wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Juuso Oikarinen]

Hi John, all,

The following is an excerpt of the db.txt from most recent
wireless-regdb.

country US:
         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
         (5490 - 5600 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
         (5650 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
 
country CA:
         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
         (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)

We are under the understanding that the Canadian national rules deny the
usage of the 5490-5710 range of frequencies (ref from RSS-210), but the
range is present in the allowed range of frequencies for the CA region:

"Additional requirements for the band 5600-5650 MHz: Until further
notice, devices subject to this Section shall not be capable of
transmitting in the band 5600-5650 MHz, so that Environment Canada
weather radars operating in this band are protected."

Then again, the FCC rules (15.407) do not prohibit the mentioned range
of frequencies within the US (with DFS and limited power level) but in
the regulatory database that range is missing.


Is there a bug in the regulatory db, or am I misunderstanding something?


-Juuso

Re: wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Juuso Oikarinen
<juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com> wrote:
> Hi John, all,
>
> The following is an excerpt of the db.txt from most recent
> wireless-regdb.
>
> country US:
>         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
>         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
>         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
>         (5490 - 5600 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
>         (5650 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
>         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
>
> country CA:
>         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
>         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
>         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
>         (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
>         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
>
> We are under the understanding that the Canadian national rules deny the
> usage of the 5490-5710 range of frequencies (ref from RSS-210), but the
> range is present in the allowed range of frequencies for the CA region:
>
> "Additional requirements for the band 5600-5650 MHz: Until further
> notice, devices subject to this Section shall not be capable of
> transmitting in the band 5600-5650 MHz, so that Environment Canada
> weather radars operating in this band are protected."
>
> Then again, the FCC rules (15.407) do not prohibit the mentioned range
> of frequencies within the US (with DFS and limited power level) but in
> the regulatory database that range is missing.
>
>
> Is there a bug in the regulatory db, or am I misunderstanding something?


Michael, any opinion on this?

  Luis

Re: wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Juuso Oikarinen]

On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 08:57 -0700, ext Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Juuso Oikarinen
> <juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com> wrote:
> > Hi John, all,
> >
> > The following is an excerpt of the db.txt from most recent
> > wireless-regdb.
> >
> > country US:
> >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5490 - 5600 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5650 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> >
> > country CA:
> >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> >
> > We are under the understanding that the Canadian national rules deny the
> > usage of the 5490-5710 range of frequencies (ref from RSS-210), but the
> > range is present in the allowed range of frequencies for the CA region:
> >
> > "Additional requirements for the band 5600-5650 MHz: Until further
> > notice, devices subject to this Section shall not be capable of
> > transmitting in the band 5600-5650 MHz, so that Environment Canada
> > weather radars operating in this band are protected."
> >
> > Then again, the FCC rules (15.407) do not prohibit the mentioned range
> > of frequencies within the US (with DFS and limited power level) but in
> > the regulatory database that range is missing.
> >
> >
> > Is there a bug in the regulatory db, or am I misunderstanding something?
> 
> 
> Michael, any opinion on this?

Any take on this one?

-Juuso

Wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Michael Green]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3262 bytes --]

1) Canada:    Industry Canada allows STAs to passive scan (ie enable operation) in those weather radar channels (5.6 to 5.65 GHz).  
APs must disable operation in those channels in Canada.  

2) U.S.:  I hope the entire industry (including Open Source) is aware and understands latest FCC rules for this band (attached "interim rules").    Here again, APs must disable operation in those channels and follow other restrictions about usage and installation, warnings to installers as described in this attachment.
STAs in US are not subject to these restrictions.

3) Atheros licensed software has two different reg domains for some countries like U.S. to support this case (ie different channels sets for AP vs. STA for the same country).


And somewhat related note:  in future when peer to peer technologies are supported in open source, then we need to be careful that sw and hw complies with these same rules (when a client device acts like a  "Master" per FCC definition using radar channels, then it must meet the full AP/DFS rules).  This point is not directly related to above Q&A, but thought I would mention it now.



Michael Green
Atheros Communications, Inc.
mgreen@atheros.com
Desk:   +1-781-400-1491
Mobile: +1-508-380-4921

-----Original Message-----
From: Juuso Oikarinen [mailto:juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 6:29 AM
To: ext Luis R. Rodriguez
Cc: Michael Green; ext John W. Linville; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 08:57 -0700, ext Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Juuso Oikarinen 
> <juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com> wrote:
> > Hi John, all,
> >
> > The following is an excerpt of the db.txt from most recent 
> > wireless-regdb.
> >
> > country US:
> >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5490 - 5600 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5650 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> >
> > country CA:
> >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> >
> > We are under the understanding that the Canadian national rules deny 
> > the usage of the 5490-5710 range of frequencies (ref from RSS-210), 
> > but the range is present in the allowed range of frequencies for the CA region:
> >
> > "Additional requirements for the band 5600-5650 MHz: Until further 
> > notice, devices subject to this Section shall not be capable of 
> > transmitting in the band 5600-5650 MHz, so that Environment Canada 
> > weather radars operating in this band are protected."
> >
> > Then again, the FCC rules (15.407) do not prohibit the mentioned 
> > range of frequencies within the US (with DFS and limited power 
> > level) but in the regulatory database that range is missing.
> >
> >
> > Is there a bug in the regulatory db, or am I misunderstanding something?
> 
> 
> Michael, any opinion on this?

Any take on this one?

-Juuso



[-- Attachment #2: KDB 443999 Interim Approval of UNII Devices.pdf --]
[-- Type: application/pdf, Size: 84474 bytes --]

Re: Wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Juuso Oikarinen]

On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 06:31 -0700, ext Michael Green wrote:
> 1) Canada:    Industry Canada allows STAs to passive scan (ie enable operation) in those weather radar channels (5.6 to 5.65 GHz).  
> APs must disable operation in those channels in Canada.  
> 
> 2) U.S.:  I hope the entire industry (including Open Source) is aware and understands latest FCC rules for this band (attached "interim rules").    Here again, APs must disable operation in those channels and follow other restrictions about usage and installation, warnings to installers as described in this attachment.
> STAs in US are not subject to these restrictions.
> 
> 3) Atheros licensed software has two different reg domains for some countries like U.S. to support this case (ie different channels sets for AP vs. STA for the same country).
> 
> 
> And somewhat related note:  in future when peer to peer technologies are supported in open source, then we need to be careful that sw and hw complies with these same rules (when a client device acts like a  "Master" per FCC definition using radar channels, then it must meet the full AP/DFS rules).  This point is not directly related to above Q&A, but thought I would mention it now.
> 

Thanks a lot for the clarification.

-Juuso

> 
> Michael Green
> Atheros Communications, Inc.
> mgreen@atheros.com
> Desk:   +1-781-400-1491
> Mobile: +1-508-380-4921
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juuso Oikarinen [mailto:juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com] 
> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 6:29 AM
> To: ext Luis R. Rodriguez
> Cc: Michael Green; ext John W. Linville; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?
> 
> On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 08:57 -0700, ext Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Juuso Oikarinen 
> > <juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com> wrote:
> > > Hi John, all,
> > >
> > > The following is an excerpt of the db.txt from most recent 
> > > wireless-regdb.
> > >
> > > country US:
> > >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> > >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> > >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > >         (5490 - 5600 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > >         (5650 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> > >
> > > country CA:
> > >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> > >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> > >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > >         (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> > >
> > > We are under the understanding that the Canadian national rules deny 
> > > the usage of the 5490-5710 range of frequencies (ref from RSS-210), 
> > > but the range is present in the allowed range of frequencies for the CA region:
> > >
> > > "Additional requirements for the band 5600-5650 MHz: Until further 
> > > notice, devices subject to this Section shall not be capable of 
> > > transmitting in the band 5600-5650 MHz, so that Environment Canada 
> > > weather radars operating in this band are protected."
> > >
> > > Then again, the FCC rules (15.407) do not prohibit the mentioned 
> > > range of frequencies within the US (with DFS and limited power 
> > > level) but in the regulatory database that range is missing.
> > >
> > >
> > > Is there a bug in the regulatory db, or am I misunderstanding something?
> > 
> > 
> > Michael, any opinion on this?
> 
> Any take on this one?
> 
> -Juuso
> 
> 

Re: Wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Juuso Oikarinen]

On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 07:57 +0300, Juuso Oikarinen wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 06:31 -0700, ext Michael Green wrote:
> > 1) Canada:    Industry Canada allows STAs to passive scan (ie enable operation) in those weather radar channels (5.6 to 5.65 GHz).  
> > APs must disable operation in those channels in Canada.  
> > 
> > 2) U.S.:  I hope the entire industry (including Open Source) is aware and understands latest FCC rules for this band (attached "interim rules").    Here again, APs must disable operation in those channels and follow other restrictions about usage and installation, warnings to installers as described in this attachment.
> > STAs in US are not subject to these restrictions.
> > 
> > 3) Atheros licensed software has two different reg domains for some countries like U.S. to support this case (ie different channels sets for AP vs. STA for the same country).
> > 
> > 
> > And somewhat related note:  in future when peer to peer technologies are supported in open source, then we need to be careful that sw and hw complies with these same rules (when a client device acts like a  "Master" per FCC definition using radar channels, then it must meet the full AP/DFS rules).  This point is not directly related to above Q&A, but thought I would mention it now.
> > 
> 
> Thanks a lot for the clarification.

One more thing though. For 1), I cannot find these interim rules
anywhere, can you post me a reference?

While I agree with what is said, but I still have the understanding that
if there is a non-conforming AP transmitting on the weather radar
frequencies within Canada, the STA still should refrain from
transmissions.

-Juuso

> -Juuso
> 
> > 
> > Michael Green
> > Atheros Communications, Inc.
> > mgreen@atheros.com
> > Desk:   +1-781-400-1491
> > Mobile: +1-508-380-4921
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Juuso Oikarinen [mailto:juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com] 
> > Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 6:29 AM
> > To: ext Luis R. Rodriguez
> > Cc: Michael Green; ext John W. Linville; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org
> > Subject: Re: wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?
> > 
> > On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 08:57 -0700, ext Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Juuso Oikarinen 
> > > <juuso.oikarinen@nokia.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi John, all,
> > > >
> > > > The following is an excerpt of the db.txt from most recent 
> > > > wireless-regdb.
> > > >
> > > > country US:
> > > >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> > > >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> > > >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > > >         (5490 - 5600 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > > >         (5650 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > > >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> > > >
> > > > country CA:
> > > >         (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (3, 27)
> > > >         (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (3, 17)
> > > >         (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > > >         (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (3, 20), DFS
> > > >         (5735 - 5835 @ 40), (3, 30)
> > > >
> > > > We are under the understanding that the Canadian national rules deny 
> > > > the usage of the 5490-5710 range of frequencies (ref from RSS-210), 
> > > > but the range is present in the allowed range of frequencies for the CA region:
> > > >
> > > > "Additional requirements for the band 5600-5650 MHz: Until further 
> > > > notice, devices subject to this Section shall not be capable of 
> > > > transmitting in the band 5600-5650 MHz, so that Environment Canada 
> > > > weather radars operating in this band are protected."
> > > >
> > > > Then again, the FCC rules (15.407) do not prohibit the mentioned 
> > > > range of frequencies within the US (with DFS and limited power 
> > > > level) but in the regulatory database that range is missing.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Is there a bug in the regulatory db, or am I misunderstanding something?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Michael, any opinion on this?
> > 
> > Any take on this one?
> > 
> > -Juuso
> > 
> > 
> 

wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Green, Michael]
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Re: wireless-regdb US and CA settings incorrect?

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Green, Michael <green@qca.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> Well, the FCC & Canada regdomains should disable those TDWR channels for an AP.
> But regdomains for client devices should not disable those channels.
>
> In our licensed sw, we use different regdomains for AP vs. STA to accomplish this. Not sure how linux handles this.

In Linux, the DFS flag will prohibit initiating communication for AP,
IBSS, Mesh, or P2P in those frequency ranges as well.

  Luis