> > It seems to me that (12, -1) would be pretty much the same as (8, +1) as > > far as regulatory is concerned. > > Yes, just beacons will flows on 12 and not on 8 so from protocol point > this is important Yes, but how is it important to the regulatory regulations? > (But this is not what is written in the comment we comparing (8,-1) to > (8,+1) - Both are FAT channels - Beacons flow on 8 channel) > > I'm just thinking about how we should > > express this in the regulatory database where we're not really concerned > > with channels but rather allowed bands. > > > Not sure what do you mean, You always need to keep in mind channel, band tuple. Well our database just says: "ok, you're allowed to use 2400-2483.5 MHz, at a maximum bandwidth of 40 MHz, if it fits" johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
