Fwd: possible mismatch Canadian regulatory info

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Seth Forshee
<seth.forshee at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 11:12:45AM -0800, cory novak wrote:
>> (sorry if this is a duplicate, got a 'we don't accept html mails' error back)
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: cory novak <cory.novak at gmail.com>
>> Date: Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:07 AM
>> Subject: possible mismatch Canadian regulatory info
>> To: wireless-regdb at lists.infradead.org
>>
>>
>> I really tried to use alternate mediums before bothering this list
>> with info that appears to me to be mismatched, but, could easily
>> simply be a result of my lack of knowledge.  Here's my info:
>>
>>
>> Canada values from this source:
>> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/sforshee/wireless-regdb.git/tree/db.txt?id=HEAD
>>
>> For Canada (5170 - 5250 is where I'm focusing):
>>
>> country CA: DFS-FCC
>> (2402 - 2472 @ 40), (30)
>> (5170 - 5250 @ 80), (17), AUTO-BW
>> (5250 - 5330 @ 80), (24), DFS, AUTO-BW
>> (5490 - 5600 @ 80), (24), DFS
>> (5650 - 5730 @ 80), (24), DFS
>> (5735 - 5835 @ 80), (30)
>>
>> *SEEM* to differ to my completely amateur eye vs industry canada
>> section 6.2 here:
>> http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10971.html#s6.2
>>
>> This is the applicable text for that band:
>>
>> "The maximum e.i.r.p. shall not exceed 200 mW or 10 + 10 log10B, dBm,
>> whichever power is less. B is the 99% emission bandwidth in megahertz.
>> The e.i.r.p. spectral density shall not exceed 10 dBm in any 1.0 MHz
>> band."
>>
>> An easier source to parse for the IC data :
>> http://www.semfionetworks.com/blog/industry-canada-new-5ghz-band-regulations
>>
>> This is the output from my Archer C2600:    * 5180 MHz [36] (17.0 dBm)
>>                         * 5200 MHz [40] (17.0 dBm)
>>                         * 5220 MHz [44] (17.0 dBm)
>>                         * 5240 MHz [48] (17.0 dBm)
>>
>>
>> It appears that the 5170-5250 band is way under spec at 17dbm instead of 23dbm.
>
> It looks to me like you are correct. Would you like to send a patch? Or
> if you aren't familiar with patching the regulatory db I can generate
> one.
>
> Thanks,
> Seth
>

Hi Seth

Just a dumb user here, I'd appreciate it if you'd go ahead.
thanks :)

Cory



[Index of Archives]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [ALSA Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux