On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Peer, Ilan <ilan.peer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 09:22 +0300, Ilan Peer wrote: >> > At some locations, channels 149-165 are considered a single bundle, >> > while at some other locations, e.g., Indonesia, channels >> > 149-161 are considered a single bundle, while channel 165 belongs to a >> > different bundle. This means that: >> > >> > 1. A station interface connection to an AP on channel 165 allows >> > the instantiation of a P2P GO on channels 149-165. >> > 2. A station interface connection to an AP on channels 149-161 >> > does NOT allow the instantiation of a P2P GO on channel 165. >> > >> > Fix this. >> >> I'll apply this, but I'm not a big fan of it. Please work with Luis to get some >> information into the regulatory database. >> > > Sure. Luis, how would like me to address this? Generally we move things that are not universal as flags, or value attributes, the difficulty here lies in that we'd get different sets of groups that allow flexibility to lift restrictions. A flag would still work in the case of UNII 3 and would enable this permissive rule to be usable on other bands as well. It would also then make the restriction to Indonesia specific to that region. As far as I can tell P2P does mandate country IE to be set so this would make relying on the country IE to be available on clients associating, the flag could also be cleared upon disconnect as we clear all permissive flags as we do not after a disconnect / suspend / resume / reboot. Let me know what you think. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
