[Cu-wireless] major interference

[Illustrious niteshad]

Normally, I'd agree, but Dave Young had mentioned that a group of the local hams in Urbana had some sort of inexplicable antipathy towards our lil' ol' 2.4 GHz network.  IIRC, they claimed that using 2.4 GHz was "inherently unsafe."  

Then again, all that we need is for someone to go war-driving/war-walking with a directional antenna (Pringles can, *cough* *cough*) along a baseline, and we should be able to pin-point the evil-doer quite well ourselves.  That's pretty much how the Motor City Radio Club pinpoints sources when they play "the Fox and the Hounds" during their annual field day.

regards,

Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 17:51:50 -0500
To: wireless at ucimc.org
Subject: Re: [Cu-wireless] major interference

> Ooooh. Call in the hams. They'll take the evildoer down.
> Mike Lehman
> 
> David Young wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 11:49:37PM -0500, David Young wrote:
> > 
> >>Below is a worrisome packet capture I took from the node at IMC at
> >>11:17pm tonight.
> > 
> > 
> > To follow up on this, this is almost consistent with interference from
> > Volo's node on the roof at The Office, except that the interference is
> > on the wrong channel (Volo's node uses channels 1 & 6), and I think it
> > is also too intense even for Peter's (unamplified) node.
> > 
> > Someone suggested to me that it could be someone operating over the
> > legal power limits. Maybe so.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cu-wireless mailing list
> Cu-wireless at lists.groogroo.com
> http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/cu-wireless
> Project Page: http://cuwireless.ucimc.org
> 

-- 
______________________________________________
http://www.linuxmail.org/
Now with e-mail forwarding for only US$5.95/yr

Powered by Outblaze