6 Responses

  1. mike
    mike at |

    seems like another way to alienate customers

  2. ucipass
    ucipass at |

    Interesting article. I actually design and implement these Cisco controller based wireless networks and kind of understand why they want to do this. In order to optimize channel and power selection of the installed access points, the system has to “own” the spectrum to a certain degree in order to adjust and determine the optional allocation. If you have too many “rouge” access points especially in the middle of the network the system will have trouble adjusting these parameters and possibly not be able to provide the promised performance, or QoS for the installed wireless network. Not surprised at all why Cisco is backing the hotels at all since their customer base is enterprise.

    I see the arguments on both sides and not even sure whose side to take. The problem is that if personal wifi will be this popular, FCC will have to give some of the spectrum to the property owners so they could guarantee QoS on their own properties.

  3. jamesb2147
    jamesb2147 at |


    Looks like we’ve all got some cred’s to tout. I’m responsible for the internet connections of 2500 students and staff at a liberal arts university on a day to day basis. As far as interference goes, I’d tell the purchaser of Wi-Fi services the truth: I don’t have any control over your attendees’ experiences beyond providing the best equipment money can buy. If everyone brings their own hotspot, no one’s is likely to work, so tell your attendees to leave it at home when they’re at the conference.

    Of course, that doesn’t address the “security concerns” of spoofed access points or rogue access points. Spoofed is not impossible, though not necessarily easy, either; use certificates. Clients can be configured to reject connecting to an AP without the proper cert. Rogues are ridiculously easy to target, because by definition they must be on your wired network. Check your BSSID’s against your local MAC address tables on the wired network and BAM! You’ve identified a port that you should shut down. Neither of these approaches requires interfering with government licensed and managed spectrum that you do not own.

    The NANOG mailing list archive has plenty of interesting posts on the topic from both viewpoints, if you want to dive deeper.

  4. Marriott/Hotel Industry FCC Petition to Block Personal Hot Spots - FlyerTalk Forums

    […] has actually been performing such blocking is in the meeting spaces, not in the guest rooms. I think it is bad precedence and works against the basic underlying technology the 802.11 wifi stand…, but the impact on most hotel guests is pretty low to nil right now. n.b. The link above is to my […]

  5. FCC blocks Marriott's wifi blocking plan - Wandering Aramean

    […] the day from one of the Commissioners suggesting that the proposal was a bad idea. Marriott‘s proposal to be able to block wifi hotspots was framed to the feds as an issue of data security – don’t let extra hotspots steal your […]