On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 07:51:56AM -0700, Michael Green wrote: > Here are my comments on the proposed patch... > > 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 > b) I think all entries in the dbase should be in dBm (not mW). > dBm vs. mW are absolutely equivalent. No reason to retain "mW" > unit from the source docs. I think this was agreed by all before, > but wanted to reiterate. I'm not sure I see the fuss. If anything, using the same units as the source docs seems less error-prone to me. Why not stick with the source units and let the tool do the conversion rather than risk introducing an error in the manual conversion? John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx might be all we have. Be ready. -- 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
