<div dir="ltr">Hello,<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Benjamin Henrion <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:zoobab@gmail.com" target="_blank">zoobab@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Paul Gardner-Stephen<br>
<<a href="mailto:paul@servalproject.org">paul@servalproject.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hello,<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Jonathan Morton <<a href="mailto:chromatix99@gmail.com">chromatix99@gmail.com</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> > We need to be able to have Mesh Extenders imported into practically any<br>
>> > country at short notice, e.g., if we succeed in having the Red<br>
>> > Cross/Crescent movement adopt them.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Where it gets complicated is if we have the <insert random small<br>
>> > pacific, african, european, south american, middle-eastern or other country<br>
>> > here> regulator and customs people want a rapid assurance that the devices<br>
>> > cannot be operated except on some band (which they might authorise for us at<br>
>> > short notice to meet a humanitarian need).<br>
>><br>
>> “Complicated” isn’t the word. “Fundamentally incompatible requirements”<br>
>> is.<br>
>><br>
>> On the one hand, you need to be able to “rapidly reconfigure” your<br>
>> hardware for a different frequency band, at short notice, from generic<br>
>> stock, and without making actual hardware changes.<br>
>><br>
>> On the other hand, you anticipate needing to be able to show that the<br>
>> preceding action *cannot* be done to these same devices once deployed in the<br>
>> field.<br>
>><br>
>> You have a big problem here. Something has to give.<br>
><br>
> Agreed in general.<br>
><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> As a related problem, consumer-grade APs are already easy to physically<br>
>> transport between Europe, America and Asia. I’ve literally done that myself<br>
>> on occasion while visiting; I have a habit of bringing a reasonably complete<br>
>> computing environment with me wherever I go.<br>
>><br>
>> But my European AP is not FCC-compliant, because it is trivially capable<br>
>> of transmitting on frequencies that are not permitted in the USA (eg. 2.4GHz<br>
>> channels 12 & 13). What’s more, it cannot be made FCC-compliant, even<br>
>> temporarily, because the firmware is locked down so that I can only select<br>
>> from European regulatory domains. I suspect there’s a jumper somewhere<br>
>> enforcing this.<br>
>><br>
>> I think the correct solution is as follows:<br>
>><br>
>> 1: Allow software-level reconfiguration of the radios. Make it as easy as<br>
>> possible to select the correct regulatory domain, using geolocation if<br>
>> practical. Before selling/deploying hardware, set it up correctly for its<br>
>> intended region, or for a failsafe composite region which is compliant in<br>
>> all of the most common domains.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Unfortunately we know from the TP-LINK case just now, that the FCC doesn't<br>
> like this, and experience from RC and others, is that the staff on the<br>
> border during disasters also get cagey about any purely software option.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Unfortunately, people travel and cross borders more and more,<br>
especially with wifi-equipped devices.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Indeed.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Why they would not be allowed to use channel 14 if they travel to<br>
Japan with their FCC certified device?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Also agreed.</div><div><br></div><div>Paul.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
--<br>
Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at <a href="http://ffii.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">ffii.org</a>><br>
FFII Brussels - <a href="tel:%2B32-484-566109" value="+32484566109">+32-484-566109</a> - <a href="tel:%2B32-2-3500762" value="+3223500762">+32-2-3500762</a><br>
"In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software<br>
patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy.<br>
Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of<br>
software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent<br>
court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their<br>
favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or<br>
democratically elected legislators."<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Battlemesh mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Battlemesh@ml.ninux.org">Battlemesh@ml.ninux.org</a><br>
<a href="http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/battlemesh</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>