Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread Butch Evans

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, wispa wrote:

While you're there... or, perhaps on your way there, please 
consider the fact that you and whoever is meeting there are 
deciding how every other WISP will structure his network and what 
they will be forced to spend or do.  You will...or will not... set 
a standard, and then the FCC and FBI will...or will not...accept 
it, and everyone who has filed that they will be compliant persuant 
standards discussions will be obligated to do what is laid out in 
the end.  You're a pretty bright guy, Marlon, and I suspect it 
won't take very long to see what direction this will head.  You 
will be playing with the fates of a lot of people who did not 
choose this in ANY way.


Choosing it (or not) is not relevant.  The law is what it is.  You 
will either choose to follow the law or not.  If you choose to 
follow the law, fine.  If you choose to NOT follow the law, fine. 
Either way, your fate is in YOUR hands...not Marlon or anyone else. 
I think you've made it abundantly clear that whatever the law says, 
you are intent on NOT following it


I haven't filed, because I cannot say I can or cannot comply. 
However, if this costs more than $100 to implement (that's all I 
have in the bank at this moment), I will simply file stating I 
cannot and will not comply, period.


Good deal.  Don't comply.  With only $100 in the bank...you can only 
purchase one more CPEHope you charge enough at install time to 
get the next one.


If the FCC then desires to shut me down then, They will have to do 
so forcibly. I will simply write a letter to all my customers, 
local newspapers, and state simply that the FCC has decided to take 
over all internet communications in a few months, and that there's 
no room left for small operations, and reccommend that they direct 
all questions to the FCC about why thier internet service will be 
no more.  I will cause them more grief and bury their office in 
irate phone calls and letters than they can possibly handle.  I


Let me try to understand this.  You have enough sway with all your 
(how many customers) to cause the FCC's office more grief...than 
they can handle?  And, you only have $100 in the bank?  Something 
isn't adding up.  Maybe I missed something.


know several sites where I can reach millions who WILL be 
activists, if we're not going to act.  I'm absolutely positive they


Hmm...Why haven't you used these sites to run for office?  It seems 
to me that you would prefer a life as a politician (I mean besides 
stating on a public list that you intend to NOT comply with the laws 
established by regulatory agencies that affect you in a way you 
don't like).  Other than that one little issue, I'd guess you would 
be a great politician (and likely have more than $100 to show for 
it).


I suggest you pass this on to the FCC and FBI, along with my 
estimation that at least 20% of all small operators will do exactly 
the same. I am SICK AND TIRED of being fed to the wolves without 
the slightest resistance.  You, of all people, should know what it


And just who is doing the feeding, Mark?  Marlon?  The FCC? 
WISPA?


and casual networks, small community and free networks, small joint 
efforts by a few people to get for themselves what they have a 
right to get. All possibly being wiped out by careless and 
overreaching federal agencies. Who's gonna stick up for them? 
WISPA's just bleating and going along like blind sheep.


Mark...You are speaking of things you haven't a clue about.  What 
makes you thing WISPA is bleating and going along like blind 
sheep?  The fact that we (I'm working with them to help create the 
standards) are trying to create a standard to provide LEAs with 
information that they need?  Is that what it is?  I'm 
confused...someone is feeding you to the wolves and WISPA is a group 
of sheep.  Perhaps you can clear this up for me.


I STILL cannot believe we're walking into this without a single 
official objection from WISPA or the other organizations supposedly 
on our side.  I guess I should not be surprised.  Expedience has 
become the religion of our times.  Like rolling over and playing 
dead is going to earn us brownie points and favors later?  Don't 
count on it.


Objection to WHAT?  You aren't making ANY sense!

Will I help law enforcement track down and prosecute people who are 
breaking the law or otherwise a threat?  No question at all, of 
COURSE I WILL.  I will NOT pre-tap thier connection in any way that


Now who is talking out of both sides of his mouth? of COURSE I 
WILL?  You said earlier that you will NOT comply.  Now I don't know 
if I agree with you or not.  Perhaps your real calling IS as a 
politician...(just something to think about, with your support of 
millions).


compromises my security or their security, costs me significantly, 
or is in my view, unconstitutional (which is pretty much anyting 
done ahead of time).  That, as a citizen, is my duty. If that costs 
me my future and 

Re: [WISPA] Was CALEA, WAY off topic video and commentary.

2007-03-08 Thread Butch Evans

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, wispa wrote:

Besides, CALEA never applied to ISP's anyway, so ruled the FCC, 
before it did a double take and now tries to hold two conflicting 
positions before regulators, concerning ISP's.  We are, or are not, 
depending on the issue, a regulated industry now, with nary a 
logical justification for this obviously inconsistent ruling.


I'd suggest that you read exactly what CALEA is.  You obviously 
don't understand it completely if this is your best argument.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
My calendar: http://tinyurl.com/y24ad6
Training Partners: http://tinyurl.com/smfkf
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread Tom DeReggi
Persoanlly, I still do not understand the uproar. I do not see where there 
are any signficant costs in complying to Calea for most WISPs.
The Lobby effort, to make a couple trips to the FBI, costs more than it does 
to implement compliance in many cases.


The only issue with CALEA is to make sure they continue to support Linux 
based formats, as already proposed, so we just have to add a few lines of 
code, and not convert our entire network to CISCO :-)  Calea is not about 
compliance, thats a given, its about understanding what is compliance, s owe 
know what to do.  Its just like OSHA, its easy to comply, where the primary 
goal is to make the company aware, and document their awareness, to do the 
things they already should be doing anyway.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 5:07 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi


Great solution Marty. Really.

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marty Dougherty
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 2:01 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

...How about we pass on the cost to our customers with a CALEA
surcharge-
Send a message out to the customers that we HAVE to charge you xx per
month to support the govt efforts to wiretap the masses or to support
the Govt efforts to keep us safe from perverts and terrorist...

Marty
__

Marty Dougherty

CEO

Roadstar Internet Inc




 
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses(84). 










This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.





--
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] Mikrotik long pings

2007-03-08 Thread Justin Wilson
We just put up a mikrotik 532 with an sr2 card. This is an AP with the
ethernet and sr2 bridged.  At the bottom of the tower is actual mikrotik
router doing routing, dhcp, etc.

I have customers associated to the Ap which works fine. If I plug into
the ethernet at the bottom of the Ap I get weird pings. What I mean is this:

If I ping a customer whos is associated via wireless they are 4-10ms
average. 

If I ping the AP itself pings will jump up to 400ms dependent on how
much traffic is going through. When the ap goes to 400ms pings the customers
stay the same (4-10ms).

Any ideas why this is happening? It does not matter where I bind the ip
on the Ap. Pings are still weird.I am not too worried because customers are
getting their speed and their pings are great.

Thanks in advance,
Justin
--
Life is unfair, but root password Helps
---
Justin S. Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CCNA - A+ - CCNT - TAT - ACSA - COMTRAIN
MTIN.NET  Wireless - WISP Consulting - Tower Climbing
AOLIM: j2sw
WEB: http://www.mtin.net
Phone: 765.762.2851


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[WISPA] email archiving

2007-03-08 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181

Hi Frank,

I see that Postini has some new mail archiving service available and a 
webcast to talk about new government regs on the subject.


Can you give me us an idea what that's all about and what the costs are?

thanks!
Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread wispa
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 02:22:57 -0600 (CST), Butch Evans wrote
 On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, wispa wrote:
 
 While you're there... or, perhaps on your way there, please 
 consider the fact that you and whoever is meeting there are 
 deciding how every other WISP will structure his network and what 
 they will be forced to spend or do.  You will...or will not... set 
 a standard, and then the FCC and FBI will...or will not...accept 
 it, and everyone who has filed that they will be compliant persuant 
 standards discussions will be obligated to do what is laid out in 
 the end.  You're a pretty bright guy, Marlon, and I suspect it 
 won't take very long to see what direction this will head.  You 
 will be playing with the fates of a lot of people who did not 
 choose this in ANY way.
 
 Choosing it (or not) is not relevant.  The law is what it is.  

Yes, the law is what it is.  It was NEVER written to apply to ISP's nor 
internet services.  Those are additions to the law that the FCC tacked on at 
a whim.  The FCC has no authority to write law, only Congress can do that.  
This is why the FCC now holds contradictory views on whether an ISP is 
an information service or a telecommunications service.  Depending on the 
issues, like taxes vs CALEA, we are, or we are NOT a telecommunications 
service.  Understand?   We are and we are not, all at the same time, so that 
it's convenient to require CALEA, but they can exempt us from other 
regulations, because we're not.  THIS WILL BE RESOLVED, and not likely in our 
favor unless we begin arguing back!

You 
 will either choose to follow the law or not.  If you choose to 
 follow the law, fine.  If you choose to NOT follow the law, fine. 
 Either way, your fate is in YOUR hands...not Marlon or anyone else. 
 I think you've made it abundantly clear that whatever the law says, 
 you are intent on NOT following it

Actually, I am following the law, it's the FCC that playing games here, 
attempting to cross a chasm in two leaps.   This is why I keep saying we MUST 
object.  

 
 I haven't filed, because I cannot say I can or cannot comply. 
 However, if this costs more than $100 to implement (that's all I 
 have in the bank at this moment), I will simply file stating I 
 cannot and will not comply, period.
 
 Good deal.  Don't comply.  With only $100 in the bank...you can only 
 purchase one more CPEHope you charge enough at install time to 
 get the next one.

You don't need to worry about my business issues, Butch.  Trust me, we're in 
very sold shape. 

 
 If the FCC then desires to shut me down then, They will have to do 
 so forcibly. I will simply write a letter to all my customers, 
 local newspapers, and state simply that the FCC has decided to take 
 over all internet communications in a few months, and that there's 
 no room left for small operations, and reccommend that they direct 
 all questions to the FCC about why thier internet service will be 
 no more.  I will cause them more grief and bury their office in 
 irate phone calls and letters than they can possibly handle.  I
 
 Let me try to understand this.  You have enough sway with all your 
 (how many customers) to cause the FCC's office more grief...than 
 they can handle?  And, you only have $100 in the bank?  Something 
 isn't adding up.  Maybe I missed something.

Yeah, you missed a lot, Butch.  Like how fast the FCC is buried just 
by frivolous applications for 3650 STA's...???  Remember Patrick's 
comments... understaffed, underbudgeted..

 
 know several sites where I can reach millions who WILL be 
 activists, if we're not going to act.  I'm absolutely positive they
 
 Hmm...Why haven't you used these sites to run for office?  It seems 
 to me that you would prefer a life as a politician (I mean besides 
 stating on a public list that you intend to NOT comply with the laws 
 established by regulatory agencies that affect you in a way you 
 don't like).  Other than that one little issue, I'd guess you would 
 be a great politician (and likely have more than $100 to show for 
 it).

You'd not like me in politics.  I'm always this defensive of principle and 
always this blunt. 

 
 I suggest you pass this on to the FCC and FBI, along with my 
 estimation that at least 20% of all small operators will do exactly 
 the same. I am SICK AND TIRED of being fed to the wolves without 
 the slightest resistance.  You, of all people, should know what it
 
 And just who is doing the feeding, Mark?  Marlon?  The FCC? 
 WISPA?

One must sit back and ask himself, who stuck our collective heads up in front 
of the regulators, asked for stuff, and then never even said boo when the 
FCC started making capricious rulings?  

 
 and casual networks, small community and free networks, small joint 
 efforts by a few people to get for themselves what they have a 
 right to get. All possibly being wiped out by careless and 
 overreaching federal agencies. Who's gonna stick up for them? 
 WISPA's just bleating and 

Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread Jack Unger

Mark and Butch,

I want to thank both of you.

I feared that the quality and tone of this discussion was taking a 
negative turn but I WAS WRONG.


I've found your discussion of the CALEA issue and the ramifications to 
the WISP industry to be interesting, informative and valuable. I'd like 
to commend both of you gentlemen for having the commitment and the 
courage to share your opinions in this open forum.


Your discussions have helped me to clarify the CALEA issues in my mind. 
Hopefully it will help others to clarify their thinking as well.


Although your political views may not be perfectly identical to each 
other, I sense that you both respect the Constitution and the Rule of 
Law and that you both want to do what you believe is correct.


Thank you again.
   jack


wispa wrote:


On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 02:22:57 -0600 (CST), Butch Evans wrote


On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, wispa wrote:


While you're there... or, perhaps on your way there, please 
consider the fact that you and whoever is meeting there are 
deciding how every other WISP will structure his network and what 
they will be forced to spend or do.  You will...or will not... set 
a standard, and then the FCC and FBI will...or will not...accept 
it, and everyone who has filed that they will be compliant persuant 
standards discussions will be obligated to do what is laid out in 
the end.  You're a pretty bright guy, Marlon, and I suspect it 
won't take very long to see what direction this will head.  You 
will be playing with the fates of a lot of people who did not 
choose this in ANY way.


Choosing it (or not) is not relevant.  The law is what it is.  



Yes, the law is what it is.  It was NEVER written to apply to ISP's nor 
internet services.  Those are additions to the law that the FCC tacked on at 
a whim.  The FCC has no authority to write law, only Congress can do that.  
This is why the FCC now holds contradictory views on whether an ISP is 
an information service or a telecommunications service.  Depending on the 
issues, like taxes vs CALEA, we are, or we are NOT a telecommunications 
service.  Understand?   We are and we are not, all at the same time, so that 
it's convenient to require CALEA, but they can exempt us from other 
regulations, because we're not.  THIS WILL BE RESOLVED, and not likely in our 
favor unless we begin arguing back!


You 

will either choose to follow the law or not.  If you choose to 
follow the law, fine.  If you choose to NOT follow the law, fine. 
Either way, your fate is in YOUR hands...not Marlon or anyone else. 
I think you've made it abundantly clear that whatever the law says, 
you are intent on NOT following it



Actually, I am following the law, it's the FCC that playing games here, 
attempting to cross a chasm in two leaps.   This is why I keep saying we MUST 
object.  



I haven't filed, because I cannot say I can or cannot comply. 
However, if this costs more than $100 to implement (that's all I 
have in the bank at this moment), I will simply file stating I 
cannot and will not comply, period.


Good deal.  Don't comply.  With only $100 in the bank...you can only 
purchase one more CPEHope you charge enough at install time to 
get the next one.



You don't need to worry about my business issues, Butch.  Trust me, we're in 
very sold shape. 



If the FCC then desires to shut me down then, They will have to do 
so forcibly. I will simply write a letter to all my customers, 
local newspapers, and state simply that the FCC has decided to take 
over all internet communications in a few months, and that there's 
no room left for small operations, and reccommend that they direct 
all questions to the FCC about why thier internet service will be 
no more.  I will cause them more grief and bury their office in 
irate phone calls and letters than they can possibly handle.  I


Let me try to understand this.  You have enough sway with all your 
(how many customers) to cause the FCC's office more grief...than 
they can handle?  And, you only have $100 in the bank?  Something 
isn't adding up.  Maybe I missed something.



Yeah, you missed a lot, Butch.  Like how fast the FCC is buried just 
by frivolous applications for 3650 STA's...???  Remember Patrick's 
comments... understaffed, underbudgeted..



know several sites where I can reach millions who WILL be 
activists, if we're not going to act.  I'm absolutely positive they


Hmm...Why haven't you used these sites to run for office?  It seems 
to me that you would prefer a life as a politician (I mean besides 
stating on a public list that you intend to NOT comply with the laws 
established by regulatory agencies that affect you in a way you 
don't like).  Other than that one little issue, I'd guess you would 
be a great politician (and likely have more than $100 to show for 
it).



You'd not like me in politics.  I'm always this defensive of principle and 
always this blunt. 



I suggest you pass this on to the FCC and 

[WISPA] canopy 900

2007-03-08 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181

Hi All,

Had a customer call and ask some questions about canopy 900.  I've not used 
it and I'm not in his market.


So I'll pass along the questions

How high above the trees are you having to mount it?

How far into the trees can you go?  Can you get 1 mile, two, three

He's in an area with a lot of interference and lots of trees.

Thanks,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



--
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 long pings

2007-03-08 Thread Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless
Do a reset on the radio, reconfigure with IP only on Ethernet, see if you
get the same thing, if so, issues with cat5... 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Justin Wilson
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:20 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Mikrotik long pings

We just put up a mikrotik 532 with an sr2 card. This is an AP with the
ethernet and sr2 bridged.  At the bottom of the tower is actual mikrotik
router doing routing, dhcp, etc.

I have customers associated to the Ap which works fine. If I plug into
the ethernet at the bottom of the Ap I get weird pings. What I mean is this:

If I ping a customer whos is associated via wireless they are 4-10ms
average. 

If I ping the AP itself pings will jump up to 400ms dependent on how
much traffic is going through. When the ap goes to 400ms pings the customers
stay the same (4-10ms).

Any ideas why this is happening? It does not matter where I bind the ip
on the Ap. Pings are still weird.I am not too worried because customers are
getting their speed and their pings are great.

Thanks in advance,
Justin
--
Life is unfair, but root password Helps
---
Justin S. Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CCNA - A+ - CCNT - TAT - ACSA - COMTRAIN
MTIN.NET  Wireless - WISP Consulting - Tower Climbing
AOLIM: j2sw
WEB: http://www.mtin.net
Phone: 765.762.2851


-- 
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] Adelstein Blasts White House over Access to Broadband

2007-03-08 Thread Jack Unger



http://njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-NZEO1173296524287.html




--
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
FCC License # PG-12-25133
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[WISPA] More CALEA deadlines. Monday March 12th

2007-03-08 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181

Hi All,

Sigh.  More law enforcement fun due next week.

As you all know by now, we had to file an FCC form 445 a couple of weeks 
ago.  That was a form telling the FCC how we're doing at becoming CALEA 
compliant.  Now we have to tell them what our policies will be when we're 
hit with a CALEA action.  That's what Monday's filing is all about.


WISPA has worked on this issue with telecom attorney Kris Twomey.  He's 
worked with us WISPs for a long time and ran a plan past the WISPA board for 
SSI procedures.  We're recommending Kris' handbook as either your policy or 
a starting point for one of your own.


If you want Kris to help you you'll have to send him the following 
information:

Full company info.
example:
Marlon K. Schafer dBa Odessa Office Equipment
box 489
107 S. 1st Street
Odessa Wa.  99159
(509) 982-2181

Primary contact:
Marlon K. Schafer
office line
cell phone
pager

Alternate contact:

Hours available:
24/7 as cell phone coverage allows

Etc.

Kris has worked out a great platform for this.  The cost to have him file 
for you is $250.  If you are a WISPA member it's $100.  You'll have until 
March 12 to join

WISPA and get the WISPA rate...

Here's Kris' explanation of what this is and his contact info.  Please 
direct questions directly to Kris as I don't know enough about this to 
answer any :-)


First a little background. About a year ago, the FCC required all
facilities-based broadband and VoIP providers to ensure that they are
CALEA compliant by May 14, 2007. CALEA stands for Communications for
Law Enforcement Act, and previously only applied to telecommunications
carriers selling traditional voice services.  The FCC and FBI are
worried about the ability of bad guys and terrorists to use advanced
communications methods to avoid detection, resulting in this expansion
of CALEA.

There has been much discussion as to which companies are caught in this
requirement. WISPs are considered facilities-based providers because
WISPs build, manage, and control infrastructure used to provide
broadband to consumers. This is distinct from traditional ISPs that
purchase DSL transport from their local ILEC and sell DSL. Those ISPs
are not covered by CALEA, instead, their ILEC is responsible for
maintaining CALEA-compliant equipment. WISPs, however, are indeed
required to become CALEA compliant. WISPA and several vendors are
pursuing technical solutions for the WISP industry to adopt that will
meet this CALEA requirement.

In the meantime, the FCC established interim deadlines as part of the
CALEA compliance verification process. By February 12, 2007, all WISPs
should have filed a FCC Form 445 to alert the FCC as to the progress of
upgrading equipment to be CALEA compliant. By March 12, 2007, all WISPs
must file a System Security and Integrity Plan. The SSI Plan sets out
the policies and procedures that WISPs agree to follow when receiving
either a CALEA or Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) traffic
interception request from a law enforcement agency. The SSI also
identifies the employees of the WISP to whom a law enforcement agency
should contact with an interception request. The SSI that I drafted will
provide the FCC with proof that the filer has CALEA procedures in place.
It can also be used as a best practices guide for how WISPs should
handle requests from law enforcement agencies, paperwork requirements,
and record storage retention. The FCC has authorized fines of $10,000
per day for non-compliance, so this isn't just an annoying FCC request
that can be ignored.

As counsel to WISPA, I have created a template SSI Plan that satisfies
FCC requirements for WISPs. I am offering to file the SSI Plans for
WISPA members for the discounted fee of $100 each. Non-WISPA members may
also take advantage of a reasonable rate for filing of $250; only active
WISPA members get the discounted rate. I heard from one (new) client
that a large law firm quoted them a price of $7500 to make the filing. I
think that's unreasonable, borderline unethical, and is an example of
the type of business practice that led me to start my own firm five
years ago. Please feel free to pass this information along to anybody
that might be interested.

Kris
__
Kristopher E. Twomey
Telecom/Internet Law and Regulatory Consulting
www.lokt.net


Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Adelstein Blasts White House over Access to Broadband

2007-03-08 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
This is scary:

Also Tuesday, Adelstein urged the FCC to adopt network neutrality rules
designed to prevent broadband providers from potentially blocking or
degrading competing content on their high-speed pipes.


-- Obviously people don't realize that WISPs, unlike conventional ILEC based
DSL and others with peering agreements, have to PAY for bandwidth and just
don't get it by peering.

- Original Message - 
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:28 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Adelstein Blasts White House over Access to Broadband




 http://njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-NZEO1173296524287.html




 -- 
 Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 FCC License # PG-12-25133
 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
 Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com




 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 3/8/2007



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread wispa
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:24:12 -0800, Jack Unger wrote
 Mark and Butch,
 
 I want to thank both of you.
 
 I feared that the quality and tone of this discussion was taking a 
 negative turn but I WAS WRONG.
 
 I've found your discussion of the CALEA issue and the ramifications 
 to the WISP industry to be interesting, informative and valuable. 
 I'd like to commend both of you gentlemen for having the commitment 
 and the courage to share your opinions in this open forum.
 
 Your discussions have helped me to clarify the CALEA issues in my 
 mind. Hopefully it will help others to clarify their thinking as well.
 
 Although your political views may not be perfectly identical to each 
 other, I sense that you both respect the Constitution and the Rule 
 of Law and that you both want to do what you believe is correct.
 
 Thank you again.
 jack

Thanks Jack.  Pardon me while I say one last bit on this rant.

The RIGHT way this is to be done, is for the FCC to un rule we're 
telecommunications providers, the same for VOIP and so on, and let the DOJ 
and FBI go back to Congress, who re-writes the rules, and supplies the funds 
to implement whatever it is they really want, and complies with our 
Constitution.   

In the meantime, let them ask US how data extraction works, let US find ways 
it can be done, develop reasonable levels we should be required to go 
through to attempt to recover the data they want. 

Just like  CALEA did for the telcos,  they can fund the software changes and 
implementation costs - Let law enforcement come meet us and ask US how best 
to get ahold of data tehy want or need.

In the meantime, this idea of open-ended demands with obscure requirements 
and almost laughably vague language needs to be tossed down the drain. 

Let them develop ways and means of talking IP to us, let Congress fund that 
research so THEY do the conversions, not us or someone we're supposed to 
freaking PAY to do it for us, and then we need a target of what and how to 
deliver data.

Yeah, we're going to have to meeet with the FBI and DOJ and develop 
reasonable mechanisms... but  it should be them asking US, not us coming 
around with our hat in hand saying please don't bury us in costs for some 
arcane type of mechanism that's not even workable on our networks with a big 
hairy fine as a stick big enough to bury small guys like me.  One single 10K 
fine and i'm bankrupt.  And the rules offer no recourse.  Doesn't actually 
MATTER if you think you comply.  If it doesn't work in the end like they 
want, the fine can be levied anyway and capriciously.  This is wrong too... 
Vague laws are unconstituional, we all know that.   

But most of all, it needs to be voted in Congress.  Let Congress take the 
heat like they should, when they have to  vote to spy on your internet use - 
and require everyone to be ready.  

This whole thing is a tragedy of spineless beaurocrats.  Congress wrote a 
law, the law was obsolete in a very short period of time, but rather than get 
Congress to fix its own mess, the DOJ and FBI and FCC are attempting to 
misapply a law, and since they cannot spend federal money without Congress 
voting it for them, they're attempting to dump the cost on us.  The DOJ 
rather than face Congress and public opinion, sought to get a shortcut from 
the FCC, who rather than demand it be done right, simply sidestepped and 
dumped the responsibility to object UPON US, by writing patently wrong rules 
that deserve to lose instantly if legally challenged, so THEY didn't have to 
argue.  And we, ( Yeah, I consider myself guilty ) did not object.  Heck, we 
DIDNT EVEN KNOW BECAUSE WE WERE NOT LOOKING.  

This is wrong on so many levels, it reeks.  What's worse, is that it CAN lose 
in court, it can be challenged and beaten in court, and if that happens, then 
literally, the FBI And DOJ are without the legal tools they probably ought to 
have. 

I know, this isn't supposed to be a political list...and I'm not being 
partisan here.  We're businessmen second, after we're citizens.  We SHOULD 
object when stuff is done wrong.  Why do you think Congress appropriated 
money for CALEA in the first place?  Because no way could they have gotten 
away with NOT doing it.  

It's our ( collectively... including me ) fault for not objecting long ago... 
But if we don't, we have done ourselves a disservice.  We've done our country 
AND OURSELVES a disservice by letting bad law, bad precedent, bad policy be 
implemented that will eventually have bad results, probably for all involved.

If we don't object, if we don't stand up and make it be done right, we'll 
simply find more of the same piled on top of CALEA.  And we'll have set the 
precedent that it's perfectly fine and we'll cooperate.  IT WILL BE TOO LATE 
to set things right without a HUGE fight. 

We need the public on our side.  We need to get with the various legal groups 
who exist to help stop this kind of abuse.  We need to indicate both our 

RE: [WISPA] Adelstein Blasts White House over Access to Broadband

2007-03-08 Thread Faisal Imtiaz

I have a very tough time trying to figure out who is 'friendly' 
'Sympathetic' to the cause of the ISP's at the FCC.

After watching the 'process' and 'negotiations' which resulted in the
approval of ATT purchase of BellSouth, I cannot tell who did more 'damage'
to the ISP's , the Republican Commissioners for un-bashfully supporting THE
ILEC's agenda or the Democrat Commissioners who insisted that the ILEC offer
very low cost DSL Service / Naked DSL service at a very low cost only to the
consumers for at least a 2 year period !


My take so far is that the Republican Commissioners are hell bent on
'shooting' the ISP's and the Democrat Commissioners are following behind to
make sure that the ISP Coffins are double nailed shut, just incase the ISP's
reincarnate.

Yes, very scary ! Very very scary !. 

Watching these guys operate, it is getting harder and harder to believe
their line ah, we did not have any intentions to hurt you in the process,
we were just trying to fix things. 

Faisal Imtiaz
SnappyDSL.net
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:41 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Adelstein Blasts White House over Access to Broadband

This is scary:

Also Tuesday, Adelstein urged the FCC to adopt network neutrality rules
designed to prevent broadband providers from potentially blocking or
degrading competing content on their high-speed pipes.


-- Obviously people don't realize that WISPs, unlike conventional ILEC based
DSL and others with peering agreements, have to PAY for bandwidth and just
don't get it by peering.

- Original Message -
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:28 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Adelstein Blasts White House over Access to Broadband




 http://njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-NZEO1173296524287.html




 -- 
 Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 FCC License # PG-12-25133
 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
 Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com




 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 3/8/2007



-- 
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] Vonage to pay Verizon $58 million

2007-03-08 Thread Brian Rohrbacher

http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1470
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
I agree.  I see it this way too.  I can't see them forcing CALEA onto
hotspot operators like McDonalds, Starbucks, etc.  Technically they're a
WISP too.  I'll operate my service just like they do.  What about muni-WIFI?
How does CALEA play into that?

If this goes the wrong way, I'm going to convert all of my customers to
prepaid hotspot users, anonymous (nothing but a card #).  You take the
equipment, install it where you want and the most I'm going to know is that
it's on Tower B, Sector 3 and they have a 77% signal.

Go find them.

- Original Message - 
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi


 On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:24:12 -0800, Jack Unger wrote
  Mark and Butch,
 
  I want to thank both of you.
 
  I feared that the quality and tone of this discussion was taking a
  negative turn but I WAS WRONG.
 
  I've found your discussion of the CALEA issue and the ramifications
  to the WISP industry to be interesting, informative and valuable.
  I'd like to commend both of you gentlemen for having the commitment
  and the courage to share your opinions in this open forum.
 
  Your discussions have helped me to clarify the CALEA issues in my
  mind. Hopefully it will help others to clarify their thinking as well.
 
  Although your political views may not be perfectly identical to each
  other, I sense that you both respect the Constitution and the Rule
  of Law and that you both want to do what you believe is correct.
 
  Thank you again.
  jack

 Thanks Jack.  Pardon me while I say one last bit on this rant.

 The RIGHT way this is to be done, is for the FCC to un rule we're
 telecommunications providers, the same for VOIP and so on, and let the DOJ
 and FBI go back to Congress, who re-writes the rules, and supplies the
funds
 to implement whatever it is they really want, and complies with our
 Constitution.

 In the meantime, let them ask US how data extraction works, let US find
ways
 it can be done, develop reasonable levels we should be required to go
 through to attempt to recover the data they want.

 Just like  CALEA did for the telcos,  they can fund the software changes
and
 implementation costs - Let law enforcement come meet us and ask US how
best
 to get ahold of data tehy want or need.

 In the meantime, this idea of open-ended demands with obscure requirements
 and almost laughably vague language needs to be tossed down the drain.

 Let them develop ways and means of talking IP to us, let Congress fund
that
 research so THEY do the conversions, not us or someone we're supposed to
 freaking PAY to do it for us, and then we need a target of what and how to
 deliver data.

 Yeah, we're going to have to meeet with the FBI and DOJ and develop
 reasonable mechanisms... but  it should be them asking US, not us coming
 around with our hat in hand saying please don't bury us in costs for some
 arcane type of mechanism that's not even workable on our networks with a
big
 hairy fine as a stick big enough to bury small guys like me.  One single
10K
 fine and i'm bankrupt.  And the rules offer no recourse.  Doesn't actually
 MATTER if you think you comply.  If it doesn't work in the end like they
 want, the fine can be levied anyway and capriciously.  This is wrong
too...
 Vague laws are unconstituional, we all know that.

 But most of all, it needs to be voted in Congress.  Let Congress take the
 heat like they should, when they have to  vote to spy on your internet
use -
 and require everyone to be ready.

 This whole thing is a tragedy of spineless beaurocrats.  Congress wrote a
 law, the law was obsolete in a very short period of time, but rather than
get
 Congress to fix its own mess, the DOJ and FBI and FCC are attempting to
 misapply a law, and since they cannot spend federal money without Congress
 voting it for them, they're attempting to dump the cost on us.  The DOJ
 rather than face Congress and public opinion, sought to get a shortcut
from
 the FCC, who rather than demand it be done right, simply sidestepped and
 dumped the responsibility to object UPON US, by writing patently wrong
rules
 that deserve to lose instantly if legally challenged, so THEY didn't have
to
 argue.  And we, ( Yeah, I consider myself guilty ) did not object.  Heck,
we
 DIDNT EVEN KNOW BECAUSE WE WERE NOT LOOKING.

 This is wrong on so many levels, it reeks.  What's worse, is that it CAN
lose
 in court, it can be challenged and beaten in court, and if that happens,
then
 literally, the FBI And DOJ are without the legal tools they probably ought
to
 have.

 I know, this isn't supposed to be a political list...and I'm not being
 partisan here.  We're businessmen second, after we're citizens.  We SHOULD
 object when stuff is done wrong.  Why do you think Congress appropriated
 money for CALEA in the first place?  Because no way could they have gotten
 away with NOT doing it.

 It's 

Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread Blair Davis
For about 20% of my users, that is all I can do  packets from/to my 
MESH based towers I can't break down to individual users.  Some of 
them can't even be broken down to individual towers...


Doug Ratcliffe wrote:

I agree.  I see it this way too.  I can't see them forcing CALEA onto
hotspot operators like McDonalds, Starbucks, etc.  Technically they're a
WISP too.  I'll operate my service just like they do.  What about muni-WIFI?
How does CALEA play into that?

If this goes the wrong way, I'm going to convert all of my customers to
prepaid hotspot users, anonymous (nothing but a card #).  You take the
equipment, install it where you want and the most I'm going to know is that
it's on Tower B, Sector 3 and they have a 77% signal.

Go find them.

- Original Message - 
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi


  

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:24:12 -0800, Jack Unger wrote


Mark and Butch,

I want to thank both of you.

I feared that the quality and tone of this discussion was taking a
negative turn but I WAS WRONG.

I've found your discussion of the CALEA issue and the ramifications
to the WISP industry to be interesting, informative and valuable.
I'd like to commend both of you gentlemen for having the commitment
and the courage to share your opinions in this open forum.

Your discussions have helped me to clarify the CALEA issues in my
mind. Hopefully it will help others to clarify their thinking as well.

Although your political views may not be perfectly identical to each
other, I sense that you both respect the Constitution and the Rule
of Law and that you both want to do what you believe is correct.

Thank you again.
jack
  

Thanks Jack.  Pardon me while I say one last bit on this rant.

The RIGHT way this is to be done, is for the FCC to un rule we're
telecommunications providers, the same for VOIP and so on, and let the DOJ
and FBI go back to Congress, who re-writes the rules, and supplies the


funds
  

to implement whatever it is they really want, and complies with our
Constitution.

In the meantime, let them ask US how data extraction works, let US find


ways
  

it can be done, develop reasonable levels we should be required to go
through to attempt to recover the data they want.

Just like  CALEA did for the telcos,  they can fund the software changes


and
  

implementation costs - Let law enforcement come meet us and ask US how


best
  

to get ahold of data tehy want or need.

In the meantime, this idea of open-ended demands with obscure requirements
and almost laughably vague language needs to be tossed down the drain.

Let them develop ways and means of talking IP to us, let Congress fund


that
  

research so THEY do the conversions, not us or someone we're supposed to
freaking PAY to do it for us, and then we need a target of what and how to
deliver data.

Yeah, we're going to have to meeet with the FBI and DOJ and develop
reasonable mechanisms... but  it should be them asking US, not us coming
around with our hat in hand saying please don't bury us in costs for some
arcane type of mechanism that's not even workable on our networks with a


big
  

hairy fine as a stick big enough to bury small guys like me.  One single


10K
  

fine and i'm bankrupt.  And the rules offer no recourse.  Doesn't actually
MATTER if you think you comply.  If it doesn't work in the end like they
want, the fine can be levied anyway and capriciously.  This is wrong


too...
  

Vague laws are unconstituional, we all know that.

But most of all, it needs to be voted in Congress.  Let Congress take the
heat like they should, when they have to  vote to spy on your internet


use -
  

and require everyone to be ready.

This whole thing is a tragedy of spineless beaurocrats.  Congress wrote a
law, the law was obsolete in a very short period of time, but rather than


get
  

Congress to fix its own mess, the DOJ and FBI and FCC are attempting to
misapply a law, and since they cannot spend federal money without Congress
voting it for them, they're attempting to dump the cost on us.  The DOJ
rather than face Congress and public opinion, sought to get a shortcut


from
  

the FCC, who rather than demand it be done right, simply sidestepped and
dumped the responsibility to object UPON US, by writing patently wrong


rules
  

that deserve to lose instantly if legally challenged, so THEY didn't have


to
  

argue.  And we, ( Yeah, I consider myself guilty ) did not object.  Heck,


we
  

DIDNT EVEN KNOW BECAUSE WE WERE NOT LOOKING.

This is wrong on so many levels, it reeks.  What's worse, is that it CAN


lose
  

in court, it can be challenged and beaten in court, and if that happens,


then
  

literally, the FBI And DOJ are without the legal tools they probably ought


to
  

have.

Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
Maybe it's time to file to be a library or school...  I'm not an ISP - I'm
an informational internet research service providing services to students
who are enrolled in our access program.

Ridiculous... this is all ridiculous.

- Original Message - 
From: Blair Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi


 For about 20% of my users, that is all I can do  packets from/to my
 MESH based towers I can't break down to individual users.  Some of
 them can't even be broken down to individual towers...

 Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
  I agree.  I see it this way too.  I can't see them forcing CALEA onto
  hotspot operators like McDonalds, Starbucks, etc.  Technically they're a
  WISP too.  I'll operate my service just like they do.  What about
muni-WIFI?
  How does CALEA play into that?
 
  If this goes the wrong way, I'm going to convert all of my customers to
  prepaid hotspot users, anonymous (nothing but a card #).  You take the
  equipment, install it where you want and the most I'm going to know is
that
  it's on Tower B, Sector 3 and they have a 77% signal.
 
  Go find them.
 
  - Original Message - 
  From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
  Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:48 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
 
 
 
  On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:24:12 -0800, Jack Unger wrote
 
  Mark and Butch,
 
  I want to thank both of you.
 
  I feared that the quality and tone of this discussion was taking a
  negative turn but I WAS WRONG.
 
  I've found your discussion of the CALEA issue and the ramifications
  to the WISP industry to be interesting, informative and valuable.
  I'd like to commend both of you gentlemen for having the commitment
  and the courage to share your opinions in this open forum.
 
  Your discussions have helped me to clarify the CALEA issues in my
  mind. Hopefully it will help others to clarify their thinking as well.
 
  Although your political views may not be perfectly identical to each
  other, I sense that you both respect the Constitution and the Rule
  of Law and that you both want to do what you believe is correct.
 
  Thank you again.
  jack
 
  Thanks Jack.  Pardon me while I say one last bit on this rant.
 
  The RIGHT way this is to be done, is for the FCC to un rule we're
  telecommunications providers, the same for VOIP and so on, and let the
DOJ
  and FBI go back to Congress, who re-writes the rules, and supplies the
 
  funds
 
  to implement whatever it is they really want, and complies with our
  Constitution.
 
  In the meantime, let them ask US how data extraction works, let US find
 
  ways
 
  it can be done, develop reasonable levels we should be required to go
  through to attempt to recover the data they want.
 
  Just like  CALEA did for the telcos,  they can fund the software
changes
 
  and
 
  implementation costs - Let law enforcement come meet us and ask US how
 
  best
 
  to get ahold of data tehy want or need.
 
  In the meantime, this idea of open-ended demands with obscure
requirements
  and almost laughably vague language needs to be tossed down the drain.
 
  Let them develop ways and means of talking IP to us, let Congress fund
 
  that
 
  research so THEY do the conversions, not us or someone we're supposed
to
  freaking PAY to do it for us, and then we need a target of what and how
to
  deliver data.
 
  Yeah, we're going to have to meeet with the FBI and DOJ and develop
  reasonable mechanisms... but  it should be them asking US, not us
coming
  around with our hat in hand saying please don't bury us in costs for
some
  arcane type of mechanism that's not even workable on our networks with
a
 
  big
 
  hairy fine as a stick big enough to bury small guys like me.  One
single
 
  10K
 
  fine and i'm bankrupt.  And the rules offer no recourse.  Doesn't
actually
  MATTER if you think you comply.  If it doesn't work in the end like
they
  want, the fine can be levied anyway and capriciously.  This is wrong
 
  too...
 
  Vague laws are unconstituional, we all know that.
 
  But most of all, it needs to be voted in Congress.  Let Congress take
the
  heat like they should, when they have to  vote to spy on your internet
 
  use -
 
  and require everyone to be ready.
 
  This whole thing is a tragedy of spineless beaurocrats.  Congress wrote
a
  law, the law was obsolete in a very short period of time, but rather
than
 
  get
 
  Congress to fix its own mess, the DOJ and FBI and FCC are attempting to
  misapply a law, and since they cannot spend federal money without
Congress
  voting it for them, they're attempting to dump the cost on us.  The DOJ
  rather than face Congress and public opinion, sought to get a shortcut
 
  from
 
  the FCC, who rather than demand it be done right, simply sidestepped
and
  dumped the responsibility to object UPON US, by 

Re: [WISPA] tv whitespaces filings

2007-03-08 Thread Alan Cain

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
Good grief guys, there are only 12 new filings in the last week or 
so!!





I don't have a cute secretary like Mary, Marlon.
**200738030387**

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] tv whitespaces filings

2007-03-08 Thread wispa
On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:32:02 -0800, Alan Cain wrote
 Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:

Over time, I have attempted to respond to a number of things, and I NEVER 
find the page to do so.  The FCC has one of the most obscure organizational 
methods I have ever run into.  I remember having to follow someone else's 
link every time.  They do listen...  I found some things I said quoted near 
verbatim in the RO on 3650.  

maybe permanent links on the WISPA homepage for each filing would be good. 



  Good grief guys, there are only 12 new filings in the last week or 
  so!!
 
 
 
 I don't have a cute secretary like Mary, Marlon.
 **200738030387**
 
 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



Mark Koskenmaki   Neofast, Inc
Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains
541-969-8200

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] Vonage to pay Verizon $58 million

2007-03-08 Thread RickG

Your Opinion of Today's Vonage Patent Judgment?

   * Verizon=Patent Trolls. Vonage shouldn't have to pay them anything
   * Vonage should pay less, and have that apply as licensing fee
   * $58 million is about fair
   * Vonage should pay more
   * Verdicts such as these point to crying need for patent reform
   * Abolish most patents and go to licensing/royalty model
   * Some other opinion
***

On 3/8/07, Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1470
--
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] RE: [isp-wireless] More CALEA deadlines. Monday March 12th

2007-03-08 Thread Rick Smith
well, it's been awesome for us.   We've already sold a couple of hotspot
management packages locally just based on the fear that the FBI will come
knocking.

I'm really hoping that CALEA requirements settle down to allowing tcpdump /
ethereal captures...  This is what WISPA should be lobbying for ... It'll
create a grass-roots industry just to solve that problem, ala Y2k.

-Original Message-
From: Doug Ratcliffe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:38 PM
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com
Subject: Re: [isp-wireless] More CALEA deadlines. Monday March 12th

So are networks such as free muni-Wifi going to be CALEA also?  How would a
free network ever be CALEA compliant?  Is every hotspot out there going to
need CALEA compliance as well?   I mean, a paid hotspot operator behind a
firewall is just as much as WISP as we all are.  Should they be filing a
form 477 too?  What makes their facilities any less important than my
facilities?   If I operate a hotspot-style network, do I become exempt for
CALEA?  I'd like to see Starbucks, McDonalds, Krystals, Dennys be forced to
install CALEA equipment... Yeah right.  I ought to just operate a totally
anonymous prepaid hotspot network and then I won't worry about subpoenas
because I have no information.

I just don't understand this, in one breath the government says The US is
behind the rest of the world in broadband growth  and in the next breath
they say Buy this super-expensive equipment in order to operate.  Next,
they drag around with 3650, make it NOT usable with current 3.5 equipment
that's TDD/FDD.  They offer USF to telcos but not us to expand into rural
areas.  I'm starting to think they don't want us little guys around.  We've
got broken equipment on towers we don't have money to replace.  Now they
want us to buy something that will be used on less than 75 customers that
are all legitimate businesses anyways.

This is ridiculous.

- Original Message - 
From: S.Y.W.S.S. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: [isp-wireless] More CALEA deadlines. Monday March 12th


 What is the form number of this now?.

 Their site doesn't really help with the key word search.

 What if you already told the FCC back in Feb you were not going to be
 compliant
 by March ??, and they already talked to you about it?

 We have your information, if anything comes up with your service we have
 your contact
 information.

 I told them there was no way I could afford, the software, hardware of TTP
 service. I also
 told them I would have to have them provide financial aid if it was ever
 required I be compliant
 as per their own section for subsidizing the costs.

 Also the way I understand it, if you have good customers. We have only
 received a court order
 once for emails relating to one user in 12 years. Simple live forward
worked
 great. They received
 a copy of every email they sent and received. Might not have much to worry
 about anyway.

 We cut their access after it was done.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com
 Cc: wireless@wispa.org; isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com
 Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 2:32 PM
 Subject: [isp-wireless] More CALEA deadlines. Monday March 12th


  Hi All,
 
  Sigh.  More law enforcement fun due next week.
 
  As you all know by now, we had to file an FCC form 445 a couple of weeks
  ago.  That was a form telling the FCC how we're doing at becoming CALEA
  compliant.  Now we have to tell them what our policies will be when
we're
  hit with a CALEA action.  That's what Monday's filing is all about.
 
  WISPA has worked on this issue with telecom attorney Kris Twomey.  He's
  worked with us WISPs for a long time and ran a plan past the WISPA board
  for SSI procedures.  We're recommending Kris' handbook as either your
  policy or a starting point for one of your own.
 
  If you want Kris to help you you'll have to send him the following
  information:
  Full company info.
  example:
  Marlon K. Schafer dBa Odessa Office Equipment
  box 489
  107 S. 1st Street
  Odessa Wa.  99159
  (509) 982-2181
 
  Primary contact:
  Marlon K. Schafer
  office line
  cell phone
  pager
 
  Alternate contact:
 
  Hours available:
  24/7 as cell phone coverage allows
 
  Etc.
 
  Kris has worked out a great platform for this.  The cost to have him
file
  for you is $250.  If you are a WISPA member it's $100.  You'll have
until
  March 12 to join
  WISPA and get the WISPA rate...
 
  Here's Kris' explanation of what this is and his contact info.  Please
  direct questions directly to Kris as I don't know enough about this to
  answer any :-)
 
  First a little background. About a year ago, the FCC required all
  facilities-based broadband and VoIP providers to ensure that they are
  CALEA compliant by May 14, 2007. CALEA stands for Communications for
  Law Enforcement Act, and 

[WISPA] RE: [isp-wireless] More CALEA deadlines. Monday March 12th

2007-03-08 Thread Rick Smith
I've been there with the crew, before the days of WISPA, but I don't get
down there much, cause I don't have the time / money :)

When I do, I will!

-Original Message-
From: geowires [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 12:02 AM
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com
Subject: Re: [isp-wireless] More CALEA deadlines. Monday March 12th

Rick Smith wrote:
 well, it's been awesome for us.   We've already sold a couple of hotspot
 management packages locally just based on the fear that the FBI will come
 knocking.
 

There is a good group going back to DC the 2nd I believe.
Lets see what they bring back.
Why haven't you gone to DC for WISPA, your just an Amtrack away?

George

** ISPCON Spring 2007 - May 23 - 25- Orlando, FL  www.ispcon.com **

** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **

** The best money you'll spend on your business all year- Save $100 until
Friday, March 30! **

___   The ISP-WIRELESS Discussion List   ___
To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-wireless/archives/
To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.

Copyright 2005 Jupitermedia Corporation All Rights Reserved.

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi

2007-03-08 Thread Peter R.

wispa wrote:

The RIGHT way this is to be done, is for the FCC to un rule we're 
telecommunications providers, the same for VOIP and so on, and let the DOJ 
and FBI go back to Congress, who re-writes the rules, and supplies the funds 
to implement whatever it is they really want, and complies with our 
Constitution.   
 


Yeah, that will happen.

The FCC realizes that the PSTN is tipping and that we still have a need 
to catch terrorists and pedophiles.


But hey that's just my rational take on it.

I'm at VPF where SS8 and Acme Packet have gone over Lawful Intercept 
extensively.


Want a copy of the PowerPoint?
You have to send me you contact info.


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] Adelstein Blasts White House over Access to Broadband

2007-03-08 Thread Peter R.

Faisal Imtiaz wrote:


I have a very tough time trying to figure out who is 'friendly' 
'Sympathetic' to the cause of the ISP's at the FCC.
 

What you all have to remember is that the FTC and the FCC are supposed 
to watch over the CONSUMERS.

Not small businesses, but the end user.

--


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/