(Resend to Kalle's correct email address) On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 2:36 PM Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > (Adding linux-wireless ML, Kalle and Johannes) > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 1:13 AM Taavi Eomäe <taavieomae@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > I have a few questions about the current regdb values for Estonia/EE and EU: > > > > 1) There are no allowed S1G/HaLow/802.11ah EE (or EU) bands: > > > > Based on resources online and Estonian law > > (https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/117052024018?leiaKehtiv - Extra 6) > > these two additions should be correct: > > > > + (863 - 868 @ 1), (25 mW) > > + (915.8 - 919.4 @ 1), (25 mW) > > > > (Note: I don't see a way to define duty-cycle limitations, but that > > should be okay?) > > I'm not sure if there are plans to support S1G in Linux. If not then > the information would go unused and untested. If it is supported, then > patches are more than welcome. > > > 2) There's seems to be a missing 160MHz channel (50): > > > > This combines the restrictions of the two existing defined bands it > > overlaps with (https://ttja.ee/eraklient/side-ja-meediateenused/raadioside/wifi-seadmete-kasutus): > > > > + (5150 - 5350 @ 160), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI > > The AUTO-BW flag lets the kernel know that it can combine neighboring > rules for wider bandwidth at the lowest power limit within the rules. > > Thus merging the rules is not needed. Indeed we would prefer rules not > be merged, as the database should convey information closest to the > regulations. > > > 3) The 6GHz band should also have an outdoor limit and probably also > > allow 320MHz channels (at least in EE): > > > > - (5945 - 6425 @ 160), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, wmmrule=ETSI > > + (5945 - 6425 @ 320), (25 mW), wmmrule=ETSI > > + (5945 - 6425 @ 320), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, wmmrule=ETSI > > The kernel currently can't deal with duplicate rules for the same > channel. Thus we have to make a decision on whether to have a rule > with higher power but indoor use only, or the opposite. > > Within our database, we have the former for some jurisdictions > and the latter for others. It really depends on the submitter. > > > Would a patch for these be accepted? Should I update all EU countries > > (considering it seems harmonized within the EU)? > > I would expect patches to be per country referencing local regulations, > not just the EU one. IIUC the EU sets one harmonized regulation but then > it's up to each member country to implement / incorporate them? > > Whether you would like to update other EU countries is up to you. > > > Thanks > ChenYu
