Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <48a43287e65e1d24082dea2cc32ca14998acb8d1.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] nl80211: add 6GHz band support
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To:     Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Cc:     linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>,
        Tova Mussai <tova.mussai@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:04:06 +0200
In-Reply-To: <9ba78df6-18a3-5c1c-6c57-3fa71531b460@broadcom.com> (sfid-20190527_224659_799325_3B1770C5)
References: <1558353645-18119-1-git-send-email-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
         <df53f969297fea1f3c8101cd2c1571a957985d2a.camel@sipsolutions.net>
         <16aeb2310e8.2764.9b12b7fc0a3841636cfb5e919b41b954@broadcom.com>
         <9ba78df6-18a3-5c1c-6c57-3fa71531b460@broadcom.com>
         (sfid-20190527_224659_799325_3B1770C5)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Arend, all,

Sorry. No, my thoughts aren't really more concrete, but Tova is starting
to work on this now.

> This came up in discussion with my colleagues today and I would say from 
> mac80211 perspective there is more to it than just scanning. In short 
> the 6GHz band is for HE-only operation so for example only HE rates may 
> be used. As the bitrates are in ieee80211_supported_band having a 
> separate 6GHz band seems to have a (slight?) advantage.

Hmm, that's a good point too, I hadn't really looked _too_ much at 6GHz
stuff.

Jouni, what do you think?

Perhaps we should just have both. I mean, we can treat this as a
separate band, and still have code to handle operating classes properly,
right?

johannes