Re: Marriott wifi blocking

[Brett Frankenberger <rbf+nanog () panix com>]

On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 01:33:13PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Oct 4, 2014, at 12:39 , Brandon Ross <bross () pobox com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 4 Oct 2014, Michael Thomas wrote:
> >
> > > The problem is that there's really no such thing as a "copycat" if
> > > the client doesn't have the means of authenticating the
> > > destination. If that's really the requirement, people should start
> > > bitching to ieee to get destination auth on ap's instead of
> > > blatantly asserting that somebody owns a particular ssid because,
> > > well, because.
> >
> > In the enterprise environment that there's been some insistence
> > from folks on this list is a legitimate place to block "rogue" APs,
> > what makes those SSIDs, "yours"?  Just because they were used first
> > by the enterprise? That doesn't seem to hold water in an unlicensed
> > environment to me at all.
>
> Pretty much... Here's why...
>
> If you are using an SSID in an area, anyone else using the same SSID
> later is causing harmful interference to your network. It's a
> first-come-first-serve situation. Just like amateur radio spectrum...
> If you're using a frequency to carry on a conversation with someone,
> other hams have an obligation not to interfere with your conversation
> (except in an emergency). It's a bit more complicated there, because
> you're obliged to reasonably accommodate others wishing to use the
> frequency, but in the case of SSIDs, there's no such requirement.
>
> Now, if I start using SSID XYZ in building 1 and someone else is
> using it in building 3 and the two coverage zones don't overlap, I'm
> not entitled to extend my XYZ SSID into building 3 when I rent space
> there, because someone else is using it in that location first.

So your position is that if I start using Starbuck's SSID in a location
where there is no Starbuck, and they layer move in to that building,
I'm entitled to compel them to not use their SSID?

> I can only extend my XYZ coverage zone so far as there are no
> competing XYZ SSIDs in the locations I'm expanding in to.

Is ther FCC guidance on this, or is this "Regulations As Interpreted By
Owen"?

> Depends on whether you were the first one using the SSID in a
> particular location or not.
>
> Sure, this can get ambiguous and difficult to prove, but the reality
> is that most cases are pretty clear cut and it's usually not hard to
> tell who is the interloper on a given SSID.

It's usually easy to tell, but I doubt the FCC would find it relevant. 

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
was and Mariott decided to settle rather than litigate the matter.  And
that was an extreme case -- Marriott was making transmissions for the
*sole purpose of preventing others from using the spectrum*.

     -- Brett