Marriott wifi blocking

Fri Oct 3 23:15:47 UTC 2014

On 10/3/14 6:01 PM, 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 can't imagine that any 'AP-squashing' packets are ever authorized,
>> outside of a lab. The wireless spectrum is shared by all, regardless of
>> physical locality. Because it's your building doesn't mean you own the
>> spectrum.
> 
> +1
> 
>>
>> My reading of this is that these features are illegal, period. Rogue AP
>> detection is one thing, and disabling them via network or
>> "administrative" (ie. eject the guest) means would be fine, but
>> interfering with the wireless is not acceptable per the FCC regulations.
>>
>> Seems like common sense to me. If the FCC considers this 'interference',
>> which it apparently does, then devices MUST NOT intentionally interfere.
> 
> I would expect interfering for defensive purposes **only** would be
> acceptable.

if you have a device licensed under fcc part 15 it may not cause harmful
interference to other users of the spectrum.

> --John
> 
>>
>> K
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 243 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20141003/0431270b/attachment.sig>