Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Josh Luthman]

Definitely includes internet service.  You need to be able to capture the
customer's traffic without changing the network.

On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 12:45 PM Chuck McCown via AF 
wrote:

> I was under the impression that CALEA was for telephone call intercepts?
>
> Best Regards,
> Chuck McCown
>
> McCown Technology Corporation
> 8401 N Commerce Dr
> Lake Point, Utah 84074
> 801-250-9503 Office
> 435-830-4306 Cell
> www.mccowntech.com
> www.microtrench.pro
> www.terabitnetworks.com
>
> *From:* dmmoff...@gmail.com
> *Sent:* Monday, March 18, 2024 4:29 AM
> *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi
>
>
> CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but
> it’s one I don’t know much about.
>
>
>
> If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We
> have parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are
> also MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.
>
>
>
> My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re
> ordered to do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual?
>
>
>
> If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no
> problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted
> me to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be
> able to tell them it was someone at the park.  At *best* I could give
> them a MAC address and hostname.  If I have to identify the *customer*
> that’s easy: the municipal parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not
> what they will want to know.
>
>
>
> Will this stuff get us in trouble?
>
>
>
> -Adam
>
>
>
> --
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] PON question

[Josh Luthman]

If you have an *ACTIVE* cabinet in the neighborhood, that means you
have electronics & batteries & an uplink fiber to feed it.  You'll also
need another fiber in another direction.  If I were to do things in town,
that would make sense.

In my case I'm in the middle of nowhere so I have all of my customers all
going to one solid concrete building (gas generator, LP generator, weeks
worth of batteries) and a 100% underground plant.  My only concern is
illegal digging in the ROW.

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 5:45 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> Mike Hammett kind of touched on what I was asking and why.  I was told
> that Metronet near me had a hut in Batavia that also served St. Charles,
> Geneva, West Chicago, etc.  via PON.
>
>
>
> Also a company that built a middle mile / anchor institution fiber network
> with a BTOP grant 12+ years ago convinced the county to let them take it
> private, and they have run aerial fiber in most of Shabbona which is one of
> the towns Mike mentioned.  With my misconception about how FTTH is
> typically deployed, I expected there to be at least one cabinet or hut in
> town.  But I think they are just using strands from the BTOP project and
> feeding it passively from a distant town.
>
>
>
> I would prefer to see more redundancy, especially since both buried and
> aerial fiber definitely gets damaged around here, but I guess practical
> results matter more than what-ifs.  At least local power outages shouldn’t
> take it down, and a central NOC or hut should be able to have serious
> battery and/or generator backup.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* AF  *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 16, 2024 4:12 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PON question
>
>
>
> PON is one port at your end and then goes through splitters that reduce
> light and add ports to end up at customer ONTs.  1:128 is pretty short
> range and high customer count - we could never do that in a rural plant
> (5-15 miles).  Maybe 1:64 but that's about the limit.  There is NO
> redundancy in PON.  Best you could do is 2x32 or whatever splitters which
> is where you feed the downstream fiber with two PON ports.  An engineer
> from Metronet told me they did that but no one could ever answer why
> (technically or operationally).   Think like you have an AP on a tower
> feeding 32 customers.  What are the chances you have an AP right below it
> with the same SSID/PSK/frequency for the customers to connect to if the
> first AP goes down?
>
>
>
> Think of Active E like a bunch of dumb switches.  You have a 48 port
> switch that goes to 48 customers using 48 fibers.  If the fiber feeding the
> switch goes down, it can go to a different fiber/uplink port.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 7:59 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:
>
> Since there are FTTH people here and I’m mostly ignorant of such things,
> maybe someone can clear something up for me.
>
>
>
> I always assumed a PON based FTTH system had a topology kind of like HFC.
> I expected fiber down the street with splitters, but fed by some sort of
> neighborhood node in a cabinet with power and electronics, fed by active
> EPL style fiber.  Which could have redundant paths, rings, etc. so a fiber
> cut wouldn’t take down a whole town or multiple towns, the backbone traffic
> would reroute.
>
>
>
> I’ve been told this is not the case.  And that instead, each PON could go
> back over a strand to a headend several towns and many miles away, all
> passive.
>
>
>
> Sorry for the poor description of my question, hopefully you can figure
> out what I’m asking.
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Ken Hohhof]

“Bureaucracy on autopilot”.  That’ll be my new favorite term.

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of Mark Radabaugh
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 5:16 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

 

While CALEA is still on the books it doesn’t seem to be of much interest to LEA.

 

No - you do not have to be able to identify the user.  If LEA can identify a 
specific end user for you out of the WiFi, then yes, they could ask for you to 
monitor it but keep in mind that CALEA isn’t meant for historical data.   It’s 
meant to be real-time capture once they have identified a particular person of 
interest (well, a specific phone number, IP address, etc.).   

 

Every year I get a phone call from the FBI verifying our contact information 
and how to get hold of us if they need something.  I point out that we file our 
CALEA documents and ask why they are calling - and they say ‘oh, we don’t use 
that’.   Uh,  got it.   But the FCC still thinks it’s important and you best 
follow the rules and file it anyway.  Local and State LEA has never heard of 
CALEA.   It’s just one more bureaucracy on autopilot that has outlived it’s 
usefulness.

 

Mark

 

 

On Mar 18, 2024, at 6:29 AM, dmmoff...@gmail.com   
wrote:

 

CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but it’s 
one I don’t know much about.

 

If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We have 
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are also 
MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.

 

My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered to 
do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual?  

 

If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me 
to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able 
to tell them it was someone at the park.  At best I could give them a MAC 
address and hostname.  If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the 
municipal parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want to 
know.

 

Will this stuff get us in trouble?

 

-Adam

 

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com  
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

 

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Mark Radabaugh]

While CALEA is still on the books it doesn’t seem to be of much interest to LEA.

No - you do not have to be able to identify the user.  If LEA can identify a 
specific end user for you out of the WiFi, then yes, they could ask for you to 
monitor it but keep in mind that CALEA isn’t meant for historical data.   It’s 
meant to be real-time capture once they have identified a particular person of 
interest (well, a specific phone number, IP address, etc.).   

Every year I get a phone call from the FBI verifying our contact information 
and how to get hold of us if they need something.  I point out that we file our 
CALEA documents and ask why they are calling - and they say ‘oh, we don’t use 
that’.   Uh,  got it.   But the FCC still thinks it’s important and you best 
follow the rules and file it anyway.  Local and State LEA has never heard of 
CALEA.   It’s just one more bureaucracy on autopilot that has outlived it’s 
usefulness.

Mark


> On Mar 18, 2024, at 6:29 AM, dmmoff...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but 
> it’s one I don’t know much about.
>  
> If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We have 
> parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are also 
> MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.
>  
> My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered 
> to do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual? 
>  
> If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
> problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me 
> to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able 
> to tell them it was someone at the park.  At best I could give them a MAC 
> address and hostname.  If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the 
> municipal parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want 
> to know.
>  
> Will this stuff get us in trouble?
>  
> -Adam
>  
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Mike Hammett]

We had a couple of cities want a franchise. One backed down after a week or 
two, while the other took over a year, then backed down. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: ch...@go-mtc.com 
To: "Mike Hammett"  
Cc: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group"  
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 12:27:19 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 




They made me get a franchise here in our county. But they do it to the others 
as well. 






From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 11:08 AM 
To: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Cc: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 


*nods* It sure is a lifesaver here in IL. As long as you don't plan on doing 
linear TV, you don't need a franchise, therefore if you pay into the state 
telecom tax fund (on voice revenues), you can build in the public ROW and 
easements and do so at no permit cost. 

Now the easement or ROW has to allow for telecom. A lot of the rural ones only 
allow for a road, so then you have to get your own easement anyway. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: ch...@go-mtc.com 
To: "Mike Hammett" , "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 12:05:26 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 




The more important detail is that we are regulated as carriers. That is helpful 
to point out for ROW and easement occupancy. 






From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 10:59 AM 
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 


The FCC's First Report and Order, issued in September 2005, ruled that 
providers of broadband Internet access and interconnected VoIP services are 
regulable as “telecommunications carriers” under CALEA. That order was affirmed 
and further clarified by the Second Report and Order, dated May 2006. On May 5, 
2006, a group of higher education and library organizations led by the American 
Council on Education (ACE) challenged that ruling, arguing that CALEA did not 
apply to them. On June 9, 2006, the D.C. Circuit Court summarily denied the 
petition without addressing the constitutionality. [11] 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Chuck McCown via AF"  
To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group"  
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 11:43:51 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 




I was under the impression that CALEA was for telephone call intercepts? 

Best Regards, 
Chuck McCown 

McCown Technology Corporation 
8401 N Commerce Dr 
Lake Point, Utah 84074 
801-250-9503 Office 
435-830-4306 Cell 
www.mccowntech.com 
www.microtrench.pro 
www.terabitnetworks.com 




From: dmmoff...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 4:29 AM 
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 



CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but it’s 
one I don’t know much about. 

If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance? We have 
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi. There are also 
MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc. 

My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered to 
do so. Do you also have to be able to identify the individual? 

If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
problem. If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me to 
start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able to 
tell them it was someone at the park. At best I could give them a MAC address 
and hostname. If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the municipal 
parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want to know. 

Will this stuff get us in trouble? 

-Adam 

-- 
AF mailing list 
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 

-- 
AF mailing list 
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 



-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Chuck McCown via AF]

They made me get a franchise here in our county.  But they do it to the others 
as well.  



From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 11:08 AM
To: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Cc: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

*nods* It sure is a lifesaver here in IL. As long as you don't plan on doing 
linear TV, you don't need a franchise, therefore if you pay into the state 
telecom tax fund (on voice revenues), you can build in the public ROW and 
easements and do so at no permit cost.

Now the easement or ROW has to allow for telecom. A lot of the rural ones only 
allow for a road, so then you have to get your own easement anyway.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP








From: ch...@go-mtc.com
To: "Mike Hammett" , "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 

Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 12:05:26 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi


The more important detail is that we are regulated as carriers.  That is 
helpful to point out for ROW and easement occupancy.  



From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 10:59 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

The FCC's First Report and Order, issued in September 2005, ruled that 
providers of broadband Internet access and interconnected VoIP services are 
regulable as “telecommunications carriers” under CALEA. That order was affirmed 
and further clarified by the Second Report and Order, dated May 2006. On May 5, 
2006, a group of higher education and library organizations led by the American 
Council on Education (ACE) challenged that ruling, arguing that CALEA did not 
apply to them. On June 9, 2006, the D.C. Circuit Court summarily denied the 
petition without addressing the constitutionality.[11]




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP








From: "Chuck McCown via AF" 
To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 11:43:51 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi


I was under the impression that CALEA was for telephone call intercepts?

Best Regards,
Chuck McCown

McCown Technology Corporation 
8401 N Commerce Dr
Lake Point, Utah 84074
801-250-9503 Office
435-830-4306 Cell
www.mccowntech.com
www.microtrench.pro
www.terabitnetworks.com

From: dmmoff...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 4:29 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but it’s 
one I don’t know much about.



If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We have 
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are also 
MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.



My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered to 
do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual?  



If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me 
to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able 
to tell them it was someone at the park.  At best I could give them a MAC 
address and hostname.  If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the 
municipal parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want to 
know.



Will this stuff get us in trouble?



-Adam





-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Mike Hammett]

*nods* It sure is a lifesaver here in IL. As long as you don't plan on doing 
linear TV, you don't need a franchise, therefore if you pay into the state 
telecom tax fund (on voice revenues), you can build in the public ROW and 
easements and do so at no permit cost. 

Now the easement or ROW has to allow for telecom. A lot of the rural ones only 
allow for a road, so then you have to get your own easement anyway. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: ch...@go-mtc.com 
To: "Mike Hammett" , "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 12:05:26 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 




The more important detail is that we are regulated as carriers. That is helpful 
to point out for ROW and easement occupancy. 






From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 10:59 AM 
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 


The FCC's First Report and Order, issued in September 2005, ruled that 
providers of broadband Internet access and interconnected VoIP services are 
regulable as “telecommunications carriers” under CALEA. That order was affirmed 
and further clarified by the Second Report and Order, dated May 2006. On May 5, 
2006, a group of higher education and library organizations led by the American 
Council on Education (ACE) challenged that ruling, arguing that CALEA did not 
apply to them. On June 9, 2006, the D.C. Circuit Court summarily denied the 
petition without addressing the constitutionality. [11] 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Chuck McCown via AF"  
To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group"  
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 11:43:51 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 




I was under the impression that CALEA was for telephone call intercepts? 

Best Regards, 
Chuck McCown 

McCown Technology Corporation 
8401 N Commerce Dr 
Lake Point, Utah 84074 
801-250-9503 Office 
435-830-4306 Cell 
www.mccowntech.com 
www.microtrench.pro 
www.terabitnetworks.com 




From: dmmoff...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 4:29 AM 
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 



CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but it’s 
one I don’t know much about. 

If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance? We have 
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi. There are also 
MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc. 

My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered to 
do so. Do you also have to be able to identify the individual? 

If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
problem. If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me to 
start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able to 
tell them it was someone at the park. At best I could give them a MAC address 
and hostname. If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the municipal 
parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want to know. 

Will this stuff get us in trouble? 

-Adam 

-- 
AF mailing list 
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 

-- 
AF mailing list 
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Chuck McCown via AF]

The more important detail is that we are regulated as carriers.  That is 
helpful to point out for ROW and easement occupancy.  



From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 10:59 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group 
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

The FCC's First Report and Order, issued in September 2005, ruled that 
providers of broadband Internet access and interconnected VoIP services are 
regulable as “telecommunications carriers” under CALEA. That order was affirmed 
and further clarified by the Second Report and Order, dated May 2006. On May 5, 
2006, a group of higher education and library organizations led by the American 
Council on Education (ACE) challenged that ruling, arguing that CALEA did not 
apply to them. On June 9, 2006, the D.C. Circuit Court summarily denied the 
petition without addressing the constitutionality.[11]




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP








From: "Chuck McCown via AF" 
To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" 
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 11:43:51 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi


I was under the impression that CALEA was for telephone call intercepts?

Best Regards,
Chuck McCown

McCown Technology Corporation 
8401 N Commerce Dr
Lake Point, Utah 84074
801-250-9503 Office
435-830-4306 Cell
www.mccowntech.com
www.microtrench.pro
www.terabitnetworks.com

From: dmmoff...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 4:29 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but it’s 
one I don’t know much about.



If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We have 
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are also 
MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.



My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered to 
do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual?  



If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me 
to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able 
to tell them it was someone at the park.  At best I could give them a MAC 
address and hostname.  If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the 
municipal parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want to 
know.



Will this stuff get us in trouble?



-Adam





-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com


-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Mike Hammett]

The FCC's First Report and Order, issued in September 2005, ruled that 
providers of broadband Internet access and interconnected VoIP services are 
regulable as “telecommunications carriers” under CALEA. That order was affirmed 
and further clarified by the Second Report and Order, dated May 2006. On May 5, 
2006, a group of higher education and library organizations led by the American 
Council on Education (ACE) challenged that ruling, arguing that CALEA did not 
apply to them. On June 9, 2006, the D.C. Circuit Court summarily denied the 
petition without addressing the constitutionality. [11] 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Chuck McCown via AF"  
To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group"  
Cc: ch...@go-mtc.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 11:43:51 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 




I was under the impression that CALEA was for telephone call intercepts? 

Best Regards, 
Chuck McCown 

McCown Technology Corporation 
8401 N Commerce Dr 
Lake Point, Utah 84074 
801-250-9503 Office 
435-830-4306 Cell 
www.mccowntech.com 
www.microtrench.pro 
www.terabitnetworks.com 




From: dmmoff...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 4:29 AM 
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi 



CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but it’s 
one I don’t know much about. 

If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance? We have 
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi. There are also 
MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc. 

My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered to 
do so. Do you also have to be able to identify the individual? 

If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
problem. If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me to 
start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able to 
tell them it was someone at the park. At best I could give them a MAC address 
and hostname. If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the municipal 
parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want to know. 

Will this stuff get us in trouble? 

-Adam 


-- 
AF mailing list 
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 

-- 
AF mailing list 
AF@af.afmug.com 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com 

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Chuck McCown via AF]

I was under the impression that CALEA was for telephone call intercepts?

Best Regards,
Chuck McCown

McCown Technology Corporation 
8401 N Commerce Dr
Lake Point, Utah 84074
801-250-9503 Office
435-830-4306 Cell
www.mccowntech.com
www.microtrench.pro
www.terabitnetworks.com

From: dmmoff...@gmail.com 
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 4:29 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

CALEA hasn’t been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but it’s 
one I don’t know much about.

 

If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We have 
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are also 
MDU’s with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.

 

My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you’re ordered to 
do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual?  

 

If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi….sure no 
problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted me 
to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be able 
to tell them it was someone at the park.  At best I could give them a MAC 
address and hostname.  If I have to identify the customer that’s easy: the 
municipal parks department, but I’m guessing that’s not what they will want to 
know.

 

Will this stuff get us in trouble?

 

-Adam

 




-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[Ken Hohhof]

I actually have zero hands-on experience, but from what I've seen posted in
the past, they don't expect you to do the impossible.  And LEA is more
interested in catching the bad guys than hanging you out to dry on a
technicality, so they will work with what you can give them.  Something that
seems to come up in discussions however is only turning over traffic
captured from the target customer, not sure how that applies in the case of
something like public WiFi at a park.

 

My limited personal experience with law enforcement is they want information
not wiretaps.  Occasionally might be in real-time (sting operation, hostage
crisis, etc.), but more typically something in the past.  Usually they have
an IP address and date/time, and want the name and address and sometimes
everything you've got about the corresponding customer.  Fraud, theft,
domestic disputes, kiddy porn, that kind of stuff.  Lately it seems we don't
find out why they want the information, and they often forbid us to alert
the customer, at least for several months (presumably to allow for a grand
jury or court date).

 

Just blue-skying, I guess if we did WiFi for public spaces, we would have to
worry more about stuff like mass shootings or terrorist attacks.  Although I
would imagine the cellphone providers would be their most important source
of information.

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of dmmoff...@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2024 5:29 AM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: [AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

 

CALEA hasn't been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but
it's one I don't know much about.

 

If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We have
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are also
MDU's with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.

 

My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you're ordered
to do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual?  

 

If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi..sure no
problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted
me to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be
able to tell them it was someone at the park.  At best I could give them a
MAC address and hostname.  If I have to identify the customer that's easy:
the municipal parks department, but I'm guessing that's not what they will
want to know.

 

Will this stuff get us in trouble?

 

-Adam

 

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Re: [AFMUG] PON question

[dmmoffett]

Since I like to give too much detail:

 

Range

The TDM timing gives you a “maximum differential reach”.  I’ve read that it’s 
20km on GPON, 40km on XGS-PON, and 100km on NG-PON2.  I haven’t read the actual 
ITU specs, but those numbers were touted to be the “standard”.  Whether that’s 
true or not: In the real world, our Nokia platform lets us configure both GPON 
and XGS to 40km differential.  The “differential reach” is the difference 
between the nearest and furthest ONT.  So if our nearest ONT is 20km down the 
line, then the furthest could be 60km.  Someone said XGS could go 100km.  That 
might mean their vendor lets them configure a higher differential reach, or 
that might be assuming the first splitter is 60km away.  It’s a true statement 
either way, but at 100km it’ll be at the razor’s edge of the link budget.

 

The loss from distance is something like 0.2-0.5db/Km, it depends on the 
wavelength. It’s worse if the fiber is very old because manufacturing methods 
have improved the attenuation.  If it’s old plant you’d have to get the part 
numbers off the cable and look up specs.  I’m not sure how old it has to be to 
matter.  I have not seen fiber old enough where that mattered, so that’s an 
academic topic for me.  

 

Fusion splices can be as low as 0.02dB attenuation, but I think the typical 
standard is 0.2dB or better is acceptable.  Connectors vary, but you can say 
0.5dB and it shouldn’t be worse than that.

 

Most of your losses come from splitters, and that’ll be exactly what you’d 
expect.  3dB every time you cut it in half, plus maybe 0.5-1 for insertion 
loss. 

 

On C+ optics you start with a tx power of +6-+7dBm.  Receiver sensitivity at 
the ONT could vary, but -28dBm is typical.  The uplink wavelength has more 
attenuation, but the ONT has a little more Tx power and the OLT has a little 
more sensitivity.  So if it’s good in one direction it’s probably good in the 
other one.  We target -20 so we have plenty of margin.  So we have some room to 
cut it a little closer when we have to, like adding a splitter for a duplex 
that was originally counted as a 1 family home during our planning, or losses 
from repairs, or whatever.  The spec sheet for our everyday ONT says 
sensitivity is -28.5 at BER e10-3, which is an acceptable BER with FEC enabled. 
 So in perfect conditions with a straight shot from the OLT to the ONT and no 
splices I could get 118km.  I don’t think they sell 118km reels, so that’s not 
realistic, but 100km figure isn’t crazy.  Realistically you won’t do that 
because you’ll have splitters.  If you were going to dedicate a whole fiber at 
that distance to one customer then you’d probably do Ethernet with long range 
transceivers.  With that much plant dedicated to them they’re hopefully paying 
a mint.

 

So yeah.  You could design with small nodes close to the customer, or you could 
design with one awesome POP reaching several towns.  Either way is doable.

 

 

Redundancy

It’s possible.  Google search for PON Type B and Type C protection.  

There are some fun little diagrams from Huawei here:

https://forum.huawei.com/enterprise/en/hcip-access-01-gpon-type-b-protection-technology/thread/667281720950538240-667213871523442688

https://forum.huawei.com/enterprise/en/hcip-access-02-gpon-type-c-protection-technology/thread/667281974273916929-667213871523442688

 

I have never done it, and I don’t know who does do it.  I’m not even sure if 
our Nokia equipment supports it.  You’ll spend twice the money on OLT capacity, 
and you’d lose ~3.5dB from the link budget to split the path to two OLT’s.  
You’d consequently spend twice as much on power and all that goes with that 
(battery backup, generator capacity, air conditioning, space).  The extra 1x2 
split could potentially cut the number of subs on the circuit by as much as 
half.  I haven’t done the math to confirm whether it’s worth it or not, but on 
the surface it sounds like it wouldn’t be. 

 

We’ve had bad transceivers and bad line cards, but not very often.  In the 
market I’m responsible for I’ve had 3 transceivers fail in 3 years, and there 
are over a thousand deployed here.  I can live with 0.3% failures on that time 
scale.  I had one bad line card, but it had a dead port out of the box.  I 
haven’t had one fail in service yet.  Power failures happen, but when we’re 
building a POP to serve 12,000 households we’re not going to skimp on 
batteries.  So redundancy would be nice to have, and someone must do it, but 
I’d have a hard time making the business case to my superiors.  If we were 
charging top dollar for an enterprise/SMB service that might be a way to 
differentiate and justify the higher price.

 

 

 

 

From: AF  On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2024 5:40 PM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PON question

 

Mike Hammett kind of touched on what I was asking and why.  I was told that 
Metronet near me had a hut in Batavia that also served 

[AFMUG] CALEA and WiFi

[dmmoffett]

CALEA hasn't been on my radar much, so this is probably an old topic, but
it's one I don't know much about.

 

If you provide WiFi in a public space how do you handle compliance?  We have
parks, airports, and other public spaces with managed WiFi.  There are also
MDU's with WiFi in a public area like a courtyard, lounge, lobby, etc.

 

My understanding is you have to be able to capture traffic if you're ordered
to do so.  Do you also have to be able to identify the individual?  

 

If they ever asked me to capture all traffic from the park WiFi..sure no
problem.  If they gave me a particular IP, port, and time, and they wanted
me to start capturing traffic AND identify who it was, then I would only be
able to tell them it was someone at the park.  At best I could give them a
MAC address and hostname.  If I have to identify the customer that's easy:
the municipal parks department, but I'm guessing that's not what they will
want to know.

 

Will this stuff get us in trouble?

 

-Adam

 

-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com