nanog mailing list archives

Re: Comcast thinks it ok to install public wifi in your house


From: Scott Helms <khelms () zcorum com>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 09:33:14 -0500

Not really, this is much more like the mesh networks that have been put in
place by lots of WISPs where every customer is also a relay.  It's also
comparable to pico cells that many of the LTE operators use to extend
coverage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picocell

https://wirelesstelecom.wordpress.com/tag/picocell/


Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:23 AM, TR Shaw <tshaw () oitc com> wrote:

Seems to me that they (Bright House Networks, Cox Communications, Optimum,
Time Warner Cable and Comcast) are effectively operating a business out of
your house and without a business license.  I am sure that this is illegal
in many towns and many towns would like the revenue.

In fact does this put the homeowner at risk since they are effectively
supporting a business running out of their house?

Tom

On Dec 11, 2014, at 9:02 AM, Scott Helms <khelms () zcorum com> wrote:

All of the members of the CableWiFi consortium have been.

Bright House Networks, Cox Communications, Optimum, Time Warner Cable and
Comcast.

http://www.cablewifi.com/

Liberty Global, the largest MSO, also does it and this year announced an
agreement with Comcast to allow roaming on each other's WiFi networks,
though that is not extended to the other members of CableWiFi at this
time.


http://corporate.comcast.com/news-information/news-feed/comcast-and-liberty-global-announce-agreement-to-connect-u-s-and-european-wi-fi-networks


Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Ryan Pavely <paradox () nac net> wrote:

http://bgr.com/2014/05/12/cablevision-optimum-modem-wifi-hotspots/

I thought cablevision has been doing this for years.

I had a higher level tech at mi casa within the last two years and he
suggested their goal was to get enough coverage to start offering CV
voip
cell phones.  "pay a little less, for not guaranteed coverage'



 Ryan Pavely
  Net Access
  http://www.nac.net/

On 12/10/2014 9:35 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:

Why am I not surprised?

Whose fault would it be if your comcast installed public wifi would be
abused to download illegal material or launch a botnet, to name some
random
fun one could have on your behalf. :-/

(apologies if this was posted already, couldn't find an email about it
on
the list)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/10/disgruntled_
customers_lob_sueball_at_comcast_over_public_wifi/

"A mother and daughter are suing Comcast claiming the cable giant's
router in their home was offering public Wi-Fi without their
permission.

Comcast-supplied routers broadcast an encrypted, private wireless
network
for people at home, plus a non-encrypted network called XfinityWiFi
that
can be used by nearby subscribers. So if you're passing by a fellow
user's
home, you can lock onto their public Wi-Fi, log in using your Comcast
username and password, and use that home's bandwidth.

However, Toyer Grear, 39, and daughter Joycelyn Harris – who live
together in Alameda County, California – say they never gave Comcast
permission to run a public network from their home cable connection.

In a lawsuit [PDF] filed in the northern district of the golden state,
the pair accuse the ISP of breaking the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
and
two other laws.

Grear – a paralegal – and her daughter claim the Xfinity hotspot is an
unauthorized intrusion into their private home, places a "vast" burden
on
electricity bills, opens them up to attacks by hackers, and "degrades"
their bandwidth.

"Comcast does not, however, obtain the customer's authorization prior
to
engaging in this use of the customer's equipment and internet service
for
public, non-household use," the suit claims.

"Indeed, without obtaining its customers' authorization for this
additional use of their equipment and resources, over which the
customer
has no control, Comcast has externalized the costs of its national
Wi-Fi
network onto its customers."

The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages for themselves and on
behalf
of all Comcast customers nation-wide in their class-action case – the
service was rolled out to 20 million customers this year."







Current thread: