Message-ID: <1350491027.10728.23.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20121017_182325_225592_5208F1FD)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] nl80211/cfg80211: add radar detection
 command/event
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Zefir Kurtisi <zefir.kurtisi@neratec.com>
Cc: Victor Goldenshtein <victorg@ti.com>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, kgiori@qca.qualcomm.com,
	mcgrof@frijolero.org, adrian.chadd@gmail.com, j@w1.fi,
	coelho@ti.com, assaf@ti.com, igalc@ti.com, adrian@freebsd.org,
	nbd@nbd.name, simon.wunderlich@s2003.tu-chemnitz.de
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 18:23:47 +0200
In-Reply-To: <507EDAD7.2030807@neratec.com>
References: <1350226137-13704-1-git-send-email-victorg@ti.com>
	  <1350226137-13704-2-git-send-email-victorg@ti.com>
	 <1350414099.10177.13.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
	 <507EDAD7.2030807@neratec.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 18:20 +0200, Zefir Kurtisi wrote:
> On 10/16/2012 09:01 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > [...]
> > 
> > It also raises a question: can you do radar detection properly while
> > doing channel TDM (multi-channel)? I guess not?

> At least ETSI differentiates between CAC and Off-Channel CAC, with
> dedicated requirements for times and detection probability for
> continuously monitoring the operating channel vs. accumulated periods
> listening for radars on a different one.
> 
> OC-CAC is considered as an optional optimization to enable switching to
> a new channel without the need to perform a CAC there. Weighting the
> potential gain vs. the required effort to support that feature, I'd
> assume OC-CAC is not a hot topic (maybe even not feasible in the long run).

Ok, cool, nice to know.

johannes