Internet service to compete with cable and DSL--auctioning spectrum at a wholesale level so various Internet service providers could use it to offer broadband services. The Coalition for 4G America--including DirecTV, Google, Intel, Skype, and Yahoo--also is pushing for rules to enable new broadband entrants. Two groups see a business model in using the spectrum for a public safety network combined with commercial access. Cyren Call wants a slice of the spectrum put in a public trust. Then it would partner with telecoms that would build a network in exchange for being able to sell wireless broadband services. Public safety wants to own the spectrum, not a private company that dictates what we can and cannot do with it, says Charles Werner, fire chief in Charlottesville, Va. Frontline Wireless, co-founded by former FCC chairman Reed Hundt, with investors including Netscape ex-CEO James Barksdale and John Doerr of Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers, aims to build a nationwide public safety broadband network, then sell commercial access. This is where government earns its keep: allocating scarce goods to greatest public bene- fit. Measure success on progress toward a via- ble, affordable wireless broadband network. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
I asked: I have 3 of your licensed routers (level 4) When do you plan to release a version of RouterOS that is CALEA compliant? Thank You They Replied: Hello, It already is, you simply have to enable sniffer of all traffic, and store the raw data on a server that captures it. You can also use smart switches that can mirror ports to a capturing server. See discussions on our forum on this topic. Regards, Normunds -- Come to MikroTik User Meetings - April 28th, Abuja, NIGERIA - May 31st - June 1st, Orlando, USA http://mum.mikrotik.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
It is lame because it is a feature that the user community needs and wants, and the vendor is passing the buck. Not surprising, concerning their actions on FCC certification of other products. Mikrotik makes dandy router software and I support them on that. We do use the PC version in some POPs Open CALEA is just not yet ready for prime time, however the compliance date loometh soon. The CALEA tap/probe should be something that can be done in the router (I think that's how Cisco implemented it). Because Imagestream will have it ready May 1st, we went with their box just to have something that works now has been tested with the FBI. I'd just like to feel that the company who many of us support heavily should listen to and support its customers better. I've seen your posts and am well aware that one can capture all traffic via mirror port and hand the whole shebang over to the LEA, or we can spend hours wading through it and massaging data (which I think might cause it to be tainted). We've probably all captured users' traffic before and probably all know how to run Ethereal. I'd just like to see an accepted method that doesn't take an abundance of time to institute and maintain. I'm curious- do you have a solution, working now, that uses the hardware you mention and OpenCALEA to deliver a product that will be accepted by law enforcement, or are you just talking concepts? _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem or issue. I'm going to keep saying this over and over and over (started over a year ago). Use a smart ethernet switch and mirror your main internet connection to a box that can capture the traffic. Then use something like openCalea (www.opencalea.org). Even if you have to buy a switch, a box to run the software, etc. you are less than $500 total. If you have multiple NOC's, $500 per location is cheap. Travis Microserv ralph wrote: I asked: I have 3 of your licensed routers (level 4) When do you plan to release a version of RouterOS that is CALEA compliant? Thank You They Replied: Hello, It already is, you simply have to enable sniffer of all traffic, and store the raw data on a server that captures it. You can also use smart switches that can mirror ports to a capturing server. See discussions on our forum on this topic. Regards, Normunds -- Come to MikroTik User Meetings - April 28th, Abuja, NIGERIA - May 31st - June 1st, Orlando, USA http://mum.mikrotik.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] OPEN Access POint in Legal Case
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070422-child-porn-case-shows-that-an- open-wifi-network-is-no-defense.html Child http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070422-child-porn-case-shows-that-an -open-wifi-network-is-no-defense.html porn case shows that an open WiFi network is no defense By Eric Bangeman http://arstechnica.com/authors.ars/I+Palindrome+I | Published: April 22, 2007 - 11:30PM CT The merits of leaving your wireless access point (WAP) open have been discussed and debated at length, especially when it comes to law enforcement. There is a growing belief that file sharers can protect themselves against lawsuits by keeping their wireless access points open. The problem is, it won't necessarily. A Texas man who was convicted of possessing child pornography tried to use his open WiFi network as a defense, saying that someone else could have used the same network to traffic in pornographic images. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit didn't buy his argument and upheld the conviction. Justin -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps
That is not much of a issue, or should not be. Atheros cards have a wide RF range (2.3ghz to 2.5ghz for most of the 2.4ghz cards) that they can do. The drivers they are certified with only allow the US spectrum. They likely use a custom driver for the FCC, as some Atheros gear is spec'ed in decimal db (xx.yy db) but still is limited to a whole db setting. On 4/23/07, Rick Harnish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, Can your software code be adjusted to limit the country codes rather easily? Or, is this feature not delaying the certification process thus far? It would seem to me that the FCC would not certify the system if it can be adjusted by some operators to operate outside of US specifications while being in the US. It would seem to me that key generation would be where you could turn this feature on and off. Thanks, Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Founding Member of WISPA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:03 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps What would be nice Lonnie, is if the original war board manufacturer went this rroute as well. Those 2 port boards fit nicely. It would also help if you took part and helped to open up the cert process with us for the products you are specifying. George Lonnie Nunweiler wrote: Jack, I am aware of your website, and also that you are available, on a paid basis, to help people with this process. It is a new business for you and I wish you well on it. As for the certs, yes, if a company chooses to keep some part of the process secret or proprietary, then the system cannot be built in an identical manner. That is simply not the case with the ADI Metro system, since they wish to help people. They will soon have the case for sale and they have assured me that the rest of the components will also be readily available. As I said, for software, the Atheros driver in conjunction with the cards controls the RF portion, thus almost any Linux software would be the same and would not need to be recertified. Atheros publish the country codes and part of the data structure is the allowable channels and power for each channel. If those are not modified, then the system is per Atheros already certified specifications. As for the 4.9 GHz bands, it was my understanding that the cards are the big thing and have to be certified. Again, the software merely puts the card into the band and it is up to the card for power and such. Not many common cards can exceed FCC guidelines, so it becomes a matter of an ability to reduce power below FCC allowable and not really an ability to set power above, since most cards cannot do that anyway. It is my stated belief that nobody needs more power anyway, unless of course they do not know what they are doing, and then they need all the power they can get. Lonnie Lonnie On 4/22/07, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I have published a Certification FAQ http://ask-wi.com/certification.html that I believe addresses all of these questions. WISPA also has a Certification email list to further address these issues. That list is currently open only to WISPA members. Regarding using a copy of someone else's certified system; an EXACT copy can be legal however this is easier said than done because the company that pays for the certification may choose to keep some information confidential to preclude someone else from making an exact copy. Most well-run businesses would probably want to prevent other businesses from sponging off of them and competing unfairly and would not cooperate with competitor businesses. Of course, a group of WISPs could collaborate to share the certification costs, then agree to build EXACT (hardware and software) copies. Responsible manufacturers or organizations could even choose to publish EXACT descriptions of their already-certified products. Anyone building these exact copies must take responsibility for building an EXACT copy. The FCC can come inspect at any time. They can also request that anyone building a certified system (the original Grantee or someone copying a certified system) provide a sample system for the FCC to test to verify compliance with the originally certified system specs. I can't speak for WISPA but their Certification email list appears to be one possible vehicle that can be used to coordinate equipment needs and share certification costs. Regarding software, AFAIK every software update does not need to be recertified. The original system certification must be done using software that only allows the system to operate in FCC-legal frequency bands and at FCC-legal power levels. For example, a 5.8 GHz system could not ship with software that also allowed operation on 4.9 GHz or even on 5.4 GHz because the certification requirements for those two
Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
I do have one question here... does the provider run the risk of privacy when capturing data that is not explicitly requested in the warrant or subpoena? When the connection is mirrored, will the provider be able to dissect the requested data? Because I would assume you can not give the requesting LEA anything they did not have a legal request for. When we had our dialup ISP, we were very careful in only providing only the warranted or subpoenaed information to the requesting LEA. Frank Muto President FSM Marketing Group, Inc www.SecureEmailPlus.com ISPCON Spring 2007 May 23-25 in Orlando, FL. LaunchPad Pavilion J - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:54 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem or issue. I'm going to keep saying this over and over and over (started over a year ago). Use a smart ethernet switch and mirror your main internet connection to a box that can capture the traffic. Then use something like openCalea (www.opencalea.org). Even if you have to buy a switch, a box to run the software, etc. you are less than $500 total. If you have multiple NOC's, $500 per location is cheap. Travis Microserv ralph wrote: I asked: I have 3 of your licensed routers (level 4) When do you plan to release a version of RouterOS that is CALEA compliant? Thank You They Replied: Hello, It already is, you simply have to enable sniffer of all traffic, and store the raw data on a server that captures it. You can also use smart switches that can mirror ports to a capturing server. See discussions on our forum on this topic. Regards, Normunds -- Come to MikroTik User Meetings - April 28th, Abuja, NIGERIA - May 31st - June 1st, Orlando, USA http://mum.mikrotik.com -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Community Wireless Summit May 18-20, 2007 -- Washington, DC.
FYI: Contact: Sascha Meinrath Executive Director CUWiN Foundation [EMAIL PROTECTED] 217-278-3933 x31 INTERNATIONAL SUMMIT TO ADDRESS FUTURE OF BROADBAND -- Community Technology Leaders from Six Continents to Participate -- Champaign-Urbana, I.L., April 18 -- The CUWiN Foundation and the Center for Community Informatics (CCI) will host the International Summit for Community Wireless Networks (http://WirelessSummit.org) from May 18-20, 2007 at Loyola College in Columbia, Maryland. The summit is the largest gathering of wireless network developers, technology and policy experts, and community organizers working to build universal, low-cost broadband networks around the world. We are proud to host an event that brings together technologists and activists committed to universal access to informatics, said Marco Figueiredo, CCI Director. The International Summit for Community Wireless Networks explores the opportunities and challenges facing the growing movement to build community and municipal broadband networks, said Sascha Meinrath, co-founder and Executive Director of CUWiN. This event showcases cutting-edge technologies and develops political strategies to increase digital inclusion. Since the first National Summit for Community Wireless Networks in 2004, over 300 Community Internet and municipal broadband projects have sprung up in the United States alone. The Summit will focus on how these networks can better serve their target populations, the policies needed to support broader deployment of community wireless systems, and the latest technological and software innovations. Presenters at previous summits have included FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, Jim Baller of the Baller Herbst Law Group, Annie Collins of Fiber for Our Future, Mark Cooper of the Consumer Federation of America, Harold Feld of Media Access Project, Robert W. McChesney of Free Press, Matt Rantanen of Tribal Digital Village, Greg Richardson of Civitium LLC, Paul Smith of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Jim Snider of the New America Foundation, Dana Spiegel of NYCwireless, Esme Vos of Muniwireless.com and many other luminaries. High-speed broadband access is the electricity of the 21st century, yet many rural and poorer urban communities are being left off the grid, said Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press, the DC-based policy think-tank. The innovators and organizers at the International Summit for Community Wireless Networks are blazing the trail to make broadband affordable and available to everyone. About CUWiN (http://www.cuwin.net) The CUWiN Foundation is a world-renowned coalition of wireless developers and community volunteers committed to providing low-cost, do-it-yourself, community-controlled alternatives to contemporary broadband models. CUWiN is fiscally sponsored by Grassroots.org, a non-profit 501c3. CUWiN's mission is to develop decentralized, community-owned networks that foster democratic cultures and local content. Through advocacy and through our commitment to open source technology, CUWiN supports organic networks that grow to meet the needs of their communities. About CCI (http://cci.cs.loyola.edu) The Center for Community Informatics engages Loyola College’s students, faculty and staff in supporting the creation and deployment of informatics tools for community empowerment. CCI develops the Community Telecenter Free Software Toolset; promotes awareness events for the Loyola College community; offer courses in Community Informatics; promotes Digital Inclusion Conferences; researches and develops human-friendly technologies to facilitate inclusion in the New Society of Knowledge; and, evaluates, documents and develops sustainable models for Universal Access to Informatics. # # # -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] OPEN Access POint in Legal Case
The article should be named ... an open WiFi network is no defense ... when you have burned CDs of illegal content in your room[, expletive-pronoun]. Would it have been a valid defense if the illegal content wasn't found in this man's room, though? Thanks for the link! The links from that article are great to read as well. Love that site. Brandon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin S. Wilson Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 10:35 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] OPEN Access POint in Legal Case http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070422-child-porn-case-shows-that-an- open-wifi-network-is-no-defense.html Child http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070422-child-porn-case-shows-that-an -open-wifi-network-is-no-defense.html porn case shows that an open WiFi network is no defense By Eric Bangeman http://arstechnica.com/authors.ars/I+Palindrome+I | Published: April 22, 2007 - 11:30PM CT The merits of leaving your wireless access point (WAP) open have been discussed and debated at length, especially when it comes to law enforcement. There is a growing belief that file sharers can protect themselves against lawsuits by keeping their wireless access points open. The problem is, it won't necessarily. A Texas man who was convicted of possessing child pornography tried to use his open WiFi network as a defense, saying that someone else could have used the same network to traffic in pornographic images. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit didn't buy his argument and upheld the conviction. Justin -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OPEN Access POint in Legal Case
This proves the point that most laws can only catch the stupid. The smart ones usually only get caught when they deal with a stupid associate. Brandon Brownlee wrote: The article should be named ... an open WiFi network is no defense ... when you have burned CDs of illegal content in your room[, expletive-pronoun]. Would it have been a valid defense if the illegal content wasn't found in this man's room, though? Thanks for the link! The links from that article are great to read as well. Love that site. Brandon -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes
Peter said: That being said. Since 1999, the RBOCs have been charging us for a DS3 fiber network that they have yet to build. That's right - 45MB to the home - as promised in 1999. Do you have proof of this in some document form? If you do can you share it? I would love to read this. I knew Illinois fined Ameritech over something like this. I guess I may get to know more now. Thanks, Scriv -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
- Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:00 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition Mark Koskenmaki wrote: Never say never, they say.What will you do when the FCC or FBI comes and says we want you to help us enforce... blah blah?You're going to have a hard time saying no when you have already made a policy of always saying yes. You will have to blow that non-existent 'goodwill'. It wont' have bought us or anyone else a thing. How many times must I say it? It would be far better to have a solidly honest position of ALWAYS standing up for our industry, in everywhere way, in opposition to EVERYTHING negative. First, let me say that there is no going to DC and standing up for this Industry. It is barely an Industry. And with 200 paid members out of 2000 possible WISP's, it is not very representative. Plus you have Part-15 and its Well, if your point is that WISPA hasn't much muscle, not even combined with part-15's numbers, I have no disagreement with that. This IS, however, an industry, with thousands of players, both big and small. Are we comparable to telco in assets and sales? No, but then for some reason, we can run rings around them in ceertain markets. agenda. You have Vendors and their agenda. You have the so-called Big Boys like NextWeb, Clearwire, ELN or whomever - and thiner agenda. And if by some stroke of luck, energy and effort, you could get them all to back your one principle, even then - and with money in the bank - it would be a wasted effort to spend John's, Marlon's and Rick's own money to go to DC to Stand Up. Because someone would break ranks for a deal or good will or whatever. Hmmm... You know, I thought I made the case that we needed the numbers... and that WISPA needed the numbers, too, for more clout. I guess maybe I have to say these things, and not just let people connect the logical dots. Ask Frank Muto. You have to have Leverage to Stand Up. And a significant number behind you who are willing and demonstrate a willingness to support. Um, we don't have that here. DC is not the Town Hall. DC is layers upon layers of subterfuge. You need a full-time well-connected lobbyist. IN a former life, we hired a well-connected lobbyist to ask Karl Rove if Indie ISP's had a chance (in 2005). This was about the time of Brand-X and Forbearance. The lobbyist gave us the check back with a solemn look. A lobbyist returned money. What does THAT tell you? that says that we're not going to influence Congress much, unless we manage to find some politician allies. I hired a PR firm to craft 14 template letters that just needed a signature, a name and an address to be faxed to Congress. Do you know how many times it was downloaded? 15. Yeah. SO tell me again how WISPA with 200 paid members should Stand Up? I'd love to hear the plan, because the one I used obviously did not work. Hrm... So, maybe the point is that you need to stir up the membership to fight for thier own interest. Best way I can tell, is to slap down the ones that speak up and say they disagree with something. /sarcasm I am not advocating shunning the rules. I am advocating telling those making up the rules as they go, TO BACK OFF BECAUSE THEY ARE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE!It is both our privilege and our duty to tell them to back off when they cross their proper boundaries. And we should be utterly unafraid to do so. Actually all your speeches have been about shunning the rules and you have stated you will not comply. That may not be your message, but that is what you have written. It is not realy your business. But for some reason you want to make this about what I do. Is that because generically, the ideas themselves are hard to argue with?I stated publicly once, clearly, what my intention is. And looks like this... I'm still waiting for some kind of agreement and clear direction from the people working on it. If i can do it, I will. If not, I won't. If not, the FCC is going to know I am not, and cannot. Then I want to know... Where does WISPA fall on this? Does WISPA support the notion of taking out ISP's because they cannot technically or financially, or physically follow some stupidly obscure and obtuse demand? Or will they start arguing in defense of their industry? Because as far as I can tell, I cannot. What I have deployed lacks the technical capability to comply. Yeah, I could help law enforcement, but I can't follow thier stupidly precise and yet obscure specified methodology. I know you've repeatedly complained that I don't put my money where my mouth is, because I can't buy plane tickets and hotel nights and can't run for office in WISPA. But I WILL put EVERYTHING on the line. I'll fight the FCC by myself if I have to. And, it sounds like a lot of
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes
Bruce Kushnick wrote a book about it: http://www.newnetworks.com/broadbandscandals.htm Here's the summary: http://www.newnetworks.com/ShortSCANDALSummary.htm In case you think he made this up, Bruce has pages and reams and pages of documents from VZ's own press releases and FCC and state filings to back it up. Peter John Scrivner wrote: Peter said: That being said. Since 1999, the RBOCs have been charging us for a DS3 fiber network that they have yet to build. That's right - 45MB to the home - as promised in 1999. Do you have proof of this in some document form? If you do can you share it? I would love to read this. I knew Illinois fined Ameritech over something like this. I guess I may get to know more now. Thanks, Scriv -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Peter R. wrote: So $500... it would probably get you about 400 more, but who will pony up the $200k? For five hundred bucks, I could easily create a few new business entities that serve one or two customers each, do the paperwork, and turn a tidy profit from the affair. I heartily encourage this notion. :) Anyway. FCC 477 only takes me fifteen or twenty minutes to do, twice a year. In exchange for relatively free access to a truckload of unlicensed spectrum, that's a pretty good bargain. The time it takes to complete that form is, in my mind, just another cost of doing business. The WISP industry is, as compared to a lot of other businesses, pretty lightly regulated. David Smith MVN.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark Koskenmaki wrote: I know you've repeatedly complained that I don't put my money where my mouth is, because I can't buy plane tickets and hotel nights and can't run for office in WISPA. But I WILL put EVERYTHING on the line. I'll fight the FCC by myself if I have to. And, it sounds like a lot of people here will applaud my departure. Of course, I suspect that means you're going to have to applaud chopping the WISP numbers down BIG time, because I know there's plenty who can't do it either, because they can't find a way to meet some minor point or other. I know by personal experience that there's PLENTY of people who have the money...and would actually sign up in a hurry, if WISPA were bold and defensive. Heck, they'd have my money again, if they would. But most see no benefit, especially when nobody appears to be defending them, but instead siding with the overreaching regulators. PERCEPTION, as you know, is everything. I don't think anyone wants you to depart. They would rather that you were part of the process. But fight the FCC on what? It is the DOJ that is pressing for CALEA. And if you never see a subpoena, it won't matter will it? There were only 1000 federal legal wiretaps last year. Chances are you won't see one or have to take on the DOJ and the $10k per day fines. I guess I don't understand exactly what it is you want from WISPA. BOLD DEFENSIVE ??? meaning, what? That instead of talking with the FBI and the FCC about standards and stuff, they just said STUFF IT? Instead of working amicably with the gov't, they should what exactly? You want them to fight CALEA and other regulations? How? It takes money. BIG MONEY. (see below) Because during the limited interaction with the F-agencies the Board didn't fight for ??? On the matter of numbers: the Big Guys would never join you in a fight against the Gov't. Would not happen. They may appear, but as soon as they could put a wedge in they would. I could see any number of groups like NextWeb, Clearwire or others saying, F! WISPA! Chairman Martin, Mr. Gonzo. We'll be Compliant. Just give us the spectrum. We'll gladly help you with BB deployment, emergency communications, and anything else. Back to this comment: chopping the WISP numbers down BIG time, because I know there's plenty who can't do it either, because they can't find a way to meet some minor point or other Why do you think there was so much discussion about compliance? To help people get compliant. (There is a webinar this week from Bearhill. ImageStream is working on it. Mikrotik gave there answer.) But from the 2 people I have spoken to at the DOJ, I don't see them killing you if you gave it an honest effort to comply. Back to PLENTY: You think more would join if we gave the Feds the finger. I say more HAVE to join so we can give the Feds the finger. Actually let me re-phrase that: More people would have to get INVOLVED. No one wants to stand alone. Involvement is a mountain to climb in bare feet with no sherpas. Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. (813) 963-5884 WISPA Associate Member ++ What it takes to Fight: It takes a lobbyist = about $60K It takes PR = $400 per month to write releases and get some traction It takes an Association Director to handle media calls, memberships, paperwork, and a Voice and Front Man = $50k That's per year. And that doesn't include contributions that need to be made to the campaigns of Congress Critters. Add on travel and dinners for the E.D. to network and press the agenda. In addition to the money, the membership would have to ACT! That is harder to achieve than coming up with the $200K per year! And in case you think I pulled those numbers out of the air. A couple of Exec Director's for ISP Assoc. made $100K. Trying to find one that is accredited and can actually produce a result is hard to find even at $50K. Then add in phone, internet and utility charges, rent, mail, travel and expenses. Lobbyist is $500 per hour - and the clock starts when he exits his office. PR is about $100 per written release and then extra to actually submit. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Hotels for ISPCON
ISPCON on May 23-25 is at the Rosen Centre Hotel (@ 9840 International Dr) Nearby is the Rosen Plaza Hotel @ 9700 International Dr Both have openings as of right now on Kayak.com between $126 and $133 per night. Comfort Inn, Best Western and Quality Inn are $59-$69 per night. (The only Comfort Inn I can vouch for is at the corner of International Drive and Sandlake. Brand new. 2 miles away. TGI Fridays is in front, so you can walk to drink and eat). Check tripadvisor.com for reviews. 9101 International Drive (I-Drive) is Pointe Orlando (http://www.pointeorlando.com). Quality Inn Plaza and Embassy Suites are closest to the Pointe. Pointe Orlando has a Starbucks, Adobe Gila's (home of the 64 oz. Margarita (http://www.adobegilas.com)), Capital Grille (expensive steak house), Hooters, and Maggiano’s Little Italy, where we were going to hold a dinner. However, since there are WISPA FISPA meetings on the 23rd evening, Adobe's may be a better idea. The 24th is ISP-CEO. The 25th is Friday night and I am probably heading home at that point. --- If anyone is coming in on the 22nd, let me know! (Or staying beyond the 25th). A trolley can take you up and down I-Drive for a nominal fee, BTW. SeaWorld is just down the street. And Disney is 20 minutes away. Closest airport is MCO (Orlando International). Next closest is probably Tampa - about 2 hours away. Frank Muto is giving away passes. WISPA has a code for free exhibit or discount full passes. RAD-INFO does to. If nothing else, buy a full day pass Thursday - you get to hear me speak at 8:45 AM and you get to go to ISP-CEO at 6:30 PM, for just $205! Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
Netgear 5 port. I've had several in boxes for 2-3 years with temps from -30F to 100F. Travis Microserv Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
Model Number?? On 4/23/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Netgear 5 port. I've had several in boxes for 2-3 years with temps from -30F to 100F. Travis Microserv Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? Most of our towers are running on Netgear FS105 and FS108 switches (the ones in the blue metal boxes, not the cheap plastic ones), and the occasional Linksys el-cheapo switch (don't have the part number handy). We only have about one switch per year die, and that's usually from lightning or power surges, as opposed to weather per se. They're not special fancy magic weatherproof switches, but they work just fine for us. This is in the midwest US, so the temperature extremes are 0 and 110 Fahrenheit. Your weather may vary. David Smith MVN.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
FS105 Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: Model Number?? On 4/23/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Netgear 5 port. I've had several in boxes for 2-3 years with temps from -30F to 100F. Travis Microserv Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
Thanks Travis and David, Those look like they will do the trick and at $13 +shipping can't beat the price! On 4/23/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FS105 Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: Model Number?? On 4/23/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Netgear 5 port. I've had several in boxes for 2-3 years with temps from -30F to 100F. Travis Microserv Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
Spray paint orange. Hide the box and packaging and charge $230! Don't give away trade secrets. :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Niemantsverdriet Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 4:46 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors Thanks Travis and David, Those look like they will do the trick and at $13 +shipping can't beat the price! On 4/23/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FS105 Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: Model Number?? On 4/23/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Netgear 5 port. I've had several in boxes for 2-3 years with temps from -30F to 100F. Travis Microserv Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 X-MS-SIGNATURE:YES N;LANGUAGE=en-us:LeBoeuf;Cliff FN:Cliff LeBoeuf ORG:Computer Sales Services, Inc. TEL;WORK;VOICE:(985) 879-3219 ADR;WORK;PREF:;;1162 Barrow Street;Houma;LA;70360;United States of America LABEL;WORK;PREF;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:1162 Barrow Street=0D=0A= Houma, LA 70360 X-MS-OL-DEFAULT-POSTAL-ADDRESS:2 URL;WORK:www.cssla.com www.triparish.net EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] X-MS-TEXT;CUSTOM1:Computers - Copiers - Internet PHOTO;TYPE=JPEG;ENCODING=BASE64: /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEAeAB4AAD/2wBDAAYEBQYFBAYGBQYHBwYIChAKCgkJChQODwwQFxQY GBcUFhYaHSUfGhsjHBYWICwgIyYnKSopGR8tMC0oMCUoKSj/2wBDAQcHBwoIChMKChMoGhYa KCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCj/wAAR CABQAEsDASIAAhEBAxEB/8QAHwAAAQUBAQEBAQEAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtRAA AgEDAwIEAwUFBAQAAAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhMUEGE1FhByJxFDKBkaEII0KxwRVS0fAkM2JyggkK FhcYGRolJicoKSo0NTY3ODk6Q0RFRkdISUpTVFVWV1hZWmNkZWZnaGlqc3R1dnd4eXqDhIWG h4iJipKTlJWWl5iZmqKjpKWmp6ipqrKztLW2t7i5usLDxMXGx8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uHi4+Tl 5ufo6erx8vP09fb3+Pn6/8QAHwEAAwEBAQEBAQEBAQECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtREA AgECBAQDBAcFBAQAAQJ3AAECAxEEBSExBhJBUQdhcRMiMoEIFEKRobHBCSMzUvAVYnLRChYk NOEl8RcYGRomJygpKjU2Nzg5OkNERUZHSElKU1RVVldYWVpjZGVmZ2hpanN0dXZ3eHl6goOE hYaHiImKkpOUlZaXmJmaoqOkpaanqKmqsrO0tba3uLm6wsPExcbHyMnK0tPU1dbX2Nna4uPk 5ebn6Onq8vP09fb3+Pn6/9oADAMBAAIRAxEAPwD0/U7ybXRqGt6xqFzZ6HaSy29vbW07RLME J+Z8dWOG74xjivKNS+JfhW0vJIU811U9ftRqT4x3MsHwd0xYm2iS8ugw9eDXzb4X0G/8Ta5b aVpMXm3U5wATgKByST2AFU207I56dOM4KUlds97u/jB4Wtxxa3szekUxP65xSwfFbTJ0WWDw v4hkgIz5i5I/Q17F8K/gdoPhGzhnvYVvNU2/PO4IOeenJA4OOPxzWnLolj4y8Sz2qhP+Ef0a cRNaiMgS3abSZC2QWC7ioU5XIJOSFwcz7l+xp/yr7jwu1+Kmn3kZls/CviKeFfvPHlgPyNJF 8X/C7KfNs7+B16xyyMGH5Zr6qkXRNFSKKdrS1EhCr5rBdx/GvL/iN4A8OeP/AB9Y6Y1vCJdK j8++Kq4ZxKD5abgwGPkLHqfu9MnJzPuHsaf8q+48ks/ixpeoFhpnhnX7wL94wktj8iaWP4ue G/NaG507UrOZeClxIVIPvzX1NbaXoXhvT1Hl21pboMb5DgAfjWH8Qvh14e+IHh17W8gj3uhk tbqInMblTtcYIyOc46GjmfcPY0/5V9x5v8M9W8P+PZLu00DVNY0nXrRBIypdttdT/EvOGHqC MjIrvtM+IsNnaC28SYj1eB3iuBCnyZViARk9wAfxr5i+BWg33hH9o220W9OJrdrmEsOkihXA YdeDtzXo/wAQmI8a6wAf+XhqunHn0ZyYuqsKlOK30MX41/8AJH9I/wCv27/9BNbX7GvhJIdD vvEdwgaS6kCQkg8KhZT+uaxfjX/yR/SP+v27/wDQTXqH7JskT/BnS1jZS6Szq4HUHznIB/Ai s5bs66H8OPog/aA+J1v4Q0a4sLWV/wC0nQDauOCcYB5z05P1HrTP2UNVXVvhcZXk8y6S+nFw TgHezbz+e8H8a8B/a2a5T4pX0c8cyQyLDJCWUhZF8pASD3wwIrnvgX8S734e+ICyzGTS7khL m0kY+WQSuXUAgCQAYyc8HGPRGp6j+03ovxBHie4uLGO51Dw5cOkkMdrCZDGwXBVwBnqCc8jk d66j9kXxFea7/wAJSNZleXVIpLfe0gAbYI/LQYAHQR4/U8mvV/CfxH8LeLkiitb2KO4lOEtb sqryH/Z5Ib8CayPHnhiHw5K/jbwxCLTVNPR3uYIV2xXsRADecq4L7Fyy88EUAcP+1BpfjyYw XfhMzXGkPb+VdW8CB5FIJOcY5BB7c8V4bYfF7xH4a8Lx+HGS8geDcPLuBt2E5yMEZxnsfevr Pwt8XPCniFTFLeR2E4wpS7ZVRieOGzj88GqPxn+E+jeOfDd48FnDBrkUTSWtzEqozOqsVRm2 klCTyPx60AfMf7POr3mufHvSL7UZfNndJhnAGB5TccV6J8TJHXx7rYDsB9oPAPsK8x/Znt5r T446RBcxtFNGJ1dGGCpEbAivTPib/wAj9rf/AF8H+QrWjuedmKvBFf41/wDJH9I/6/bv/wBB NZn7Hfju30jXr3wtqUzJHqjLJZlj8iyqG3L7FhjHuuOpFdD8YNG1HUfgdaXmmW7XC2V9O1yi 4ykRD7n69iBwM9c9q+VIJTE+cZHcetZy3Z2UP4cfRH6AfHX4VW3xK0WARzC11azJNtPs3DDE blYZGQQPwP5H5A0b4ReJNW8TXGk2ccU0VtcNbzXkTBo1KnDY6biPb869i+Gn7Sy2djHZ+Mt9 0VYKt0ARIq/7QC4b68H1z1rqdK+MvgTw3qV1c6VrS3Gl6jObmW0eGUTW0sjFpHViCCCTnZwA ckHnFI1PDrX4NePbPxjb2HkTxQwXIeO9WdcAK3EigMSD7dq+wvF3iSOPTNQ0nTbb+1da8kRv aK+xE3jH7yQgheDnHLEdBWXb/G34dT232hPE1sFxkhopFYe2CteUap8efCejeObjV9AU3cN8 VF+pEgMhVAiOpIwpAGMKDkDnsQAeS+Jvgt4803WPsUdtLe2kxXbciVEVsgZyu/Ix098V9s+C
Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
I've been using these outdoors since 2001. Only failure I've had has been due to lightning. Travis Johnson wrote: FS105 Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: Model Number?? On 4/23/07, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Netgear 5 port. I've had several in boxes for 2-3 years with temps from -30F to 100F. Travis Microserv Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
I'm trying out the newer linksys gigE switches. I've lost a LOT of netgear switches over the years. Usually the metal case ones but not always. I don't think there's a good cheaper one out there anymore. They've gone REALLY cheap. Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 2:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? Most of our towers are running on Netgear FS105 and FS108 switches (the ones in the blue metal boxes, not the cheap plastic ones), and the occasional Linksys el-cheapo switch (don't have the part number handy). We only have about one switch per year die, and that's usually from lightning or power surges, as opposed to weather per se. They're not special fancy magic weatherproof switches, but they work just fine for us. This is in the midwest US, so the temperature extremes are 0 and 110 Fahrenheit. Your weather may vary. David Smith MVN.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
OK, I'm in a pissy mood today so don't anyone take this too personally. WISPA HAS taken up the fight against the FCC when it makes sense to do so. I've been back to DC a couple of times per year since 2001 or so. Recently I've gotten teams from WISPA into the FCC to talk to folks about all manner of things. We filed in support of the new antenna rules. It's MUCH cheaper and easier to be FCC compliant today. WISPA filed in favor of new higher power rules for base stations at 2.4 gig. Did you know that you can LEGALLY run very high wattage at your base stations if you follow the new rules? Gotta use very specific gear but it's possible to have the power to do 30 to 40 mile ptmp links at 2.4 gig these days. It's NOT WISPA's fault that the manufacturers won't certify the gear to do it. Heck, WISPA even worked with the FCC to come up with a rules interpretation that would likely allow people to use OFF-THE-SHELF gear to do it! The trick is, you'd BETTER have a certified system cause you're gonna be wayy over 4 watts. I came up with a possible config that would give us 60 watts at EACH base station antenna! 8 watts is easy to do with the right antenna choices etc. If you want this hardware shipped gotta beat up on the manufacturers not WISPA. The data from the 477 is easy, non useful to competitors etc. and would be MUCH more valuable if people actually filled the dang thing out. We've worked with industry to get accurate data to the FCC via the 477 and other methods. We're not fighting against the 477 cause there's no reason to fight it. It's a LAW and the FCC HAS to ask us for the data. If we're gonna fight for a change in a law we're better off to pick a different battle. CALEA is a law that you must follow. It's not the big nasty thing you keep making it sound like. Nothing more than the electronic version of the wiretapping laws that have been on the books for as long as anyone I know can remember. What WISPA has been doing is helping you figure out what you have to do to be compliant. We've spent out time and money working to make this as easy as we can for you so that you DON'T have to shut the doors due to this. We're also working on mechanisms that will be FBI approved and will allow you to be compliant in even nicer ways for less money. When I get a chance, we're gonna fight for self certification for WISPs. That'll make all of our networks automatically compliant except in the most extreme cases or where people refuse to run legal power levels. I could probably write another page or two about what WISPA HAS done to make YOUR life as a WISP easier and more long term stable/predictable. I think the point has been made though. My next point is that you really have NO business spouting this rubbish Mark. You made some great arguments but they are based on half truths or ignorance of the facts. They are also, for the most part, a Red Herring. You see, RIGHT NOW we have to be CALEA compliant. If we don't like that we can fight it, but that fight will have to come later. Doesn't matter if we like the law or not, either obey or run the risk of getting caught. WE decided to take the time to help you comply rather than risk getting the $10k per day fines. And, if you don't like the way things are being done, pony up for the $25 per month and join WISPA. Run for the board and help guide the team. We know a LOT more about what's going on and what's not going on, as well as the reasons for it than you do. If you were on the board you'd almost certainly agree with almost everything we've done. Not everything we do can, or should, be public knowledge. Someone out there has to work with customers, try new gear, look in places we don't have time to look etc. It's good that people are out there doing those things and letting us know what they come up with. Then the board has to combine it all into a reasonable policy or action, based on ALL of the things we know about. Anyone out there can armchair quarterback till the cows come home, won't change a thing about the game though. Oh yeah, if anyone out there is having trouble coming up with the coin to join WISPA, the minimum wage in most of the country is over $7 per hour. I heard McDonald's is hiring near you. 10 hours per week will do wonders for your financial situation! I know, when I was new in business I drove tractor from 5 till dark 3 or 4 days per week. Some people will do what it takes. Others will just talk about what the rest of us should be doing better. Who out there is a doer vs. a talker? OK, enough talking out of me. I have to go watch my son play baseball. Then, tomorrow, back to DOING our latest FCC filing. Yeah, the one NO one is helping on. Including our FCC committee. NO one offered to help with this filing when I asked for someone on the committee to run with it. sigh. Have a great night all, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408)
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
- Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition OK, I'm in a pissy mood today so don't anyone take this too personally. So am I. We filed in support of the new antenna rules. It's MUCH cheaper and easier to be FCC compliant today. So did a bunch of us. The data from the 477 is easy, non useful to competitors etc. and would be MUCH more valuable if people actually filled the dang thing out. We've worked with industry to get accurate data to the FCC via the 477 and other methods. We're not fighting against the 477 cause there's no reason to fight it. It's a LAW and the FCC HAS to ask us for the data. If we're gonna fight for a change in a law we're better off to pick a different battle. Right. The FCC didn't even want information from small providers...and then behold, certain people I was giving money to to represent me (and I thought they were) suddenly turned on me, and encouraged the FCC to apply it to everyone. Law? Hell, no. It's the FCC's wishes. And we're discussing how stupid the whole damn thing is as well. And here you are defending it. You wonder why I'm in a pissy mood??? CALEA is a law that you must follow. It's not the big nasty thing you keep making it sound like. Nothing more than the electronic version of the wiretapping laws that have been on the books for as long as anyone I know can remember. What WISPA has been doing is helping you figure out what you have to do to be compliant. We've spent out time and money working to make this as easy as we can for you so that you DON'T have to shut the doors due to this. We're also working on mechanisms that will be FBI approved and will allow you to be compliant in even nicer ways for less money. $1 and 1 minute is TOO MUCH OBLIGATION. Sorry. Anyone who thinks we OWE them anything for our existence is cracked. THEY OWE US GRATITUDE FOR DOING THE COUNTRYS WORK And they owe us a check for doing work for them. THAT's NOT RADICAL, that's nothing other than CIVICS 101! When I get a chance, we're gonna fight for self certification for WISPs. That'll make all of our networks automatically compliant except in the most extreme cases or where people refuse to run legal power levels. So, we can argue and advocate to the FCC about rules changes and implementations about RF issues, but God forbid we should tell them that CALEA is out of line?It is STILL their ruling and opinions, which is the sole reason we're issued network mandates. HARRRUMPH!!! to repeat an old fashioned retort. I could probably write another page or two about what WISPA HAS done to make YOUR life as a WISP easier and more long term stable/predictable. I think the point has been made though. I like you, Marlon. We've done stuff together and I have respect for you as a person. So don't take this personally...but I call BS on it! My next point is that you really have NO business spouting this rubbish Mark. You made some great arguments but they are based on half truths or ignorance of the facts. They are also, for the most part, a Red Herring. You see, RIGHT NOW we have to be CALEA compliant. If we don't like that we can fight it, but that fight will have to come later. Doesn't matter if we like the law or not, either obey or run the risk of getting caught. WE decided to take the time to help you comply rather than risk getting the $10k per day fines. There will be no fight later. We should have been telling them to stuff it because this silly nonsense that applies to TELCOS doesn't apply to IP networks. Instead, we should be telling them that due to diversity and innovation, it's absolutely impossible to not stifle the way we do things and conform to obscure and frankly... SILLY demands. IF it were me, my comments would be, we as an industry stand ready and willing to assist law enforcement and homeland security any way we can, but it is NOT our obligation to morph our networks into the federal mold at our expense. Rather, it is imperative that the FBI, DOJ, and local law enforcement develop reasonable abilities to deal with IP networks, and that we can work with agencies that have reasonable ability to understand and work with cutting edge technologies, rather than trying to restrain an entire industry for their convenience. I am not advocating flaunting the law, for pity's sakes. I am just eternally vigilant and VERY defensive of my rights and freedoms as a citizen and businessman. Instead, we should have been ADAMANTLY and repeatedly saying in forceful language, THIS IS NOT UNIVERSALLY POSSIBLE, and then asking the industry what ways they can be accommodated- and educating them, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND - them telling us how our networks have to work. It's called setting precedents,
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark said it better than I can. The only thing I would add it this.. Some have mentioned getting some 'goodwill' from the gov. for doing this Get real. There is no such thing. Mark Koskenmaki wrote: - Original Message - From: "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "WISPA General List" wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition OK, I'm in a pissy mood today so don't anyone take this too personally. So am I. We filed in support of the new antenna rules. It's MUCH cheaper and easier to be FCC compliant today. So did a bunch of us. The data from the 477 is easy, non useful to competitors etc. and would be MUCH more valuable if people actually filled the dang thing out. We've worked with industry to get accurate data to the FCC via the 477 and other methods. We're not fighting against the 477 cause there's no reason to fight it. It's a LAW and the FCC HAS to ask us for the data. If we're gonna fight for a change in a law we're better off to pick a different battle. Right. The FCC didn't even want information from small providers...and then behold, certain people I was giving money to to represent me (and I thought they were) suddenly turned on me, and encouraged the FCC to apply it to everyone. Law? Hell, no. It's the FCC's wishes. And we're discussing how stupid the whole damn thing is as well. And here you are defending it. You wonder why I'm in a "pissy mood"??? CALEA is a law that you must follow. It's not the big nasty thing you keep making it sound like. Nothing more than the electronic version of the wiretapping laws that have been on the books for as long as anyone I know can remember. What WISPA has been doing is helping you figure out what you have to do to be compliant. We've spent out time and money working to make this as easy as we can for you so that you DON'T have to shut the doors due to this. We're also working on mechanisms that will be FBI approved and will allow you to be compliant in even nicer ways for less money. $1 and 1 minute is TOO MUCH OBLIGATION. Sorry. Anyone who thinks we OWE them anything for our existence is cracked. THEY OWE US GRATITUDE FOR DOING THE COUNTRY"S WORK And they owe us a check for doing work for them. THAT's NOT RADICAL, that's nothing other than CIVICS 101! When I get a chance, we're gonna fight for self certification for WISPs. That'll make all of our networks automatically compliant except in the most extreme cases or where people refuse to run legal power levels. So, we can argue and advocate to the FCC about rules changes and implementations about RF issues, but God forbid we should tell them that CALEA is out of line?It is STILL their ruling and opinions, which is the sole reason we're issued network mandates. HARRRUMPH!!! to repeat an old fashioned retort. I could probably write another page or two about what WISPA HAS done to make YOUR life as a WISP easier and more long term stable/predictable. I think the point has been made though. I like you, Marlon. We've done stuff together and I have respect for you as a person. So don't take this personally...but I call BS on it! My next point is that you really have NO business spouting this rubbish Mark. You made some great arguments but they are based on half truths or ignorance of the facts. They are also, for the most part, a Red Herring. You see, RIGHT NOW we have to be CALEA compliant. If we don't like that we can fight it, but that fight will have to come later. Doesn't matter if we like the law or not, either obey or run the risk of getting caught. WE decided to take the time to help you comply rather than risk getting the $10k per day fines. There will be no fight later. We should have been telling them to stuff it because this silly nonsense that applies to TELCOS doesn't apply to IP networks. Instead, we should be telling them that due to diversity and innovation, it's absolutely impossible to not stifle the way we do things and conform to obscure and frankly... SILLY demands. IF it were me, my comments would be, we as an industry stand ready and willing to assist law enforcement and homeland security any way we can, but it is NOT our obligation to morph our networks into the federal mold at our expense. Rather, it is imperative that the FBI, DOJ, and local law enforcement develop reasonable abilities to deal with IP networks, and that we can work with agencies that have reasonable ability to understand and work with cutting edge technologies, rather than trying to restrain an entire
RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
You're reading too much into it. They're right. The ability is there to mirror every packet to/from a IP address onto disk. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ralph Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 12:23 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 It is lame because it is a feature that the user community needs and wants, and the vendor is passing the buck. Not surprising, concerning their actions on FCC certification of other products. Mikrotik makes dandy router software and I support them on that. We do use the PC version in some POPs Open CALEA is just not yet ready for prime time, however the compliance date loometh soon. The CALEA tap/probe should be something that can be done in the router (I think that's how Cisco implemented it). Because Imagestream will have it ready May 1st, we went with their box just to have something that works now has been tested with the FBI. I'd just like to feel that the company who many of us support heavily should listen to and support its customers better. I've seen your posts and am well aware that one can capture all traffic via mirror port and hand the whole shebang over to the LEA, or we can spend hours wading through it and massaging data (which I think might cause it to be tainted). We've probably all captured users' traffic before and probably all know how to run Ethereal. I'd just like to see an accepted method that doesn't take an abundance of time to institute and maintain. I'm curious- do you have a solution, working now, that uses the hardware you mention and OpenCALEA to deliver a product that will be accepted by law enforcement, or are you just talking concepts? _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem or issue. I'm going to keep saying this over and over and over (started over a year ago). Use a smart ethernet switch and mirror your main internet connection to a box that can capture the traffic. Then use something like openCalea (www.opencalea.org). Even if you have to buy a switch, a box to run the software, etc. you are less than $500 total. If you have multiple NOC's, $500 per location is cheap. Travis Microserv ralph wrote: I asked: I have 3 of your licensed routers (level 4) When do you plan to release a version of RouterOS that is CALEA compliant? Thank You They Replied: Hello, It already is, you simply have to enable sniffer of all traffic, and store the raw data on a server that captures it. You can also use smart switches that can mirror ports to a capturing server. See discussions on our forum on this topic. Regards, Normunds -- Come to MikroTik User Meetings - April 28th, Abuja, NIGERIA - May 31st - June 1st, Orlando, USA http://mum.mikrotik.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark Koskenmaki wrote: Law? Hell, no. It's the FCC's wishes. And we're discussing how stupid the whole damn thing is as well. And here you are defending it. You wonder why I'm in a pissy mood??? It's indirectly a law - the FCC is granted broad powers under current law to request things like this. If you think the FCC's authority goes too far, you're welcome to that opinion (and to try to change others' minds on the subject, though it doesn't seem like you've had much luck so far). Given that the FCC gives us access to a truckload of unlicensed spectrum and, so far, only asks me to fill out a ten-minute form twice a year, I think it's a darn good bargain. $1 and 1 minute is TOO MUCH OBLIGATION. Sorry. Anyone who thinks we OWE them anything for our existence is cracked. THEY OWE US GRATITUDE FOR DOING THE COUNTRYS WORK And they owe us a check for doing work for them. THAT's NOT RADICAL, that's nothing other than CIVICS 101! Maybe we went to different schools. Mine had a bunch of classes on how everyone is responsible for doing their part in a participatory democracy. (I know, this is technically a representative republic, but bear with me here.) You pay some property taxes, you get to use all those roads they built. The government doesn't give you stuff for free, you don't give them stuff for free. It's all trade-offs. Basic freshman-year-of-college economics. A few minutes to fill out a form is a pretty darn good price for everything we get from the FCC. So, we can argue and advocate to the FCC about rules changes and implementations about RF issues, but God forbid we should tell them that CALEA is out of line?It is STILL their ruling and opinions, which is the sole reason we're issued network mandates. To be blunt, your opinion is (apparently) in the minority. If you think CALEA goes too far, I don't think anyone is preventing you from making FCC filings to that effect. I am not advocating flaunting the law, for pity's sakes. I am just eternally vigilant and VERY defensive of my rights and freedoms as a citizen and businessman. Instead, we should have been ADAMANTLY and repeatedly saying in forceful language, THIS IS NOT UNIVERSALLY POSSIBLE, and then asking the industry what ways they can be accommodated- and educating them, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND - them telling us how our networks have to work. While I'm sure the statement this is not universally possible is technically correct (the best kind of correct!) I believe you're seriously over-estimating the difficulty. I'd wager most of us already have, somewhere in our network, a decent managed switch that can be configured to spit out the requested data. Feed said data into a cheap PC with a big hard drive (another thing that most of us already have), filter out the specific bits the government wants, spit it out. If this takes more than a couple hours to set up, there's something seriously weird going on with your network. David Smith MVN.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
David E. Smith wrote: Mark Koskenmaki wrote: You pay some property taxes, you get to use all those roads they built. . It's all trade-offs. Basic freshman-year-of-college economics. I just wanted to point out an error you just made mark, you said : The government doesn't give you stuff for free, And your correct, but this other part is incorrect: you don't give them stuff for free Yes we do. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 21:19 -0700, George Rogato wrote: David E. Smith wrote: Mark Koskenmaki wrote: You pay some property taxes, you get to use all those roads they built. . It's all trade-offs. Basic freshman-year-of-college economics. I just wanted to point out an error you just made mark, you said : The government doesn't give you stuff for free, And your correct, but this other part is incorrect: you don't give them stuff for free Yes we do. Care to quantify this statement? -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors
Mikrotik Routerboard ? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Niemantsverdriet Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 5:01 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Switch that will surrive outdoors I am in need of a switch that can live outdoors in an enclosure. It needs to be small (5 ports) and cheap as the customer dose not want to any more that he has to. It also needs to surrive the hot and cold temps that it will experiance. Any reccomendations? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
- Original Message - From: David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9:03 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition Mark Koskenmaki wrote: Law? Hell, no. It's the FCC's wishes. And we're discussing how stupid the whole damn thing is as well. And here you are defending it. You wonder why I'm in a pissy mood??? It's indirectly a law - the FCC is granted broad powers under current law to request things like this. If you think the FCC's authority goes too far, you're welcome to that opinion (and to try to change others' minds on the subject, though it doesn't seem like you've had much luck so far). Given that the FCC gives us access to a truckload of unlicensed spectrum and, so far, only asks me to fill out a ten-minute form twice a year, I think it's a darn good bargain. It's not a 'favor' from the FCC. I don't owe them a blasted thing for it. It's public spectrum, for public use. It does NOT belong to the FCC, it is charged with regulating it, not doling out in return for favors! It is given the task of regulating it for the best public interest. How well it does that is definitely up for discussion, but that IS the FCC's job. You're acting as if it belongs to them and we're asking for their property. It's not that way. $1 and 1 minute is TOO MUCH OBLIGATION. Sorry. Anyone who thinks we OWE them anything for our existence is cracked. THEY OWE US GRATITUDE FOR DOING THE COUNTRYS WORK And they owe us a check for doing work for them. THAT's NOT RADICAL, that's nothing other than CIVICS 101! Maybe we went to different schools. Mine had a bunch of classes on how everyone is responsible for doing their part in a participatory democracy. (I know, this is technically a representative republic, but bear with me here.) You pay some property taxes, you get to use all those roads they built. The government doesn't give you stuff for free, you don't give them stuff for free. It's all trade-offs. Basic freshman-year-of-college economics. A few minutes to fill out a form is a pretty darn good price for everything we get from the FCC. I'd say they are sorely overpaid. As far as everything we get? In my view, they are derelict in doing what should be done. Hardly a case that I owe them my identity, and my business information in return. Even more offensive to me, is the idea that we can brown-nose them into getting stuff. If that's the case, and that's how we want the game played, then we have no chance against the high powered, high dollar efforts by the big boys. We have to appeal to right, wrong, reason, logic, and principle. It's all we have. And it's certainly better to play that game than to get down in the muck where the money tries to buy what they want. So, we can argue and advocate to the FCC about rules changes and implementations about RF issues, but God forbid we should tell them that CALEA is out of line?It is STILL their ruling and opinions, which is the sole reason we're issued network mandates. To be blunt, your opinion is (apparently) in the minority. If you think CALEA goes too far, I don't think anyone is preventing you from making FCC filings to that effect. What, you want me to get into a filings fight with WISPA?Geez, man. I was here when WISPA was started, I STILL WANT TO SEE IT GROW. I want it to be the energetic organization that people see value in jumping in and supporting. I am not advocating flaunting the law, for pity's sakes. I am just eternally vigilant and VERY defensive of my rights and freedoms as a citizen and businessman. Instead, we should have been ADAMANTLY and repeatedly saying in forceful language, THIS IS NOT UNIVERSALLY POSSIBLE, and then asking the industry what ways they can be accommodated- and educating them, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND - them telling us how our networks have to work. While I'm sure the statement this is not universally possible is technically correct (the best kind of correct!) I believe you're seriously over-estimating the difficulty. I'd wager most of us already have, somewhere in our network, a decent managed switch that can be configured to spit out the requested data. Feed said data into a cheap PC with a big hard drive (another thing that most of us already have), filter out the specific bits the government wants, spit it out. If this takes more than a couple hours to set up, there's something seriously weird going on with your network. You say this, but yet none of us seem to be able to point to a single WISP not using someone else's services or software to do it, and nobody seems to know if ANY of it works yet. This is hardly overestimating. Besides, who the heck cares if it's overestimating. If it forces anyone to change how their products work, then it's wrong. I'm seeing people talking about COMPLETELY
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
you don't give them stuff for free Yes we do. Care to quantify this statement? Sure, the government has never paid me to give them taxes. George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Whoa... I think someone's goofed slightly here. I said i don't owe them my services, skills, etc, for free. David said that we don't get stuff given to them, and we should not be giving them things for free.However, I think his point was that he's viewing the mandates on us as payment for unlicensed spectrum. I see unlicensed spectrum as nothing more than the FCC doing it's job, to promote use of a public asset (rf spectrum) as it's supposed to be used... for the benefit of the people. I don't see that as obligating me to do any old thing they happen to dream up for me to do for them. And if it's a quid pro quo, where's the balance point? Do I owe them a $100 / mo service? A $3000 + 400/mo ttp contract for it? WHat is it? And why aren't we defending our industry from gatekeeper regulation which stifles entry into it? Man, you people don't logically connect the dots, do you? Why wasn't WISPA asking every member, list member, and everyone else they could to flood the FCC with objections, and then offer a much saner view of how ISP's can assist LEA's?WISPA doesn't need to advocate flaunting the law to object, as some here are misportraying the notion.Instead, we're trying to downplay a very arbitrary intrusion into our networks and business. Instead of building leadership, WISPA is letting it slip away. Or maybe WISPA's figuring to join the ranks of the TTP's out there trying to scare people into buying into something for protection. When that's done to a brick and mortar business, it's called extortion. Really, I don't think they are... But that's how some people have viewed it. I know, I've seen the comments. - Original Message - From: Ryan Langseth [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9:31 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 21:19 -0700, George Rogato wrote: David E. Smith wrote: Mark Koskenmaki wrote: You pay some property taxes, you get to use all those roads they built. . It's all trade-offs. Basic freshman-year-of-college economics. I just wanted to point out an error you just made mark, you said : The government doesn't give you stuff for free, And your correct, but this other part is incorrect: you don't give them stuff for free Yes we do. Care to quantify this statement? -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Heh... Is this an argument that taxes are a violation of the 5th Amendment? Especially the part that says ...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. ? That's where I derive my idea that we do not owe them any services or spending money to provide services or labor without compensation. Heck, CALEA provided funds to the telcos to compensate them... Why the heck are we special and not protected?From the arguments here, we have an unfillable debt owed merely for use of unlicensed spectrum... I disagree there's any debt or obligation whatsoever. - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition you don't give them stuff for free Yes we do. Care to quantify this statement? Sure, the government has never paid me to give them taxes. George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
But does that meet CALEA specs? Not really, since it does not do the MD5 hash and such. At least that is what I get from reading about CALEA. Basically if a TTP doesn't sign off on it you might be at the wrong end of a investigation when the lawyers start saying it was not captured correctly. You should talk to your lawyer about it and not take my opinion of it as anything but just what it is, stinky just like every ones. On 4/23/07, Smith, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're reading too much into it. They're right. The ability is there to mirror every packet to/from a IP address onto disk. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ralph Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 12:23 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 It is lame because it is a feature that the user community needs and wants, and the vendor is passing the buck. Not surprising, concerning their actions on FCC certification of other products. Mikrotik makes dandy router software and I support them on that. We do use the PC version in some POPs Open CALEA is just not yet ready for prime time, however the compliance date loometh soon. The CALEA tap/probe should be something that can be done in the router (I think that's how Cisco implemented it). Because Imagestream will have it ready May 1st, we went with their box just to have something that works now has been tested with the FBI. I'd just like to feel that the company who many of us support heavily should listen to and support its customers better. I've seen your posts and am well aware that one can capture all traffic via mirror port and hand the whole shebang over to the LEA, or we can spend hours wading through it and massaging data (which I think might cause it to be tainted). We've probably all captured users' traffic before and probably all know how to run Ethereal. I'd just like to see an accepted method that doesn't take an abundance of time to institute and maintain. I'm curious- do you have a solution, working now, that uses the hardware you mention and OpenCALEA to deliver a product that will be accepted by law enforcement, or are you just talking concepts? _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem or issue. I'm going to keep saying this over and over and over (started over a year ago). Use a smart ethernet switch and mirror your main internet connection to a box that can capture the traffic. Then use something like openCalea (www.opencalea.org). Even if you have to buy a switch, a box to run the software, etc. you are less than $500 total. If you have multiple NOC's, $500 per location is cheap. Travis Microserv ralph wrote: I asked: I have 3 of your licensed routers (level 4) When do you plan to release a version of RouterOS that is CALEA compliant? Thank You They Replied: Hello, It already is, you simply have to enable sniffer of all traffic, and store the raw data on a server that captures it. You can also use smart switches that can mirror ports to a capturing server. See discussions on our forum on this topic. Regards, Normunds -- Come to MikroTik User Meetings - April 28th, Abuja, NIGERIA - May 31st - June 1st, Orlando, USA http://mum.mikrotik.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
You also might be on the wrong end of CALEA if a TTP does sign off on it. Use of a TTP does not provide any legal cover, btw--in the end, the service provider, not the TTP, is responsible--read the official statements and legalese on the matter. Still, for all the scare tactics getting thrown around, CALEA really isn't that big of a deal (unless you are doing VoIP, where the near-real time requirements require a bit of planning). Yes, sniffing and packaging does meet CALEA specs. Need a MD5 hash? Then generate one... In general, do not expect relatively simple layer 2/3 network equipment to provide complex application layer-style support for various networking tasks that can and, indeed should, be performed elsewhere on the network :) CALEA capable? Sure, if it does Ethernet (or, indeed, any layer two or layer three protocol), then it is CALEA capable. -Clint Ricker Kentnis Technologies On 4/24/07, Jeromie Reeves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But does that meet CALEA specs? Not really, since it does not do the MD5 hash and such. At least that is what I get from reading about CALEA. Basically if a TTP doesn't sign off on it you might be at the wrong end of a investigation when the lawyers start saying it was not captured correctly. You should talk to your lawyer about it and not take my opinion of it as anything but just what it is, stinky just like every ones. On 4/23/07, Smith, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're reading too much into it. They're right. The ability is there to mirror every packet to/from a IP address onto disk. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ralph Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 12:23 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 It is lame because it is a feature that the user community needs and wants, and the vendor is passing the buck. Not surprising, concerning their actions on FCC certification of other products. Mikrotik makes dandy router software and I support them on that. We do use the PC version in some POPs Open CALEA is just not yet ready for prime time, however the compliance date loometh soon. The CALEA tap/probe should be something that can be done in the router (I think that's how Cisco implemented it). Because Imagestream will have it ready May 1st, we went with their box just to have something that works now has been tested with the FBI. I'd just like to feel that the company who many of us support heavily should listen to and support its customers better. I've seen your posts and am well aware that one can capture all traffic via mirror port and hand the whole shebang over to the LEA, or we can spend hours wading through it and massaging data (which I think might cause it to be tainted). We've probably all captured users' traffic before and probably all know how to run Ethereal. I'd just like to see an accepted method that doesn't take an abundance of time to institute and maintain. I'm curious- do you have a solution, working now, that uses the hardware you mention and OpenCALEA to deliver a product that will be accepted by law enforcement, or are you just talking concepts? _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23 Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem or issue. I'm going to keep saying this over and over and over (started over a year ago). Use a smart ethernet switch and mirror your main internet connection to a box that can capture the traffic. Then use something like openCalea (www.opencalea.org). Even if you have to buy a switch, a box to run the software, etc. you are less than $500 total. If you have multiple NOC's, $500 per location is cheap. Travis Microserv ralph wrote: I asked: I have 3 of your licensed routers (level 4) When do you plan to release a version of RouterOS that is CALEA compliant? Thank You They Replied: Hello, It already is, you simply have to enable sniffer of all traffic, and store the raw data on a server that captures it. You can also use smart switches that can mirror ports to a capturing server. See discussions on our forum on this topic. Regards, Normunds -- Come to MikroTik User Meetings - April 28th, Abuja, NIGERIA - May 31st - June 1st, Orlando, USA http://mum.mikrotik.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
