Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]:38128 "EHLO mail-wm0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753985AbcDST1o (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:27:44 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id u206so46669691wme.1 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 22:27:40 +0300 Message-ID: <87k2jt5rgz.wl-bordjukov@gmail.com> (sfid-20160419_212748_781087_0BF3D1C4) From: Petko Bordjukov To: Maximilian Engelhardt Cc: seth.forshee@canonical.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, maxi@daemonizer.de, wireless-regdb@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [wireless-regdb] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for Germany (DE) on 5GHz In-Reply-To: <1958820.LBuzOElZFT@perisens15> References: <1958820.LBuzOElZFT@perisens15> MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="pgp-sign-Multipart_Tue_Apr_19_22:27:36_2016-1"; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --pgp-sign-Multipart_Tue_Apr_19_22:27:36_2016-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Hello, Just to add my input to this thread. I've previously contributed the SRD ranges for Bulgaria, hopefully this info will provide pointers for research in other EU countries. Since then I've doublechecked the standards situation for Wi-Fi with the local communications regulation commission and one of the staffers there has given me an expert opinion (I would attach it, but it's a nasty HTML email in Bulgarian, if there's interest, I'd be glad to share and translate it). The gist on the SRDs is that in Bulgaria they fall under the following standards (which correspond to ETSI standards): BDS EN 300 440-2[0] BDS EN 300 674-2-2[1] Note that the first one is a harmonized standard (so in theory it should be universally adopted accross the EU) and the second one is a candidate harmonized standard (so you should check if it's already been adopted locally). As far as I could tell, BDS EN 300 674-2-2 defines the maximum e.i.r.p. for the SRD range but someone more knowledgable should take a look, too. One thing that they did not mention is that there's a BDS EN 300 440-1[2] that does indeed also specify the max e.i.r.p. but I've reached this through my own research and did not get this info from anybody affilliated with the CRC. Also, note that the EN 300 440-1[3] still does NOT seem to be a harmonized standard (again, probably one should check if it has been adopted locally). [0] http://www.bds-bg.org/en/standard/?natstandard_document_id=47135 [1] http://www.bds-bg.org/bg/standard/?natstandard_document_id=32906 [2] http://www.bds-bg.org/bg/standard/?natstandard_document_id=30570 [3] http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/300400_300499/30044001/01.06.01_60/en_30044001v010601p.pdf On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:03:16 +0300, Maximilian Engelhardt wrote: > > Hi, > > In Europe ETSI standardized the used for short range devices (SRD) [1] in ETSI > EN 300 440-1 [2]. --pgp-sign-Multipart_Tue_Apr_19_22:27:36_2016-1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAABCAAGBQJXFoaoAAoJECq9VKOh1QeKfFoP/3N3XHsPmg3yiSiDVKxrbV9f CF3rnk6To10LgsiBz75J+WXn2fGhBsfZJrlkX8Fi7XnDg22IiW6dm9QmH0s8PQHZ daKonlUxHUUzFMkV8IfARr9fin4adt+Vf3lw/YYZppWaUEbN6037tqr5oxNozVXH z9pqaidnHKQNi1cIjNHusuk+Uu1lozjN2f3bLXW8dSrTgGIYnn9BaXalvzbxzUBa 6ky44nePq4Q8w3xbfd4/kSpy5FDEjJygugTMnaUCulcLMbqLH747BQYaB6KGsy3n kIFES8FdKC+oRA9JJJpTRAw6JbPK6jzDJ05jiEf6z0rys5ZaHjRQYtndLVEjMoxu 8NtDP+HtGMvn1tzwZHFMFyCx+M0Q6WvM+e+jhTcYrvkYbNcSvhnv6ngEY2fbyHwV AJ0oowoEEDiL3XqMjeWH1lpLrPR6ow8i1U53hqQU4KePtJjrb0W/KeiSRQWUrJxe 6S4E8Q3lJmylOPOnMdViUaJ7kLkk9b85NQFmsaWOAuOtS8TYZf+APnsiBH2fi4Ks UsQWt677/0PBUkIm6B+lP4UtMj0KuQ9nyZkeK2qgQlrIVECFF2ZBdGhlSsvYBP1Y cDZwQOrXlxXFR++OZEMH939uOgBkXO1llXgAGm8qqjShejUziUwC13wPFlAasEkQ pavhQfcQ8GTZm25yM6X5 =5Cog -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp-sign-Multipart_Tue_Apr_19_22:27:36_2016-1--