discussed in my original post, from a
technical standpoint.
Thanks,
Adam
- Original Message -
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:17:09 -0400, Dawn DiPietro wrote
Mark,
Wireless providers DO have to comply with CALEA whether you like it
or not.
As quoted from the link I sent you earlier;
Nor does our interpretation of section 332 of the Communications
Act and its implementing regulations
http://forum.mikrotik.com/search.php?mode=resultssid=723d81c229563812d900d2
0b3a31a900
Ralph
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance
should
follow the original intent of the Constitution...but that cat left the bag
decades ago.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of wispa
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:29:18 -0400, Jeff Broadwick wrote
Mark,
Right or wrong, Congress regularly delegates rule-making to the various
agencies. They pass laws that are purposely vague and/or broad and they
empower the various agencies (and the courts, ultimately) to fill in
the blanks.
=resultssid=723d81c229563812d900d2
0b3a31a900
Ralph
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Hi,
While I appreciate Mark's comments
Mark,
Enough with the analogies.
CALEA is law - not once but twice - 1934 and 1996.
Courts have upheld the FCC decision on what CALEA covers.
The same laws that give the DOJ the right to wiretap, gives the FCC the
right to create guidelines.
I don't like it, any more than I like ATT letting
@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need to--or want to--do at each individual CPE or router. Likewise,
although assistance from manufacturors is nice, it is not requisite
Clint Ricker wrote:
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need to--or want to--do at each individual CPE or router.
Wouldn't it be cool, and cheap, if it was just that easy?
Here's your encrypted access to xxx customers radio / port, it's yours
to monitor...?
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need to--or want to--do at each individual CPE or router. Likewise,
although assistance from manufacturors is nice, it is not requisite
and in some ways may
There are 3rd party vendors, like IP Fabrics with CALEA compliance gear.
For data it shouldn't be that big of a deal since the Edge Router
(connecting your WAN with your upstream) should be able to be tapped, if
you use what I will call a brand name (Cisco, Juniper, Redback, blah,
blah and
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods- For Clint
Hello Clint.
You are confusing me. When I mention MT, I said routers, not CPE. We
don't
use non type accepted CPE and therefore don't have
Blair,
Two months ago, we were ready to join WISPA. At the time, I felt that
WISPA had proven its longevity and was becoming a mature voice for the
WISP's. But, after the form 477 issue, FCC sticker issue, and now
the CALEA issue, I'm pretty sure that I disagree with the majority of
the
Blair Davis wrote:
Because at WISPA, we don't have to all think the same and have the same
opinions all in step. We're not clones. We're individuals who each have
our own beliefs and run our operation individually, sometimes uniquely
And fortunately WISPA is an organization made up of
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:20:15 -0400, Blair Davis wrote
I've been watching this discussion for a bit.
Up front, I have to say I agree with Mark.
Say the FBI and DOJ wanted a way to track any automobile in the
country in real time, (so the bad guys can't hide their movements).
They go to
George
As to form 477 and CALEA, no, no one has spoken of making membership
contingent on their position on these issues.
But, I do recall a discussion, on this list, 'Dealing with bad players',
starting on Feb 8, that basically proposed requiring the use of
stickered equipment to be a
Sounds vagely familiar,
Like I said, from my opinion, wispa would not be an industry association
Remember once had a guy selling jock straps with the wispa logo thinking
that was a good idea too.
Blair Davis wrote:
George
As to form 477 and CALEA, no, no one has spoken of making
Inline
wispa wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:20:15 -0400, Blair Davis wrote
I've been watching this discussion for a bit.
Up front, I have to say I agree with Mark.
Say the FBI and DOJ wanted a way to track any automobile in the
country in real time, (so the bad guys can't hide
Mark,
Right in time.
WISPA will be having elections in the very near future.
Now is the time to join WISPA and be eligible to cast your vote or run
for a board seat.
Membership is a very low 250.00 per year.
And you get to vote!
Try the new automated sign up:
We're close guys. Just waiting to get a doc fine tuned and double checked.
marlon
- Original Message -
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
I bet
, here?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Clint Ricker
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:31 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you
need
linked to from the Mikrotik
threads:
http://contributions.atis.org/UPLOAD/PTSC/LAES/PTSC-LAES-2006-084R8.doc ...
Adam
- Original Message -
From: Ralph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] CALEA compliance
Butch Evans wrote:
This is not acceptable. ALL facilities based service providers are
required to be compliant.
How is using a 3rd party not compliant? I seem to recall the FCC
specifically allows for 3rd parties to provide your compliance.
-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 5:25 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:49:43 -0400, Adam Greene wrote
Hi,
As a new member of WISPA I am reading with interest all of the
postings about CALEA from the past few weeks.
Thankfully, we have designed our network in such a way that all
customer IP traffic passes through at least one Cisco
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 19:49:43 -0400, Adam Greene wrote
extracting a snippet from Adam's interesting prose
A: No. The petition proposes CALEA coverage of only broadband Internet access
service and broadband telephony service. Other Internet-based services,
including those classified as
Mark, your info is 3 years old
We have to be ready to tap our lines. Even IMs.
marlon
- Original Message -
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
On Mon, 26 Mar
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
Anyone that was at the meeting yesterday care to comment on this
approach?
I wasn't there, but my understanding from those that were:
Matt Wrote:
It may also be of interest to note that companies such as
ourselves have the
It may also be of interest to note that companies such as ourselves have
the ability to provide lawful intercept in compliance with CALEA for our
single-homed downstream ISP customers assuming there is no NAT involved.
-Matt
Peter R. wrote:
ISP-Planet has a blurb on CALEA:
WISPs take note:
]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 7:10 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA
It may also be of interest to note
: [WISPA] CALEA
It may also be of interest to note that companies such as ourselves
have the ability to provide lawful intercept in compliance with CALEA
for our single-homed downstream ISP customers assuming there is no
NAT involved.
-Matt
Peter R. wrote:
ISP-Planet has a blurb on CALEA
LAES = lawfully authorized electronic surveillance
Frank Muto
Co-founder WBIA
www.wbia.us
- Original Message -
From: Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 1:31 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Calea - what will we need
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Rick Smith wrote:
Is there anywhere online that actually states WHAT we will need to
provide ?
I.e. data format, etc. - It was my impression that this was still
under discussion at the FBI...
The exact format and method of delivery has not been decided. There
are
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, wispa wrote:
There is a specific data format, called LAES, which is an acronym
for something or other.
LAES is a delivery protocol, not data format.
As best I can tell, this format costs a license fee if you wish to
program something to use it. Thus, NO OPEN SOURCE IS
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:07:33 -0400, Rick Smith wrote
Is there anywhere online that actually states WHAT we will need to
provide ?
I.e. data format, etc. - It was my impression that this was still under
discussion at the FBI...
There is a specific data format, called LAES, which is an
Ken never called me back and here is one big deadline today, anyone know how to
call him?
Forbes
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of wispa
Sent: Mon 3/12/2007 10:33 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Calea - what will we need to provide
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 2:05 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Calea - how to reach Ken
Ken never called me back and here is one big deadline today, anyone know how
to call him?
Forbes
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi Peter,
I'd like to see the powerpoints!
Dylan Oliver
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
608-588-8010
PO Box 668
Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives:
During the Brand-X Supreme Court case, the DEA, the FBI and the DOJ
clearly spelled out that ISP and VoIP traffic would need to be CALEA
compliant. It isn't the FCC, it is the DOJ.
Your statements take us back to all the lobbying efforts that CLEC's
and ISP's have ever done:
Don't regulate
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:47:20 -0400, Peter R. wrote
During the Brand-X Supreme Court case, the DEA, the FBI and the DOJ
clearly spelled out that ISP and VoIP traffic would need to be CALEA
compliant. It isn't the FCC, it is the DOJ.
Oh, please. The DOJ doesn't write law. the DOJ wants
wispa wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:47:20 -0400, Peter R. wrote
During the Brand-X Supreme Court case, the DEA, the FBI and the DOJ
clearly spelled out that ISP and VoIP traffic would need to be CALEA
compliant. It isn't the FCC, it is the DOJ.
Oh, please. The DOJ doesn't write
Peter R. wrote:
You guys do complain loudly but do very little action.
It is left to the few to fight for the many.
It's very lonely out here, wish more wisps would get past the 250.00 and
join wispa so that we can make things happen.
--
George Rogato
Welcome to WISPA
www.wispa.org
Also what wispa really needs is some wisps that want to be active in
wispa and set some programs up that would serve them and the industry.
One such program that we tried to get going was a promotional committee
that would promote wisps in their market place.
Sounds good?
Only two wisps
As a matter of fact, to give Peter R. some pay back for helping us.
Do you guys know that he is the man to get you great pricing on
bandwidth, just about anyplace in the country.
So there is a plug for Peter R. and his ability to help you buy better.
George
George Rogato wrote:
Also what
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Calea - what will we need to provide ?
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:47:20 -0400, Peter R. wrote
During the Brand-X Supreme Court case, the DEA, the FBI and the DOJ
clearly spelled out that ISP and VoIP traffic would need to be CALEA
compliant. It isn't the FCC, it is the DOJ.
Oh
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 5:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Calea - what will we need to provide ?
I see little benefit to protesting the Calea/DOJ judgement, as compliance is
a mute point, if it were easy and cost effective to comply.
A preferred
Peter R. wrote:
During the Brand-X Supreme Court case, the DEA, the FBI and the DOJ
clearly spelled out that ISP and VoIP traffic would need to be CALEA
compliant. It isn't the FCC, it is the DOJ.
Your statements take us back to all the lobbying efforts that CLEC's
and ISP's have ever done:
How does the introductory reference to cable operators seeming immunity to
this in this document square with these discussions?
http://www.scte.org/documents/standards/approved/ANSISCTE24132006.pdf
. . . j o n a t h a n
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:55:18 -0500, Sam Tetherow wrote
Peter R. wrote:
During the Brand-X Supreme Court case, the DEA, the FBI and the DOJ
clearly spelled out that ISP and VoIP traffic would need to be CALEA
compliant. It isn't the FCC, it is the DOJ.
Your statements take us back to
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:08:10 -0500, Jonathan Schmidt wrote
The question is... if we're not providing VOIP service, doesn't this apply to
the VOIP provider, and not me?
How does the introductory reference to cable operators seeming
immunity to this in this document square with these
LAES stands for; lawfully authorized electronic surveillance.
Frank Muto
WBIA www.wbia.us
P.S. Also a supporting WISPA vendor.
- Original Message -
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA
Sam Tetherow wrote:
Peter R. wrote:
During the Brand-X Supreme Court case, the DEA, the FBI and the DOJ
clearly spelled out that ISP and VoIP traffic would need to be CALEA
compliant. It isn't the FCC, it is the DOJ.
Your statements take us back to all the lobbying efforts that
CLEC's and
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
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
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
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
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
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
, 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
]
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
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
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 10:35:29 -0800, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote
Hi All,
We have a meeting set up for the 22nd in Va. I have 4 people set
to go to it at this time but I'd like a 5th. I'm after a network
admin type. Anyone have the time and recourses available? Or if
I missed
)And I run my own wisp!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 10:35:29 -0800, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote
Hi
businesses.
Regards,
Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.
- Original Message - From: wispa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
I know several sites where I can reach millions who
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of wispa
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 3:23 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 10:35:29 -0800, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
wrote
Hi All,
We have a meeting set up for the 22nd in Va. I have 4 people set
(509) 982-2181
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 1:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
Sigh.
First, the mission statement for WISPA, just so's we're all on the same
page
about motivations:
Wireless Internet Service Providers Association is dedicated
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
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:36:20 -0800, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote
Sigh.
First, the mission statement for WISPA, just so's we're all on the
same page about motivations: Wireless Internet Service Providers
Association is dedicated to promoting and improving the WISP industry.
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 21:44:56 +, Ron Wallace wrote
I'm with you Marlon. I support your position.
However, if I am all the support you have you better use a cane.
Ron Wallace
I dunno if you've met Marlon, but he's got pretty decent legs of his own...
he'll be alright :)
H, interesting idea!
I believe there is something not too far from that on my phone bills
already.
marlon
How about all of the other things you will have to do in order to
operate your business- especially taxes and insurance. Did you put them
into your business plan? If so, then
Fourth, certainly I know I'm not speaking for all WISPs. I'm
speaking for WISPA. YOU get to choose whether or not you wish to
agree. You can always file a statement saying you don't agree and
why. The FCC loves to hear from us. Last I knew the IEEE never
asked for my opinion on a standard
that come to
mind real fast)
Mac
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 3:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
Sigh.
First, the mission
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mac Dearman
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 7:02 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
Thank you Marlon!
I can now delete my saved response that I had composed earlier and was
contemplating sending. Anyone can respond better than I as I
OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482
Founding Member of WISPA-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Mac Dearman Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 7:02 PM To:
'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi
Thank
Folks,
I do not want to rant or in anyway fan flames here,
but I Do want to ask the question:
What are the Big Kids doing about CALEA and the
talk seeping out, about data monitoring / logging from DOJ?
Earthlink, AOL (and it's clones), MSN, ATT?
Are those guys on the
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 22:16:38 -0600, Dave Brenton wrote
Folks,
I do not want to rant or in anyway fan flames here,
but I Do want to ask the question:
What are the Big Kids doing about CALEA and the
talk seeping out, about data monitoring / logging from DOJ?
Earthlink, AOL
Gee, has this ever happened to someone on a cell phone?
-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2007 10:03 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA opinion... it's nice to know
Not to change the subject, but
on that page
On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 19:01:16 +, John J. Thomas wrote
Gee, has this ever happened to someone on a cell phone?
I have dialed 911 and had the call dropped.
I guess I should sue the cell phone company and lobby Congress to ensure 911
calls cannot be dropped.
Or maybe that's patently
PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2007 11:32 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: Vonage WasRe: [WISPA] CALEA opinion... it's nice to know
On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 19:01:16 +, John J. Thomas wrote
Gee, has this ever happened to someone on a cell phone?
I have dialed 911 and had the call
Not to change the subject, but
on that page, I fund this a lot more disturbing..
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/03/vonage_fire.html
wispa wrote:
That at least SOME people agree with me.
http://blogs.globalcrossing.com/regulatory?from=50
The second entry on that page is very
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 10:03:58 -0800, George Rogato wrote
Not to change the subject, but
on that page, I fund this a lot more disturbing..
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/03/vonage_fire.html
Dang! Let's just outlaw VOIP!
Problem solved.
It will be awfully hard to be compliant by Feb. 2nd when the government is
planning to release the compliance standard at the end of February.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ross Cornett
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:29 AM
Yes. We're working on this from a couple of different angles.
First, we've got a couple of lawyers (one an ex wisp) working on an FAQ or
whitepaper so that we all know exactly what the law says, in layman's terms.
Second, we've been talking to the FCC and FBI. We'll likely end up
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 11:01 AM
To: Mario Pommier
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea
Hi Mario,
You just have to be crazy enough to volunteer :-)
sign up here: http://signup.wispa.org/wispa-newacct.html
Rick's opinions don't count for anything! roflol
for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us
- Original Message - From: Rick Harnish
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 8:24 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] calea
That was my understanding as well Scott. I
My understanding is that the law requires one of three particular
protocols/formats and TCPDump is not one of them. And, store and
forward is not an option.
Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote:
Sounds simple enough. Any MT can stream packets a packet capture device.
As far as VPN, that's
] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 7:46 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea
My understanding is that the law requires one of three particular
protocols/formats and TCPDump is not one of them. And, store and
forward is not an option.
Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless
PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 8:24 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] calea
That was my understanding as well Scott. I can't seem to remember what
formats they said were ok to use, do you?
Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc
Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
There are already standards in place on what and how to do this for
the DSL industry, cable is working on a standard. The conversation
was more technical than I can recall word for word, but it sounds like
it would be a very very good idea for us to
Marlon, if your subscriber is downstream of a switch, you may be able to use
VACLs http://www.ciscopress.com/articles/article.asp?p=25329seqNum=3rl=1
For this. Given that you can pick the subscriber/subscribers and just hose
mirror copies of all their packets out a switch interface...maybe good
101 - 191 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
