I have seen numerous posts on the WISPA list indicating that a cost
effective and compliant solution for this issue was being worked on and
would become available in the near future.
|| I think that is wishful thinking on some people's part. When you see
|| companies like Cisco struggle to provide a minimum of support on a small
|| subset of their products you can begin to imagine the scope of the
|| problem. Every post I have seen where people have suggest a solution,
the
|| suggestion only solved one specific part of CALEA. Solving part of the
|| problem is not enough.
Actually you have to remember that a CALEA request will pracitcally
never touch upon all the different information that CALEA defines. The
only real time streaming requirement is VoIP and similar protocols.
In all other cases a competent *nix wizard could script a basic sniffer
solution in an afternoon, which would satisfy the intercept requirement in
any collection scenario that does not include a real time component.
The CALEA compliance committee clearly stated that the LEAs are
going to be working with the ISP to help them satisfy the subpoena.
They further said that they would usually be working with the ISP even
before a subpoena would be issued.
I have seen numerous posts indicating that small providers should not be
concerned and that attaining CALEA compliance would not put them out of
business.
|| I would argue that small providers should be very concerned. Not just
|| about CALEA, but a concerted effort on the part of large telcos to ruin
|| competition through seemingly legimate public safety issues.
This is true, but this issue is not one of the ones the telco's are using.
Sadly, CALEA was originally intended for circuit switched networks only
unfortunately the LEAs worked in concert to convince the FCC that it
should also apply to packet switched networks. This is primarily due to
the fact that VoIP and other real time communications protocols were
rapidly migrating to the IP world. There was not time to get congress
to address the packet switched world with a new law.
The facts remain that our business model currently is profitable and we
are
providing a valuable service in a rural area. The added costs of CALEA
compliance jeopardize our ability to continue providing service. Who
needs
to explain to the hundreds of happy customers I currently service in a
rural
community that they no longer have high speed internet and don't have an
alternative broadband solution?
|| Unfortunately, many consumers will lose as small companies go under.
This
|| won't be the first policy that is designed for the good of the many as
|| opposed to the few. It isn't fair, but it is done.
Small companies will not go under in becoming CALEA compliant. First the
smaller you are the less likely it is that you will *ever* be subject to a
subpoena. Second, the smaller you are the *easier* it will be to
satisfy the
subpoena because you will likely *know* the target personally. Your network
architecture will be important but CALEA does not permit the LEAs to
require to have to significantly modify your network. Read the FAQ.
If someone has better information on how a small ISP can become CALEA
compliant in a cost effective manner, please contact me as I am all ears.
If there is better information or a defined solution being presented on
the
WISPA member list, I am more than willing to pay membership dues to
access
it. If there isn't a better solution being discussed there, I would just
as
well save the due money as it will probably not be long before we are out
of
business or sell to a larger competitor and the membership will be
useless.
Save the dues money. It will probably be all you need to become
compliant. :(
|| I personally do not believe that any CALEA can be cost effective. Quite
|| simply, solving CALEA requires spending money without earning any
|| additional revenue. The only way to justify the CALEA expense is to
accept
|| it as a cost of doing business. This means simply that your market
|| opportunity is lost if you aren't CALEA compliant. I firmly believe
every
|| service provider should have plans for being CALEA compliant or have
plans
|| for exiting the business. This one is different than E911; the liability
|| will be staggering.
If you did not file your 477, why not? If you want a voice with the FCC
they
need to know we exist. The FCC states that they have only had about 400
wireless ISPs file their 477s. There is also a pretty good estimate
that there
are about 4000 wireless ISPs. If we want the FCC to listen to us as much as
they listen to the ILECs, we need to make as much noise as the ILEC's. If
we prove to them that we don't care what they do (and not filing that 477
speaks volumes in that regard), what are they to do?
People, CALEA is not going to kill your business. Read the FAQ. Discuss
the FAQ. This ripping of the vestments and beating of the breasts is for
fear mongers and sheep. We are neither.
CALEA is a DONE DEAL. Whining about it is NOT going to help anyone.
Whining about it is NOT going to FIX anything. Whining about it is NOT
going to help anyone become compliant.
-m-
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
