[Commotion-discuss] Interesting discussion on WISPA listserv about the cable ISP hotspots

Ben West ben at gowasabi.net
Fri Nov 15 18:10:31 UTC 2013


I believe the nature of FCC certification of unlicensed devices is that the
devices (and their users) have to tolerate potentially destructive
interference.  This could mean that operator(s) of unlicensed devices may
chose to configure their radios so as to render the spectrum unusable (even
by their own radios), whether by intention or by negligence, that being
their prerogative.

Things like HAM and military radar will indeed impose external restrictions
on where/when unlicensed devices may be used, but as long as any device is
not broadcasting above the TX power limit stipulated in its certification,
there is nothing bodies like the FCC would be empowered or inclined to do.

I would like to think there are some paths available for lodging complaints
about poor spectrum usage by specific parties, even for unlicensed bands,
but I'm fairly certain those paths would be steeply uphill.



On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Joshua Breitbart <breitbart at newamerica.net
> wrote:

> Is there any way to regulate that kind of hardware and noise pollution
> at the local level?
>
> On 11/15/13 12:03 PM, Ben West wrote:
> > There is an interesting discussion going on right now on the WISPA
> listserv
> > (Wireless Internet Service Provider Association) about the hotspots being
> > hung on coax lines by US cable ISPs like Comcast, Time Warner, etc to
> > distribute service via 802.11 to existing subscribers.
> >
> > This was brought about by Comcast's recent appeal to the FCC to free up
> > more of the 5.GHz band for more "unlicensed" use (aka so they can use the
> > band for cheaper):
> >
> http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/comcast-testifies-to-congress-today-in-support-of-gigabit-wi-fi-2
> >
> http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/496570-Comcast_to_Congress_Freeing_Up_More_5_GHZ_WiFi_Spectrum_Is_Crucial.php?rssid=20065
> >
> > The WISPA discussion archive is only visible to list members, but those
> > interested should be able to subscribe here:
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >
> > The actual hotspot being deployed is a product made by Ruckus, which
> > apparently retails for a thrifty 5000$US.
> >
> http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20130610-ruckus-adds-zoneflex-7781cm-access-point-to-its-portfolio
> > http://www.ruckuswireless.com/products/zoneflex-outdoor/7781cm
> >
> > Much of the discussion on the WISPA lists includes concern over the cable
> > operators' apparent apathy over the spectrum pollution they cause
> (possibly
> > in 2.4GHz *and* 5.8GHz) by scattering these devices all over creation.
>  It
> > would seem that ensuring appropriate TX power levels, so that even the
> > cable operators' own subscribers get good connection to the APs, may not
> be
> > a high priority. :(
> >
> > A potential upshot is that the very high price for the Ruckus unit could
> be
> > used by listmembers here for their own funding applications, to the
> effect
> > of, "the cable company pays $5000 for just one of their fancy hotspots!
> > The same funds could build a mesh across this entire block."  Member of
> the
> > WISPA list have already jumped on this very fact, too.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Commotion-discuss mailing list
> > Commotion-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-discuss
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commotion-discuss mailing list
> Commotion-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-discuss
>
>


-- 
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
ben at gowasabi.net
314-246-9434
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/commotion-discuss/attachments/20131115/2a57e965/attachment.html>


More information about the Commotion-discuss mailing list