:35 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
But does that meet CALEA specs? Not really, since it does not do the
MD5 hash and such. At least that is what I get from reading about
CALEA. Basically if a TTP doesn't sign off on it you might be at the
wrong end
I asked:
I have 3 of your licensed routers (level 4) When do you plan to
release a version of RouterOS that is CALEA compliant?
Thank You
They Replied:
Hello,
It already is, you simply have to enable sniffer of all traffic, and store
the raw data on a server that captures it. You can
] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:55 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem or issue.
I'm going to keep saying this over and over and over (started over a year
in Orlando, FL.
LaunchPad Pavilion J
- Original Message -
From: Travis Johnson
To: WISPA General List
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem
: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
It is lame because it is a feature that the user community needs and
wants,
and the vendor is passing the buck.
Not surprising, concerning their actions on FCC certification of other
products.
Mikrotik makes dandy router software and I support
disk.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of ralph
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 12:23 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
It is lame because it is a feature that the user community needs
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:55 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik's (lame) answer to CALEA as of 4/23
Why is that lame? I don't see where this is Mikrotik's problem or issue.
I'm going to keep saying this over
