On 10/6/14, 8:41 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Actually, in multiple situations, the FCC has stated that you are responsible
> when deploying a new unlicensed transmitter to insure that it is deployed in
> such a way that it will not cause harmful interference to existing operations.
>
> Using the sam
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Clay Fiske wrote:
>>legitimate right to claim that other wifi networks were impacting their own
>>network’s performance, specifically based on the FCC’s position that a new
>> transmitter should not disrupt existi
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Clay Fiske wrote:
>legitimate right to claim that other wifi networks were impacting their own
>network’s performance, specifically based on the FCC’s position that a new
> transmitter should not disrupt existing operations. I was not in any way
>intending to say t
Bugger. Just realized I got the document names wrong.
I'll just keep going with the wrong values, and
pretend I didn't copy the dates from last time
by mistake. ^_^;
http://nanog.cluepon.net/index.php/NANOG62aft2
Thanks! :)
Matt
Sorry, lunch was a bit short today, so
didn't have time to post URL to morning
notes over lunch as usual, sorry about
that. ^_^;;
Matt
http://nanog.cluepon.net/index.php/NANOG62morn2
On Oct 6, 2014, at 1:16 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>
> Hi Clay,
>
> It isn't that simple. Marriott offended against multiple laws and
> regulations in multiple jurisdictions.
>
> The FCC's concern is use of the spectrum. This they addressed --
> intentionally preventing others' use of the spec
in case anyone can help resolve
traceroute6 www.socialsecurity.gov
traceroute6: Warning: www.socialsecurity.gov has multiple addresses; using
2001:1930:c01::
traceroute6 to www.socialsecurity.gov (2001:1930:c01::) from
2607:f2f8:a8e0::2, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets
1 2607:f2f8:a8e0::1
Two other places that might be worth a visit:
(taking care to leave torches and pitchforks behind)
The National Cryptologic Museum is located next to the National Security
Agency HQ. It's really not that far away.
https://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic_heritage/museum/
The B&O Train Museum is a
On 10/06/2014 02:39 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 10/6/14 10:11 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
Fort McHenry
If you're a fan of history,...
And if you can make it to the inner harbor area, on the west side of the
Aquarium is USS Torsk, a WWII vintage US submarine, and on the east side
of the Aquari
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Clay Fiske wrote:
> On Oct 6, 2014, at 12:07 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>> If the microwave oven in the adjoining room makes 2.4ghz unusable I'm
>> out of luck. If Marriott sends deauth packets (or any other
>> unsolicited packets) under my SSID, they're hacking my
On 10/6/14 12:56 PM, Clay Fiske wrote:
Depending how it was actually worded by the FCC, I could see a corporation using it
in court to defend their perceived “right" to protect their wifi network from
being “disrupted” by other traffic.
It's not clear that you understand how unlicensed spectr
On Oct 6, 2014, at 12:07 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Clay Fiske wrote:
>> Suppose from Marriott’s perspective that your personal wifi
>> network is interfering with the throughput of their existing network.
>
> Then Marriott misunderstands the nature of *unlicen
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Clay Fiske wrote:
> Suppose from Marriott’s perspective that your personal wifi
> network is interfering with the throughput of their existing network.
Then Marriott misunderstands the nature of *unlicensed* spectrum which
anyone is allowed to use. There's a differ
I live in a condo. I have a WLAN set up. More people move in and start
setting up WLANs and the collective noise of those WLANs starts to
impact the performance of my WLAN. Just because I was there first
doesn't mean I have any right to start de-authing the newcomers. I
don't see how Marrio
On Oct 6, 2014, at 8:41 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> Actually, in multiple situations, the FCC has stated that you are responsible
> when deploying a new unlicensed transmitter to insure that it is deployed in
> such a way that it will not cause harmful interference to existing operations.
I rec
On 10/6/14 10:11 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
Fort McHenry
If you're a fan of history, or just an American, I can't recommend
visiting Fort McHenry highly enough. When I was there (which admittedly
was a long time ago) they did an excellent job of "setting the scene"
for the battle that inspired
Anyone coming or leaving via BWI airport :
http://www.bwiairport.com/en/shops/shop-dine/store/obryckisab/
*Obrycki's *is an absolute /*must*/ for Authentic Maryland crab cakes,
the ones
they show on the food channel, and "my grandmother made".
Get them *pan fried*, ignore all the other prete
On 10/06/2014 10:12 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 6, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 10/06/2014 07:37 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 4, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 10/04/2014 11:13 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Very true. I wasn't talking about ideal solutions. I was ta
On Oct 6, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> On 10/06/2014 07:37 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Oct 4, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/04/2014 11:13 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Very true. I wasn't talking about ideal solutions. I was talking about
current state
Restaurants worth visiting: the Waterfront Kitchen (pricey, worth it,
harbor views), The Helmand (Afghan, delicious, charming hosts),
McCormick & Schmick's (seafood, harbor views), The Black Olive (Greek),
B&O Brasserie (great cocktails too), Sotto Sopra (Italian),
Da Mimmo's (Italian)
Restaurants
NANOG 62 Baltimore Attendees (and Remote Participants) -
Starting at 9 AM tomorrow, there will be an ARIN Public Policy Consultation
in the
Chesapeake AB room. A list of the draft policies that will be discussed is
attached
(and available online on the event Agenda page.)
This a g
On Oct 5, 2014, at 4:31 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Brett Frankenberger
> wrote:
>> For example, you've asserted that if I've been using "ABCD" as my SSID
>> for two years, and then I move, and my new neighbor is already using
>> that, that I have to change. But th
On 10/06/2014 07:37 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 4, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 10/04/2014 11:13 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Very true. I wasn't talking about ideal solutions. I was talking about current
state of FCC regulations.
Further, you seem to assume a level of control ov
On 10/03/2014 04:26 PM, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
On Fri 2014-Oct-03 16:01:21 -0600, John Schiel
wrote:
On 10/03/2014 03:23 PM, Keenan Tims wrote:
The question here is what is authorized and what is not. Was this
to protect their network from rogues, or protect revenue from
captive customers.
I'm searching for a low price VDSL DSLAM like e.g. the Patton FF3210P.
I need to redistribute the connectivity to customers inside a large campus
but i don't need any particular additional service.
Do you have any advice?
Thanks!
Mirko
On Oct 5, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Jay Ashworth:
>
>> It is OK for an enterprise wifi system to make this sort of attack
>> *on rogue APs which are trying to pretend to be part of it (same
>> ESSID).
>
> What if the ESSID is "Free Internet", or if the network is completely
On Oct 4, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> On 10/04/2014 11:13 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Very true. I wasn't talking about ideal solutions. I was talking about
>> current state of FCC regulations.
>>
>> Further, you seem to assume a level of control over client behavior that is
>> r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear colleagues,
In a cooperation between the RIPE NCC and ARIN we investigate the
visibility/reachability of longer-than-/24 prefixes out of ARIN's
23.128/10 IPv4 address block. This part of ARIN policy
(https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four10)
I would also appreciate a similar contact regarding search, please contact off
list.
Thanks.
--
Chip
e:h...@itschip.com
m:+44 (0) 785 752 7096
p:+44 (0) 800 710 1182
w:https://itschip.com
Original Message
From: vinny_abe...@dell.com
Sent: Monday, 6 October 2014 13:29
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sub
On 10/03/14 19:36, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Alain Hebert"
>> PS: About that uRPF Convo, we could dump all that knowledges into
>> lets say... some comprehensive wiki page maybe =D That way when the
>> topic arise we could just link to it.
> Gee, Alain...
>
> whe
Sorry for the noise, but can anyone get me in touch with a contact at Google,
specifically regarding Google Search? Please reply off-list.
Thanks.
-Vinny
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 07:57:07PM -0700, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
> But it's not a completely discrete network. It is a subset of the
> existing network in the most common example of e.g. a WLAN + NAT device
> providing access to additional clients, or at least an adjacent network
> attached to t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
If someone from Level3 (Europe) with core access is here and willing
to assist, please can you contact me off-list for routing issues
related to AS2614 (RoEduNet) BGP in Bucharest, RO ?
Thanks.
- --
Valeriu Vraciu
RoEduNet (AS2614)
-BE
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 4:32 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> Hugo, I still don't think that you have quite made it to the distinction that
> we are looking for here.
>
> In the case of the hotel, we are talking about an access point that connects
> via 4G to a cellular carrier. An access point that att
> On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 11:19:57PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > > There's a lot of amateur lawyering ogain on in this thread, in an area
> > > where there's a lot of ambiguity. We don't even know for sure that
> > > what Marriott did is illegal -- all we know is that the FCC asserted it
> > > w
35 matches
Mail list logo
