kieron115

lmfao. apparently the way this was originally written would have prevented non-exempt routers from getting security updates. you know, the alleged reason this ruling even exists. somebody at the FCC office of engineering and technology must have noticed because they issued a temporary waiver (PDF file).

Applying the revised 47 CFR §§ 2.932(b) and 2.1043(b) to the newly added Covered Routers would have the effect of prohibiting permissive changes to Covered Routers even if they were authorized prior to the March 23, 2026, Covered List addition. This prohibition would be in effect even for Class I permissive changes—such as software and firmware security updates that mitigate harm to U.S. consumers—because previously-authorized Routers are now covered equipment. ............... Therefore, OET concludes that a limited waiver until March 1, 2027, is warranted and in the public interest. March 1, 2027, is convenient because it is the date until which the recent DoW determination excepts certain otherwise Covered Routers. Prior to March 1, 2027, the OET will re-evaluate whether to further extend applicability.

They wouldn't be forwarding packets between networked systems unless you're using one as a hotspot. And even then I don't know if the term "networked systems" would include a single computer or if they intend it to mean an area network of some kind.

the children yearn for the mines

They’re always rentals though, correct It’ll be interesting to see which way it swings, for sure. Stupid stupid rule either way.

Taking a huge payment from Comcast and Verizon would be my guess. The language appears to exclude ISP-owned routers.

It would be funny if, like, the UniFi line got banned but the edgerouter line didn’t just based on target audience

I’m thinking exempt based on the FCC language of “designed to be installed by the consumer”. ISP provided routers are usually hooked up by the installer tech. Which makes me wonder which ISP chortled orange man’s balls to get this passed.

It would seem to exclude ISP provided routers =/

Based on the language, it would seem to exclude ISP provided routers as those are not “designed to be installed by the consumer”. It also excludes anything not SoHo.

I’m thinking exempt based on the FCC language of “designed to be installed by the consumer”. ISP provided routers are usually hooked up by the installer tech. Which makes me wonder which ISP chortled orange man’s balls to get this passed.

“This is why she’s not allowed on the couch” says joke to me idk.

not sure why you got downvoted. its the picture from the wapo article. unless wapo is in on the meme.