From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.atheros.com ([12.36.123.2]:17945 "EHLO mail.atheros.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751072AbZAFUrs (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:47:48 -0500 Received: from mail.atheros.com ([10.10.20.108]) by sidewinder.atheros.com for ; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:47:48 -0800 Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 12:47:44 -0800 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: Gertjan van Wingerde CC: Luis Rodriguez , Ivo van Doorn , "John W. Linville" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "rt2400-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH] rt2x00: Provide regulatory hint with rt2500pci/usb Message-ID: <20090106204744.GB21980@tesla> (sfid-20090106_214753_823231_3AC97F47) References: <200901042021.10904.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <20090105200809.GH6834@tesla> <49627BCB.4020200@kpnplanet.nl> <200901052321.46422.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <20090105234546.GK6834@tesla> <4963BFEF.2090006@kpnplanet.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In-Reply-To: <4963BFEF.2090006@kpnplanet.nl> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 12:32:47PM -0800, Gertjan van Wingerde wrote: > On 01/06/09 00:45, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 02:21:46PM -0800, Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > > >> On Monday 05 January 2009, Gertjan van Wingerde wrote: > >> > >>> On 01/05/09 21:08, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >>> > >>> The problem isn't there for the bits that Ivo sent, as the rt2500 devices don't support the a band. > >>> > >> For rt2500pci and rt2500usb there are chipsets which support 5GHz (they are rare, but they do exist), > >> comments for the Ralink drivers indicate they simply didn't add the regulatory domain definitions yet. > >> > > > > Based on the documentation from the EEPROM for all devices I read that its recommended > > that the EEPROM *not be relied on for the regulatory domain*, instead it recommends the > > windows registry be used. > > > > Based on tests for the devices with only one band, do are you seeing an actual regulatory > > domain in the EEPROM? > > > > To deal with the issue of having two separate EEPROM values for a regulatory domain > > and since the documentation indicates to not rely on it I would advise to allow users > > to be compliant by selecting the country they are in. wpa_supplicant has support for > > selecting country now, and so does iw. Eventually I see Network Manager letting users > > select the country. But you guys are the maintainers and developers so you will know > > better. > > > > My tests indicate that there are devices out there that have this > information set in the EEPROM. Based on tests with my own patch, and my > own devices, I have been able to determine the following: > > 1. rt2400pci --> don't know, don't own a rt2400pci device. > 2. rt2500pci --> don't know, don't own a rt2500pci device anymore. > 3. rt2500usb --> my e-tech device (not sure which type; the device > doesn't say it) has an actual domain set for the bg band. > 4. rt61pci --> my Sitecom WL151 device does not contain actual domain > information. > 5. rt73usb --> my Sitecom WL113-002 device does contain actual domain > information, and the codes for the bg band and a band are the same. > 6. rt2800pci --> my Sitecom WL182 device does contain actual domain > information, and the codes for the bg band and a band are the same. > 7. rt2800usb --> my Sitecom WL181 device does contain actual domain > information, and the codes for the bg band and a band are the same. > > So, there are devices out there that do contain "meaningful" regulatory > information. > > Luis, the definitions for the a-band EEPROM codes only give the channel > numbers, it doesn't indicate a real "country". Is there any way we can > check whether these sets of channels are actually consistent with the > regulations of specific countries? You can help contribute to the wireless-regdb and check that the valid channels apply there. Luis