From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from canardo.mork.no ([2001:4641::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1YpaZX-0005gh-CU for wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 10:59:32 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mork.no; s=a; t=1430823544; bh=0arJLKIM2xywXvGk1udTM3u8Juk/pb70mHeAf9NrExo=; h=From:To:Cc:References:Date:Message-ID:From; b=nv8ApGiobg6gLp20oLmBjKa4V8jYHCghVazK0y3W+RdGKDYFl/Abvfak7k+9wcc7k pv5hugEchrmPY4jO++VQy5Ut1DW8tWpbCIDwuHpJCfocuylpmZvhvsN+/zFpSETEZm Ocf+sTRqz2t3G88Y/DSNIvUTdbyq60w88qd1uw51Y5TqsLqJXZ4XyzAtF6JZ+QoEa3 SQXMQ0OmEedipMM7aLMM519fyefn/7j9cCBIdyOSa5690OJVF7jAi7JLTZkHGIxltl BggTRWAoAQzEChguXWBAs24SyLDpef0ON7dzCLBq7q5GJi0dxwbwZdDaAj9L/Qd/Hv SKJ/k9X9senTQ== From: =?utf-8?Q?Bj=C3=B8rn_Mork?= References: <20150505113216.90f7fdbceca7565206599b83@ubnt.com> <20150505084821.GA26349@jouni.qca.qualcomm.com> Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 12:58:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20150505084821.GA26349@jouni.qca.qualcomm.com> (Jouni Malinen's message of "Tue, 5 May 2015 11:48:21 +0300") Message-ID: <87d22f8f4d.fsf@nemi.mork.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] Specify Australian DFS region as DFS-ETSI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: "wireless-regdb" Errors-To: wireless-regdb-bounces+johannes=sipsolutions.net@lists.infradead.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: Jouni Malinen Cc: wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org, Dmitry Ivanov List-ID: Jouni Malinen writes: > On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 11:32:16AM +0300, Dmitry Ivanov wrote: >> Currently, DFS region for Australia is not specified. This prevents starting AP with AU country code on DFS-affected channel in 5 GHz band with latest cfg80211 and hostapd because there is an explicit check for such condition. >> >> This patch specifies DFS region for Australia as DFS-ETSI. Alternatively, DFS-FCC can be used. > > I would have used DFS-FCC here unless you have a clear indication of > DFS-ETSI being closer to requirements. In addition, there should be a > Signed-off-by: tag in the commit log as described in the CONTRIBUTING > file. >From what I can gather from http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2014L01253 the details are hidden in the standard "AS/NZS 4268:2012". The scope here: http://shop.standards.co.nz/catalog/4268:2012%28AS|NZS%29/scope? shows the existence of an appendix "B" titled "DYNAMIC FREQUENCY SELECTION (DFS) AND TRANSMIT POWER CONTROL (TPC) REQUIREMENTS FOR RADIO LOCAL AREA NETWORK (RLAN) TRANSMITTERS OPERATING IN 5250 TO 5350 MHz OR 5470 TO 5725 MHz" But I'm afraid you'll have to buy the standard to get the full details... Given hysterical raisins, and the general tendency to reference ETSI standards and ERC decisions, I'd say that DFS-ETSI is more likely. Why would they use FCC rules? But it should probably be kept aligned with the NZ entry, which currently is DFS-FCC. Don't know the source of that, though. Could very well be wrong... Ref the "EN 301 893 V1.7.1" alternative given here: https://gazette.govt.nz/notice/id/2015-go694 Bjørn _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb