Return-path: Received: from mail-la0-f48.google.com ([209.85.215.48]:48286 "EHLO mail-la0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758573Ab3CDTUM (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2013 14:20:12 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f48.google.com with SMTP id fq13so5262267lab.7 for ; Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:20:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1362095777.8330.15.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <1360797364-9430-1-git-send-email-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <1360797364-9430-2-git-send-email-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <1362095777.8330.15.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:19:51 -0800 Message-ID: (sfid-20130304_202023_613979_B6178C3F) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] regulatory: allow VHT channels in world roaming To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, green@qca.qualcomm.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 15:33 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> > For VHT, the wider bandwidths (up to 160 MHz) need >> > to be allowed. Since world roaming only covers the >> > case of connecting to an AP, it can be opened up >> > there, we will rely on the AP to know the local >> > regulations. > >> This seems reasonable to me but in your patch you only allow 80, not >> 160, any reason for that? > > 160 doesn't fit here yet -- I think it should be enabled when/if those > DFS channels are added, I don't see a reason they're missing there. True. OK I checked internally and enabling VHT80 is reasonable, as for the DFS stuff you mentioned, you are right as well, but that should be done through a separate patch. The only thing to consider there is scan time increases considerably but seems like a reasonable compromise. I'm surprised no one has had issues before with this. Acked-by: Luis R. Rodriguez Luis