On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 07:20:39PM -0800, James Ewing wrote:
>    "IMO, people should reject irresponsible power hacks like these. There
>    is really a lot at stake for the open-source community, which needs to
>    build  trust with the FCC and the 802.11 manufacturers by proving that
>    they
>    will  not  propagate  device  drivers  that operate radios outside the
>    legal
>    power  limits.  It  is hard enough to get 802.11 docs for open source,
>    now;
>    if the community's earns a reputation for sloppiness and recklessness,
>    it will be even worse."
> 
>    This is neither irresponsible nor reckless. The 84 mw setting is legal
>    even  in  the  EU,  where  output  is  limited  to  100  mw max. It is
>    far below the  North  American  max  of  4W and 1/3 the setting of the
>    popular 200 mw Senao cards.
> 
>    The Sveasoft code is completely open source.
> 
>    IMO people shouldn't spread groundless FUD.

Unless you know that the card in question is type-accepted for that
amount of output power, and can produce it *cleanly*, then you
shouldn't be asserting that it's ok.

And I suspect you *don't*, in fact, know that.

Enough, as we used to say, "to bet your license on".

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the Technical Staff     Baylink                             RFC 2100
The Suncoast Freenet         The Things I Think
Tampa Bay, Florida        http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

        Come see Linux Gazette in our new home: www.linuxgazette.net!
--
general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to