FCC Bans Open Source router firmware
-
-
That won't last long
-
So the ruling actually doesn't address routers at all, just access points. Many routers include access points, but this does not affect open source routers, only end user modification of access points. Open or closed, it's modification of the radio software alone that is banned.
-
@MattSpeller said:
That won't last long
I don't see any reason that it would change. It is only very low end devices that are affected and the ruling is for a reason. A bit of a weird reason, but a reason.
-
@scottalanmiller Where do you see it only applying to AP's or low end devices?
-
@MattSpeller said:
@scottalanmiller Where do you see it only applying to AP's or low end devices?
In the article he linked. It's the 5GHz radio (which means part of the AP) that is regulated, not routing. The use of the term router is not from the FCC but an interpretation by the article writers. And only low end routers have APs included in them, normally consumer grade. I'm sure somewhere there is an exception to this, but I know of no non-entry point (e.g. below Ubiquiti level) router with a built in AP.
-
@scottalanmiller You're correct it's the 5GHz radios that are being regulated, but where do see any exemptions? As I understand from reading the below, it's anything that has a SDR and operates in 5Ghz
-
@MattSpeller said:
@scottalanmiller You're correct it's the 5GHz radios that are being regulated, but where do see any exemptions?
Exemptions for what?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
It's the 5GHz radio (which means part of the AP) that is regulated, not routing.
-
@MattSpeller said:
As I understand from reading the below, it's anything that has a SDR and operates in 5Ghz
Right, so, things in IT that use 5GHz radios are exclusively APs and WiFi endpoints. That's what things with radios ARE.
-
@MattSpeller said:
@scottalanmiller said:
It's the 5GHz radio (which means part of the AP) that is regulated, not routing.
Right. So that can be reworded "It's the AP that is regulated, not routing."
-
@scottalanmiller Oh ok - I see where our misunderstanding is, one sec
-
If it has a radio it is either an AP or an endpoint (laptop, tablet, etc.) Some low end and mostly consumer unified devices have routing and AP units in a single box (sometimes on a single chip), but it is purely the AP functionality that is regulated. So only devices that act as APs are regulated. IF those devices also do other things, they are still regulated. But a router alone without an AP is in no way affected by the law.
-
@scottalanmiller software defined radios are baked into the SOC (system on chip) that runs the whole radio device (router, ap, whatever).
In order to lock down the radio, you'll essentially have to lock down the SOC. It'd be sweet if they managed a way around this (using a separate chip for the SDR) but that will cost more money.
-
Oh, maybe you mean routers that don't have radios in them?
-
@MattSpeller said:
@scottalanmiller software defined radios are baked into the SOC (system on chip) that runs the whole radio device (router, ap, whatever).
Sure. But that is not the same as the FCC regulating routers in any way. If the US bans guns, and guns can be carried in cars, we wouldn't claim that the US banned cars. That manufactures can combine products and one product that is sometimes combined with another (but mostly only for consumers and entry level SMB business devices) gets "banned" we would never claim that the other device that it is sometimes combined with is banned.
For example, @JaredBusch and @gjacobse and I all use routers that are not affected. So routers themselves are not affected by the law. APs are, however, always affected by it. It's the APs that the law is about, not things that may or may not have APs added to them.
To be clear, this means PCs and tablets are affected too, because they have radios (sometimes.)
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I don't see any reason that it would change. It is only very low end devices that are affected and the ruling is for a reason. A bit of a weird reason, but a reason.
It is certainly not only "very low end devices"
Many quality all in one routers contain both the 2.4 and 5 ghz bands. These devices are all over the SMB for a reason. Better gear like the Ubiquiti and other similar levels of hardware was not available at scale until recently.
While I never recommend anything with the AP and router on the same piece, it is still always an option when I give a quote.
-
@MattSpeller said:
Oh, maybe you mean routers that don't have radios in them?
Right, which is nearly all (except for consumer and entry level ones like Netgear.)
-
@JaredBusch said:
Many quality all in one routers contain both the 2.4 and 5 ghz bands.
While I never recommend anything with the AP and router on the same piece, it is still always an option when I give a quote.What devices are you thinking of. We often recommend them, but as entry level devices (Netgear, as an example) although now that Ubiquiti is out, I know of nothing that isn't below their level like this (I qualified that above.)
I know that SonicWall sometimes does this, but I would never put SW at or above Ubiquiti, so by the qualification I gave, to me it's entry level (meaning below Ubiquiti who has set the bar pretty high for $100.)
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Right, which is nearly all (except for consumer and entry level ones like Netgear.)
OK! Now we're onto something lol
You're talking about enterprise/managed wired routers, right? Yeah they're definitely not affected by this.
We're all concerned about wifi routers, running stuff like tomato and DDWRT
