The form does not mean that you are compliant. It's simply to let the FCC
know where you are at in the process. Just tell them where you are at in
getting compliant. You need to tell them what your plan is.
Laters,
marlon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martha Huizenga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 445
Ideas about how to fill out the form if you don't know how you would
comply yet? Does anyone know if this is a required field? Can you just put
"not sure yet"? Are there industry standards - can we put that we would
follow the WISPA standard if it is not yet written?
I appreciate the links from people - Cisco - works if you have Cisco
installed and NetTap, not sure if this works for me or not yet.
Martha
John Scrivner wrote:
I have not spent one penny on CALEA yet. I know I will but I bet it will
not be much and I bet this will all look like "sky is falling" dialog
when it is all said and done. I remember the day that K-Mart said they
were going to give away free dialup nationwide. I think that was around
2000. Now that scared me. Funny thing was I grew more that month than any
other prior. CALEA does not scare me at all. The only thing the "big
boys" are getting from all of this is a good laugh at folks who decide
this is going to be a make or break for them. Fear is not worthy of your
time. Stop worrying and run your business. Let WISPA take the heat of
making CALEA something you can dodge with ease. That is our job. If CALEA
takes more than $250 bucks out of your pocket and 2 hours away from your
business then I will feel I have not done a very good job. I could be
wrong but you know what? I am not going to worry about it. :-)
Scriv
Rick Smith wrote:
Was it "being alarmist" to shout "the redcoats are coming!" ?
I understand no one knows the format of the data yet. But the truth is
that CALEA is an attempt to put the trigger there,
get us to go broke funding it, and let "them" pull it any time they
want...
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Butch Evans
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 3:40 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Form 445
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, wispa wrote:
Uhmm, Butch... No, they're not "asking for a means". They're
insisting that we build the tap into our network, at our expense, prior
to a request ( whether we got any requests or not ), to provide them
data in a specific form.
And what form is that data going to take? You don't know. You are
being alarmist, in that you are getting bent out of shape over something
you don't even KNOW. THAT is what I said.
The FACT is that the government MUST have a means to gathering
information for criminal prosecutions. Even you can't deny that. That
means (when it comes to Internet traffic) MUST happen at the ISP level.
WHY? Because MANY ISPs HIDE THEIR CUSTOMERS. It happens behind every
ISP who decides that NAT is "necessary". Sorry, but that is one thing
that makes it necessary for them to gather data on YOUR network. They
HAVE to be able to gather data on a specific suspect.
THAT is precisely what I said, nothing more, and nothing less.
REALLY? Maybe when I read these words from YOUR email address, it was a
government conspiracy that sent them to point the finger at you. Here
are SOME of the things you said:
<SNIP>
I said that not resisting regulation would kill us.
The process has begun. We marched in to be fleeced, smiling and
bleating
softly.
Been nice knowing you folks.
</SNIP>
and here
<SNIP>
the federal govenrment has just taken wholesale control of the ISP
business.
</SNIP>
and here
<SNIP>
You can bet that any "industry" standard derived will derived with the
input from the telecoms to bankrupt as many small ISP's as possible.
I predict that in 2 years there will not be enough WISP's left to fund
WISPA at all, unless the dues go up on the order 20 to 50 times.
</SNIP>
and here
<SNIP>
we need to work at launching the largest "industry and public" backlash
ever, to end this sort of stuff...
</SNIP>
Perhaps I'm the only one reading "alarmist" into your words...
Up to this point, the LEA's had to pony up the means of tapping and
grabbing the data they wanted. Which, in my view, is fair and
equitable. Why should we all pay for and design a network around some
system few will ever use?
Read the documentation again...I'm not here to educate you, but the fact
is that your network is NOT going to have to be "designed around"
anything.
CALEA was NOT written for ISP's or VOIP. The FCC and DOJ have
broadened its meaning all on their own.
No, it wasn't written for that purpose. But, the world is not the same
as it was when the CALEA laws were penned. Times change and so do the
laws. My only suggestion is to do 2 things:
1. Like it or not, the law is the law, and you MUST follow it. If you
decide to break the law, I hope you are caught and punished.
2. Don't ASSUME (you know about that word, right?) that every law is a
government conspiracy to put you out of business.
OH...it wouldn't hurt if you'd take your meds...
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
