From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: [RFC] Geographical/regulatory information for ieee80211 Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:55:32 -0700 Message-ID: <4443D694.8090809@hp.com> References: <443EF3E9.7050303@lwfinger.net> <20060415174734.GA10595@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Larry Finger , netdev@vger.kernel.org, jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us Return-path: Received: from palrel12.hp.com ([156.153.255.237]:53225 "EHLO palrel12.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751191AbWDQRzf (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:55:35 -0400 To: Christoph Hellwig In-Reply-To: <20060415174734.GA10595@infradead.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 07:59:21PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > >>I am planning on writing a new routine to be added to >>net/ieee80211/ieee80211_geo.c that will populate an ieee80211_geo object >>given a country code. The new routine will eliminate the need for each >>driver to do their own. > > > This sounds like a generally good idea, but the question is: do we want > this inside a kernel module or in userspace, either like the regulartory > daemon intel has (unfortunately in binary only form) or as a simple init > script. I really don't want to recompile my kernel just because regulations > changed, and they seems to do that quite often. Yet I would expect the regulatory bodies to look less favorably on something more easily maleable by the end-user. rick jones