While I personally think this is an open-and-shut decision, I thought I’d bring it up here. Yes, I pulled it from Slashdot, but I thought it’d make a good discussion here. The school is attempting to ban 802.11b/g wireless as it is interfering with the campus network which is also using the 802.11b/g protocol at the 2.4 GHz spectrum. Here is the policy. This article gives some background on the setup at UTD. Now, the problem that I see is that the 2.4 GHz spectrum is unlicensed, meaning that anyone can use it and that users must accept any interference caused by other users. If such private WAPs (which apparently are being hooked into Comcast or the like) are also allowing access into the school’s wireless LAN, then I can see the argument there, at least that the private WAP cannot be allowed to be used as an entry into the LAN. However, if the WAP does not allow for access into the school network and is being used with a third-party outside provider, then I see a private entity trying to overrule the FCC and thus UTD has set themselves up to get smacked from the FCC and possibly a lawsuit or two from students.
I can’t really comment on the legality of this decision by the administration, but I used to live in those apartments on the UTD campus, and I can say that I am extremely unsurprised that the incompetent micromanaging control freaks there would try to pull a stunt like this. Luckily, there are enough politically savvy nerds at that campus that I don’t see this decision lasting very long; either they’re going to rescind the policy, have it smacked down by a higher power, or (most likely) it’s going to be cheerfully and openly ignored by 95% of the student population, like almost every other asinine regulation they have going on over there.
As a Wireless LAN installer, I can tell you that UTD’s policy stems not from an access threat, but rather from an interference threat. 802.11b/g only allows 3 channels that don’t overlap, and once those are used up, well, that’s that. The thing you will have watch out for is UTD implementing something like AireSpace that can proactively cancel out interfering WAPs. This is legal because users have to accept interfering signals, and the AireSpace product generates signals that intentionally interfere…
I am curious if UTD has any problems with students (or staff) using cordless phones, since they operate in the 2.4GHz band, as well (except for the older 900MHz ones)…? I am especially curious about this, after reading DirkGntly’s post.
At first, I thought UTD’s setup basically consisted of several “isolated” hotspots, throughout campus. But, according to asterion’s article, they are broadcasting the signals to residences as well (student apartments, etc.). I have had several problems with cordless phones interfering with wireless networks before, but I was just wondering what kind of role it would play in a situation like this.
Personally, I can see where UTD is coming from. It seems they’ve put a lot of work into going WiFi; their HelpDesk would probably see a lot of congestion, from complaints about unreliable wireless signals, if some kind of restrictions weren’t put into place.
LilShieste
Of course if UTD does deploy something like that, couldn’t some motivated geeks just rig up some equipment to start jamming the UTD Wireless? As long as they stayed within FCC power limits, it would be legal.
It would probably be “legal”, as far as the FCC is concerned… but I wouldn’t expect UTD to be too thrilled with the “motivated geeks” responsible for something like this. I would expect some kind of punishment from the university, in this event.
Why would students want to do something like this, anyway? Chances are, the WAP they would be setting up wouldn’t be meant for use by a lot of students. IOW: why screw many students out of WiFi access, just so you and your friends can set up your own little WiFi LAN? Just join the campus’s network, and get over it, IMHO.
LilShieste
I don’t get it. It’s UT’s campus, it gets to decide what people are doing there, right? So why can’t they ban these wireless things? It may be stupid and asinine to do so, but I can’t see how it would be illegal.
Because as some control freak homes associations found out when they tried to ban satelite dishes and external roof antennae, they do not in fact own or control the airwaves, the Federal government does.
Surely theres a difference between banning the use of a frequency and banning equipment that can use that frequency. After all, it is private property so they should be able to say that any equipment found on UT grounds that produces significant noise on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum must be switched off. It doesn’t stop people from outside blasting in as much noise as they want of course.
If this really were the case, then I should be allowed to bring my cellphone into the exam room on the grounds that only the FCC can prohibit me from broadcasting my signal.
Hmmm… every time I took an exam at UTD, I brought my cell phone with me (clipped on my belt, plain for all to see). Nobody ever had a problem with it.
I mentioned that there were three non-overlapping channels. There are actually 11 channels in the 802.11b/g spectrum, but only channels 1, 6 and 11 are far enough apart that their signals don’t overlap. 2.4ghz telephones can operate in one of two ways: the first involves the phone finding a least-congested channel, and then ‘camping’ there for the duration of the conversation. This is usually pretty safe and a non-issue since conversations are usually pretty short. The second involves the telephone operating on a frequency-hopping technology that rolls the signal through all 11 channels at a set interval. This can often be more problematic, since the phone will temporarily occupy a frequency at the same time as a nearby WAP - though only for a few seconds, this can cause a degradation in data. Not a huge issue for a university that is merely providing public network access, but a HUGE issue for healthcare environments where the WiFi air space needs to be pretty clean and 100% reliable. Unfortunately, the FCC rules mean that both the WiFi LAN and the 2.4ghz phone are allowed to “step on each other’s toes” in any given situation.
In the example of “enterprising geeks,” it should be noted that the AireSpace system, if unable to shut them down, will issue an alert to the WiFi LAN admin. This alert will indicate the type of interference, its persistence, AND (are you ready for this) the LOCATION OF THE OFFENDING SIGNAL to within 15 feet in all 3 dimensions, if the triangulation feature is enabled. If the “geeks” think they can do it with impunity, they’ll be surprised when university administrative-types come knocking on the door…
…of course, for those seriously interested, www.wifiplanet.com has a wealth of information - more than enough to make you cross-eyed in short order from trying to sort through and read it all.
I believe (someone correct me, if I’m wrong) that cell phones typically operate on a different band than 2.4GHz (I think its usually one of: 900MHz/1.8GHz/1.9GHz), so I wouldn’t expect any problems arising between WiFi access and cell phones.
And thanks for the information, DirkGntly. I am working with wireless networks more and more often (software engineer), but was completely unaware of the “non-overlapping” channels. And your last post contains some good info, as well.
LilShieste