Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com ([209.85.212.179]:34364 "EHLO mail-wi0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750901AbbI1U1B convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2015 16:27:01 -0400 Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so121721021wic.1 for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2015 13:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2087\)) Subject: Re: [wireless-regdb] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for South Africa (ZA) on 5GHz From: =?utf-8?Q?Karl_M=C3=B6ller?= In-Reply-To: <1443462165.2401.7.camel@sipsolutions.net> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:26:52 +0200 Cc: Seth Forshee , wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Message-Id: (sfid-20150928_222705_516292_F9BFF170) References: <9BEBB87E-EA6D-4219-ADC5-40C1E19DA5DA@excors.net> <1443426260.2401.2.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20150928160741.GA25936@ubuntu-hedt> <1443462165.2401.7.camel@sipsolutions.net> To: Johannes Berg Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Here is an older draft document, dated end 2014 directly from the regulator (ICASA): http://www.icasa.org.za/Portals/0/Regulations/Working%20Docmuents/Radio%20Frequency%20Spectrum%20Regulations/DraftRevRadioFreq.pdf Notice on page end 80 / top 81 that it lists: "DFS & Transmitter Power Control Obligatory” for the band in question, which is now deleted in the final document published in March this year. Regards Karl > On 28 Sep 2015, at 7:42 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-09-28 at 11:07 -0500, Seth Forshee wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 09:44:20AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >>> >>>> The bands don’t quite match up and DFS/TPC is (apparently) not >>>> required for 5470 - 5725. More importantly, the max transmitted >>>> power >>>> seems to be 1W/30dBm e.i.r.p and not 27dBm. >>> >>> Without checking now, just a note: we sometimes have lower limits >>> here >>> due to spectral power density, indoor/outdoor or TPC requirements. >> >> One of the documents says that the TPC requirement for that range was >> lifted in March 2015, so if it was lowered for TPC then we may be >> able to bump it up to 30 dBm. >> > > That's very well possible then - the typical TCP requirement is "1/2 of > the power w/o TPC", which would match the 3dB > > johannes