Re: FCC issues new rules about foreign made routers
"Livingood, Jason via NANOG" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.operators.nanog |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <BY5PR11MB425889EF4E301370C33B14C5C756A@BY5PR11MB4258.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> |
> In the documents I don't see any provision for waivers other than conditional approval. People more familiar with FCC process than me say the same, there's no realistic way to get anything approved. You could look to what have been done on drones, since that was the first of these IIRC. Based on no inside info - making a total guess at the future - I could imagine that the covered list will continue to expand to other network, server, and application technologies. > Oh, absolutely, the software is awful and there's a lot we can and should do about it. But that's unrelated to where the box is physically assembled. I have a Ubiquiti Edgerouter which as far as I know is designed in the US, and runs software written in the US, but it's assembled in China so it's lucky I already have one. Even in a case of h/w design or s/w dev seemingly done inside the US, that may in reality just be led by US staff; it may involve staff in other countries (i.e., India, Vietnam, Taiwan, EU). JL _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/SY3YHUEN54QPOTLI6FBHZE7XQRK2FOQZ/