Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751587AbWB0ReV (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:34:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751591AbWB0ReV (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:34:21 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:15341 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751532AbWB0ReU (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:34:20 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:34:04 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Alan Cox , Christoph Hellwig , James Ketrenos , NetDev , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, okir@suse.de Subject: Re: [Announce] Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG Network Connection Message-ID: <20060227093404.4020ac6a@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20060227171029.GA763@infradead.org> References: <43FF88E6.6020603@linux.intel.com> <20060225084139.GB22109@infradead.org> <1140915482.23286.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060227171029.GA763@infradead.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.0.0 (GTK+ 2.8.6; i486-pc-linux-gnu) X-Face: &@E+xe?c%:&e4D{>f1O<&U>2qwRREG5!}7R4;D<"NO^UI2mJ[eEOA2*3>(`Th.yP,VDPo9$ /`~cw![cmj~~jWe?AHY7D1S+\}5brN0k*NE?pPh_'_d>6;XGG[\KDRViCfumZT3@[ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1212 Lines: 26 On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:10:29 +0000 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 12:58:02AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Sad, 2006-02-25 at 08:41 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > the regualatory problems are not true. > > > > They are although the binary interpretation isn't AFAIK from law but > > from lawyers. The same is actually true in much of the EU. The actual > > requirement is that the transmitting device must be reasonably > > tamperproof. Some of the lawyers have decided that for a software radio > > tamperproof means "binary". > > Exactly. There's no strong requirement, it's just over-zealous corporate > lawyers. That's why we need to push Intel strongly here. It is not Intel, but the regulators that need a stronger clue. Vendors don't have any incentive to force change on this. They just want to sell as much hardware as possible. Does anyone know who the actual FCC administrators in charge of this are? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/