wifi blocking [was Re: Marriott wifi blocking]

Wed Oct 8 21:17:23 UTC 2014

There is a provision in the regulations somewhere that allows
underground/tunnel transmitters on licensed bands without a license,
provided certain power limits are honoured outside of the tunnel.
Perhaps they are operating under these provisions?

K

On 10/08/2014 02:11 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:37 PM, joel jaeggli <joelja at bogus.com> wrote:
>> On 10/8/14 1:29 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>>> On 10/8/2014 08:47, William Herrin wrote:
>>>> BART would not have had an FCC license. They'd have had contracts with
>>>> the various phone companies to co-locate equipment and provide wired
>>>> backhaul out of the tunnels. The only thing they'd be guilty of is
>>>> breach of contract, and that only if the cell phone companies decided
>>>> their behavior was inconsistent with the SLA..
>>>
>>> OK that makes more sense than the private answer I got from Roy.  I
>>> wondered why the FCC didn't take action if there was a license violation.
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/technology/fcc-reviews-need-for-rules-to-interrupt-wireless-service.html?_r=0
> 
> From the article: "Among the issues on which the F.C.C. is seeking
> comment is whether it even has authority over the issue."
> 
> Also: "The BART system owns the wireless transmitters and receivers
> that allow for cellphone reception within its network."
> 
> I'm not entirely clear how that works.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> 
> 
> 