Folks, we have 802.11ac and 802.11ad now and I have a few pending patches that I'd like to submit but unfortunately the requirements that we have discussed for accepting patches do not meet the criteria we have set in the community [0] for all the documentation. Additionally getting all that documentation has proven quite difficult and at this point I do not think we can easily get these upstream without making an exception. I'd like to propose a middle ground to also address another issue I've noticed. Vendors can disagree and in order to give vendors a warm fuzzy on ability to ensure their data is interpreted and provide the ability to offload down to wireless-regdb even more interpretations I'd like to propose the idea of embracing vendor namespaces within wireless-regdb / crda / the kernel. The way I'd envision this is '/sbin/crda US OUI' is passed upon a regulatory hint and in turn CRDA will read the namespace for the OUI passed in regulatory.bin. Then at our wireless summit kumbaya and with the development / enhancements of intersect.c and union.c (not yet developed) we'd work on generalizing the data. This would also allow vendors to supply their own rules without the high bar that we are setting which so far has proven very difficult to met. In the meantime, while that gets developed, I'd still like to supply patches to enable VHT80 for a few countries without hopefully such high bar for documentation as I cannot get this information. Let me know if this sounds reasonable. [0] http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=128414096127554&w=2 Luis
