On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Emmanuel Grumbach <egrumbach@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> <emmanuel.grumbach@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Grumbach, Emmanuel >> >><emmanuel.grumbach@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>>> country IL: >> >>>>> (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20) >> >>>>> + (5150 - 5250 @ 40). (N/A, 200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR >> >>>>> + (5250 - 5350 @ 40). (N/A, 200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS >> >>>> >> >>>>I believe the one standing issue here is you are enabling HT40 on 5 >> >>>>GHz, how about enabling 2.4 GHz first, and then through a separate >> >>>>patch and time/review we review the HT40 stuff, unless you are in no >> >>>>rush to get 2.4 GHz enabled. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> I am not following... HT40 on 2.4 GHz is already enabled... >> >>> What should I enable in 2.4 GHz ? >> >> >> >>Sorry I meant 5 GHz. >> > >> > Actually 40GHz is less a problem in 5GHz than in 2.4GHz since in 2.4GHz >> > I need to have a "Coexistence mechanism", which is not required in 5GHz. >> > This Coexistence mechanism is apparently implemented by one OEM under the >> > name "Clear Channel Assessment (CCA)". >> > >> > In short, I don't think there is any special issue with 40MHz in 5GHz, but >> > I may miss something here... In any case, I have no problem with sending >> > a patch that allows 5GHz in 20MHz for the moment. >> > I can also have a look at the EEPROM in our NICs which is supposed to have >> > all the needed limitations. Details to follow tomorrow. >> >> OK thanks for the clarification Emmanuel, please give Michael some >> time to review. >> > > > How much time ? :-) Seems he just finished and sent his notes to the list. 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
