From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/3] Add Regulatory Domain support to d80211 Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:47:50 -0400 Message-ID: <43e72e890610241047g119a4ef5h95969941aa4a80ed@mail.gmail.com> References: <43e72e890610231541k2e8e6dcbq98f58a77aa8a52d7@mail.gmail.com> <20061024140212.GB17543@devicescape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Jiri Benc" , "John W. Linville" , "Jean Tourrilhes" Return-path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.231]:29816 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161115AbWJXRrw (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:47:52 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i4so381804wra for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 10:47:51 -0700 (PDT) To: "David Kimdon" In-Reply-To: <20061024140212.GB17543@devicescape.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 10/24/06, David Kimdon wrote: > Hi, > > > The following patches extend 802.11 regulatory domain support of the > > d80211 wireless stack through two modules: > > > > 1. ieee80211_regdomains > > 2. iso3166-1 > > I am glad to see this work, this is something that we need a solution > for. I do wonder if we can push most of this out of the kernel and > into userspace. We could hard code a single set of constraints in the > kernel which may be used world wide (802.11b channels 1-11, is that > allowed everywhere?). Unforunatley there is no easy middle ground that will make everyone happy. What I defined as World is there just as most devices seem to have such regulatory domain and what I defined it as is a compromise in what seems to be the middle of all restrictions. There is no easy answer here but I think the best is to consider that there is just no "World" regulatory domain unless all regulatory domain agencies do come up with one. We should see if legal can work with a few regulatory agencies to see if at least a few will agree on one... > Then we have a userspace tool which passes > updated regulatory information into the kernel based on the user's > country input. Please see my more thorough reply to Johannes as he asked this first. But yes -- you are right. The main reason why this has been put in the kernel was to make a userspace daemon optional as it would allow us to easily introduce regulatory domain control without forcing distributions to use a new daemon immediately. Also we need to iron out userspace communication before even considering a userspace regulatory daemon. Keep in mind the Kconfig makes the regulatory domains defined optional except World compliant regulatory domain already. Luis