Spanish law was based on CEPT/EU rules:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/wireless-regdb/2012-June/000058.html
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/wireless-regdb/2012-June/000059.html
Orden ITC/332/2010, de 12 de febrero, por la que se aprueba el cuadro
nacional de atribución de frecuencias (CNAF):
https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2010-2719
https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/02/19/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-2719.pdf
search for:
UN - 85 RLANs y datos en 2400 a 2483,5 MHz (pag. 213)
UN – 128 RLANs en 5 GHz (pag. 232)
more info at "Cuadro nacional de atribución de frecuencias (CNAF)":
http://www.minetur.gob.es/telecomunicaciones/espectro/paginas/cnaf.aspx
---
db.txt | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
index 4c54543..11409d6 100644
--- a/db.txt
+++ b/db.txt
@@ -239,10 +239,10 @@ country EG:
(5250 - 5330 @ 20), (N/A, 20), DFS
country ES: DFS-ETSI
- (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
- (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
- (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (N/A, 20), DFS
- (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (N/A, 27), DFS
+ (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW)
+ (5150 - 5250 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR
+ (5250 - 5350 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
+ (5470 - 5725 @ 40), (N/A, 500 mW), DFS
country FI: DFS-ETSI
(2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
--
1.7.10.4
On 07/03/2012 11:25 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> Spanish law was based on CEPT/EU rules:
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/wireless-regdb/2012-June/000058.html
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/wireless-regdb/2012-June/000059.html
>
>
> Orden ITC/332/2010, de 12 de febrero, por la que se aprueba el cuadro
> nacional de atribución de frecuencias (CNAF):
> https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2010-2719
> https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/02/19/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-2719.pdf
>
> search for:
> UN - 85 RLANs y datos en 2400 a 2483,5 MHz (pag. 213)
> UN – 128 RLANs en 5 GHz (pag. 232)
>
> more info at "Cuadro nacional de atribución de frecuencias (CNAF)":
> http://www.minetur.gob.es/telecomunicaciones/espectro/paginas/cnaf.aspx
>
> ---
> db.txt | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> index 4c54543..11409d6 100644
> --- a/db.txt
> +++ b/db.txt
> @@ -239,10 +239,10 @@ country EG:
> (5250 - 5330 @ 20), (N/A, 20), DFS
>
> country ES: DFS-ETSI
> - (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
> - (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
> - (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (N/A, 20), DFS
> - (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (N/A, 27), DFS
> + (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW)
> + (5150 - 5250 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR
> + (5250 - 5350 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
> + (5470 - 5725 @ 40), (N/A, 500 mW), DFS
>
> country FI: DFS-ETSI
> (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
>
Signed-off-by: Xose Vazquez Perez <[email protected]>
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 07/04/2012 01:59 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>
>> Please send a new patch and if you are going to convert something form
>> dBm to mW then please do that in *one* single patch so that it can
>> easily be read what changes you are *actually* making. That is one
>> patch to make a conversion in units that will not make any actual
>> changes, and then send another patch with all the verbiage you can use
>> to explain *why* you want the change you are making. You want the
>> commit log to have enough language so that if I forward the patch to a
>> regulatory person who has never read a patch they can read it.
>
>
> There was only one patch.
>
> The second mail was only a "Signed-off-by:", just in case.
>
>
>> The agreed upon "bar" for quality of regulatory patches was agreed
>> upon a while ago, for details see:
>>
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=128414096127554&w=2
>
>
> Thank youuuuu
> http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Regulatory#Mailing_list_for_regulatory_updates
> :-P
>
>
>> The more information you can provide the better.
>
>
> I believe I sent enough.
Any chance you can just repost a v2 with the SOB on it?
Luis
On 07/04/2012 01:59 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Please send a new patch and if you are going to convert something form
> dBm to mW then please do that in *one* single patch so that it can
> easily be read what changes you are *actually* making. That is one
> patch to make a conversion in units that will not make any actual
> changes, and then send another patch with all the verbiage you can use
> to explain *why* you want the change you are making. You want the
> commit log to have enough language so that if I forward the patch to a
> regulatory person who has never read a patch they can read it.
There was only one patch.
The second mail was only a "Signed-off-by:", just in case.
> The agreed upon "bar" for quality of regulatory patches was agreed
> upon a while ago, for details see:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=128414096127554&w=2
Thank youuuuu http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/Regulatory#Mailing_list_for_regulatory_updates
:-P
> The more information you can provide the better.
I believe I sent enough.
-thanks-
On 07/04/2012 02:34 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>> The more information you can provide the better.
>>
>>
>> I believe I sent enough.
>
> Any chance you can just repost a v2 with the SOB on it?
¡ marchando cocina !
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 07/03/2012 11:25 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
>>
>> Spanish law was based on CEPT/EU rules:
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/wireless-regdb/2012-June/000058.html
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/wireless-regdb/2012-June/000059.html
>>
>>
>> Orden ITC/332/2010, de 12 de febrero, por la que se aprueba el cuadro
>> nacional de atribución de frecuencias (CNAF):
>> https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2010-2719
>> https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/02/19/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-2719.pdf
>>
>> search for:
>> UN - 85 RLANs y datos en 2400 a 2483,5 MHz (pag. 213)
>> UN – 128 RLANs en 5 GHz (pag. 232)
>>
>> more info at "Cuadro nacional de atribución de frecuencias (CNAF)":
>> http://www.minetur.gob.es/telecomunicaciones/espectro/paginas/cnaf.aspx
>>
>> ---
>> db.txt | 8 ++++----
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
>> index 4c54543..11409d6 100644
>> --- a/db.txt
>> +++ b/db.txt
>> @@ -239,10 +239,10 @@ country EG:
>> (5250 - 5330 @ 20), (N/A, 20), DFS
>>
>> country ES: DFS-ETSI
>> - (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
>> - (5170 - 5250 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
>> - (5250 - 5330 @ 40), (N/A, 20), DFS
>> - (5490 - 5710 @ 40), (N/A, 27), DFS
>> + (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW)
>> + (5150 - 5250 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR
>> + (5250 - 5350 @ 40), (N/A, 100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
>> + (5470 - 5725 @ 40), (N/A, 500 mW), DFS
>>
>> country FI: DFS-ETSI
>> (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (N/A, 20)
>>
>
> Signed-off-by: Xose Vazquez Perez <[email protected]>
Please send a new patch and if you are going to convert something form
dBm to mW then please do that in *one* single patch so that it can
easily be read what changes you are *actually* making. That is one
patch to make a conversion in units that will not make any actual
changes, and then send another patch with all the verbiage you can use
to explain *why* you want the change you are making. You want the
commit log to have enough language so that if I forward the patch to a
regulatory person who has never read a patch they can read it.
The agreed upon "bar" for quality of regulatory patches was agreed
upon a while ago, for details see:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=128414096127554&w=2
The more information you can provide the better.
Luis