From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: proposal for new wireless configuration API Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:14:24 +0200 Message-ID: <1155712464.3600.10.camel@ux156> References: <1155655728.17742.30.camel@ux156> <200608151838.58182.mb@bu3sch.de> <1155665688.8940.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200608152113.23697.mb@bu3sch.de> <1155671994.19284.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Michael Buesch , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jean Tourrilhes Return-path: Received: from crystal.sipsolutions.net ([195.210.38.204]:26020 "EHLO sipsolutions.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750956AbWHPHOF (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Aug 2006 03:14:05 -0400 To: Dan Williams In-Reply-To: <1155671994.19284.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 15:59 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > Ok, so if somebody magically opens up new unlicensed ISM spectrum > around, say, 7GHz, does that space get broken into channels and assigned > specific numbers by the IEEE? > > I know there are stable channel #s for abg range. What about the > future? [1] Can we guarantee that whenever new spectrum opens up that > future 802.11 products may use, that the mappings are well-defined? > > That was my main question. I'd expect them to actually break it into channels and assign channel numbers. Or whoever creates the hardware first does it, and those numbers then get adopted in the year-long specification process ;) Besides, if we really really really needed something else later for whatever weird reason, we could add a new attribute for those cases, and have it reject the channel attribute then :) johannes