From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: proposal for new wireless configuration API Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:00:17 -0400 Message-ID: <20060818150006.GA5359@tuxdriver.com> References: <1155655728.17742.30.camel@ux156> <1155659387.3005.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200608151838.58182.mb@bu3sch.de> <20060817232941.GB23163@p15091797.pureserver.info> <1155885125.3425.11.camel@ux156> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ulrich Kunitz , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.52]:6152 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030465AbWHRPBN (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:01:13 -0400 To: Johannes Berg Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1155885125.3425.11.camel@ux156> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 09:12:05AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 01:29 +0200, Ulrich Kunitz wrote: > > Or are here people, who > > really want to freely transmit on all frequencies their RF might > > be able to generate? > > Yes :P > Some amateur radio people asked me about extending the spectrum a bit to > the top (apparently they're allowed to use the band just above the ISM > band as well). > > However, I don't think we need to cater them in the API. I think they > ought to be able to live with kernel patches since we don't really know > how far up the frequency on say the bcm43xx can go anyway before the > card breaks/malfunctions. I concur. It would be best to confine the "normal" API to things that are legitimately done without a license if at all possible. Those who are licensed for other spectrum uses should be more than capable of applying a patch to do so (thereby more clearly taking regulatory responsibility upon themselves). John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com