From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com ([209.85.218.52]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1YEgEg-0006yB-R3 for wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:33:27 +0000 Received: by mail-oi0-f52.google.com with SMTP id h136so5074016oig.11 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:33:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 09:33:03 -0600 From: Seth Forshee Message-ID: <20150123153303.GB4094@ubuntu-hedt> References: <20150123103720.GA7274@jouni.qca.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150123103720.GA7274@jouni.qca.qualcomm.com> Subject: Re: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Add back regulatory rules for US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: "wireless-regdb" Errors-To: wireless-regdb-bounces+johannes=sipsolutions.net@lists.infradead.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: Jouni Malinen Cc: "wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org" , Daiwei Li List-ID: On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:37:20PM +0200, Jouni Malinen wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 07:42:12PM -0800, Daiwei Li wrote: > > We've found that our devices can't seem to operate on certain > > frequencies (e.g. 5660MHz) being used by access points like the Apple > > Airport Extreme and Asus RT-AC68U. I did a git bisect and found that > > 31dc1c5eca29d039ac8f26340defe44bd7e497c1 removed that band amongst > > others. A more recent [1] FCC source implies that these frequencies > > should be usable with DFS. > > > > Does anyone know the source for the commit that removed these frequencies from? > > I'm not sure what the exact rationale for that part of the commit was. > > > @@ -1125,6 +1125,8 @@ country US: DFS-FCC > > (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (30) > > (5170 - 5250 @ 80), (17), AUTO-BW > > (5250 - 5330 @ 80), (23), DFS, AUTO-BW > > + (5490 - 5600 @ 80), (23), DFS, AUTO-BW > > + (5650 - 5710 @ 40), (23), DFS, AUTO-BW > > (5735 - 5835 @ 80), (30) > > AUTO-BW does not seem to make much sense here since neither new range > has immediately neighboring ranges with different flags. Good point. Daiwei, care to send an updated patch? _______________________________________________ wireless-regdb mailing list wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb