[Battlemesh] Funkregulierung: Angriff auf alternative Software

Paul Gardner-Stephen paul at servalproject.org
Fri Sep 4 18:58:26 CEST 2015


So, in terms of this FCC rule, one option could be to try to get the EU to
require that routers CAN be re-flashed to support all the use-cases and
arguments that we have been making.  This would provide some back-pressure
on the vendors, and in the very least require the EU market versions to be
flashable, which would in many ways solve the problem.

Being in Australia, I have little idea of how we might pursue such a thing,
or what our prospects of success would be, or how long it would take.

Also, my suspicion is that it might be interesting to find out if any of
the current US congress majority who do not like "big government" might be
natural allies in discouraging the FCC from implementing "nanny state"


On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Saverio Proto <zioproto at gmail.com> wrote:

> > thanks a lot for informing us, however could you please keep language to
> > English for the battlemesh mailing list?
> Ja bitte. Wir sprechen keine Deutsch ;)
> I think it is nice we have this languange incidents from time to time.
> It means we are really an international group and we write to the list
> in a natural way without mental barriers.
> However let's stick to English :)
> ciao,
> Saverio
> _______________________________________________
> Battlemesh mailing list
> Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org
> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ml.ninux.org/pipermail/battlemesh/attachments/20150905/642a9466/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Battlemesh mailing list