> In the current implementation in net/wireless/reg.c a channel is only then > allowed if it falls into a regulatory rule which allows it. Channel 144 > (5710–5730 MHz) > in Germany could possibly be allowed, but lies in the union of the > frequency ranges of two > adjacent reg. rules. > > (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (N/A, 26), (0 ms), DFS > (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (N/A, 13), (N/A) > > It would therefore be necessary, to combine two adjacent rules correctly. The resulting channel definition > would therefore be limited to 13dBm, 80 MHz and has to use DFS. Should the regulatory code be altered to > allow for such checks or do I understand this completely wrong? Hmm. Yeah. Somehow, I actually thought we did this?! How did this work? Or did we just always hack around it by aligning the regdb with the wireless channelisation? No objection to fixing that in the reg code, I think. johannes
