From: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
Jan Kaisrlik <kaisrja1@fel.cvut.cz>,
wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, bernd.lehmann@volkswagen.de,
jan-niklas.meier@volkswagen.de, s.sander@nordsys.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] cfg80211: Add support for ITS-G5 band (5.9 GHz)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 18:38:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h9lqeplf.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1444997197.2370.22.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Hi all,
(I added wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org to recipients, the original
mail is at http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=144499490005262)
On Fri, Oct 16 2015, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-10-16 at 13:28 +0200, Jan Kaisrlik wrote:
>> The patch adds support for Intelligent Transportation System (ITS-G5)
>> band as defined by ETSI EN 302 663 standard. This band is enabled by
>> a new configuration option CFG80211_REG_ITSG5_BAND, which depends on
>> CFG80211_CERTIFICATION_ONUS.
>
> That Kconfig option seems unnecessary - after all, the regulatory
> database still has a say in this?
I thought that the regdb is for unlicensed bands with unrestricted use.
The 5.9 GHz band is not licensed but it is restricted for ITS
applications. In http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=140183393707445&w=2
Luis Rodriguez suggested that having a Kconfig option may be the way to
go, but we may misread what he was saying.
I assume that if this band will be in regdb, it will be too easy to use
this band (e.g. by mistake) for non-ITS applications.
> Even the NL80211_RRF_ITSG5 flag seems somewhat unnecessary - if the
> regulatory database did in fact provide information on these channels,
> then we can assume they're usable, no?
>
> IOW - I don't really see the point of this patch - can't we treat these
> channels just like regular ones, and rely on the regulatory information
> to prevent their use in all but special scenarios (where the integrator
> is providing a proper database)?
Our goal is to make it easier for people to experiment with ITS in
controlled environment (e.g. in a university lab). So you suggest that
this should be enabled by providing custom regdb rather than recompiling
the kernel with CFG80211_CERTIFICATION_ONUS?
-Michal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-16 16:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-16 11:28 [RFC PATCH 1/2] cfg80211: Add support for ITS-G5 band (5.9 GHz) Jan Kaisrlik
2015-10-16 11:28 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] ath9k: " Jan Kaisrlik
2015-10-16 12:06 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] cfg80211: " Johannes Berg
2015-10-16 16:38 ` Michal Sojka [this message]
2015-10-16 20:24 ` Johannes Berg
2015-10-16 20:46 ` Michal Sojka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87h9lqeplf.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz \
--to=sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz \
--cc=bernd.lehmann@volkswagen.de \
--cc=jan-niklas.meier@volkswagen.de \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=kaisrja1@fel.cvut.cz \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=s.sander@nordsys.de \
--cc=wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox