From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Fri Nov  6 16:44:46 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 15:44:46 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB
In-Reply-To: <4d07581c-a3be-a3c6-bf32-7007eb45d541@wildgooses.com>
References: <4d07581c-a3be-a3c6-bf32-7007eb45d541@wildgooses.com>
Message-ID: <20201106214446.GG6125@ubuntu-x1>

Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when
you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick
it back up.

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 08:50:41PM +0100, Ed W wrote:
> Hi, I think that the wireless regdb for GB domain can be corrected:
> 
> According to Ofcom, in 2017 the rules were updated for the 5725-5850Ghz
> range to allow a power output of 200mW (the max power output is much higher
> still for fixed wireless where a ?50 licence is purchased)
> 
> Reference to the latest Ofcom document is here (IR-2030):
> 
> https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf
> 
> 
> My reading of this is that DFS is currently required and I *assume* also the
> wmm would be the same as the rest of the range. I'm not sure if this rule
> needs an AUTO-BW?

AUTO-BW doesn't make sense here, however it does look like the 5470 -
5725 rule could be expanded to 5730 to allow channel 144 to be used.

I agree that it looks like DFS is required, and also TPC which will
require us to use 100 mW as the max EIRP. Afaik the wmmrule doesn't
apply to the 5.8 GHz band, so I think that isn't required.

I'll send out a patch soon with these updates.

Thanks,
Seth

> (Note also that Ofcom opened a proposal to remove the DFS requirement on
> this frequency band (and to add new 5Ghz bands). Results of this are due
> later in 2020.)
> 
> 
> Therefore I think that the db.txt should say:
> 
> 
> |
> 
> country GB: DFS-ETSI
> ...
> 
> 	# Reference (IR-2030)
> 	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> 
> |
> 
> |Could someone appropriate please check this and update upstream.|
> 
> |
> |
> 
> |Thanks|
> 
> |Ed W
> |
> 
> ||
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wireless-regdb mailing list
> wireless-regdb at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless-regdb


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Fri Nov  6 16:53:24 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Fri,  6 Nov 2020 15:53:24 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: update 5.8 GHz regulatory
 rule for GB
Message-ID: <20201106215324.91265-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com>

Based on [1], the 5.8 GHz limit for GB is 200 mW and requires DFS
and TPC. Update the rule accordingly.

While at it, expand the 5470 - 5725 rule to 5730 as specified in
the same document to allow channel 144 to be used.

[1] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf

Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee at canonical.com>
---
 db.txt | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
index 699bce9fb9d8..39e1928fe384 100644
--- a/db.txt
+++ b/db.txt
@@ -593,9 +593,9 @@ country GB: DFS-ETSI
 	(2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
 	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
 	(5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
-	(5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
+	(5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
 	# short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1)
-	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW)
+	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (100 mW), DFS
 	# 60 GHz band channels 1-6
 	(57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40)
 
-- 
2.27.0



From starosekpd at gmail.com  Sun Nov  8 16:19:01 2020
From: starosekpd at gmail.com (Pavel Starosek)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 03:19:01 +0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for
 Kazakhstan (KZ)
In-Reply-To: <CAPgWZqzskMUOnmdBwh6TEh5yfrbdzg+4bZOUMQPkJffWizZweg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPgWZqzskMUOnmdBwh6TEh5yfrbdzg+4bZOUMQPkJffWizZweg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPgWZqx-bHc5iEn-fWbzarrUNB5kbMnay_Pr5BKROznOAO0nWQ@mail.gmail.com>

Updates, based on [1] (search for word "RLAN" to jump to the desired
part on the page):

* Extended range 2400-2483.5
* 5150?5250 MHz range may be up to 200 mW
* The same is about 5250 - 5350 MHz according to our local
regulations, but looks like this is incorrect because of TPC?
Therefore, I didn't change this value
* Add 5725-5850 MHz range for indoor usage
* Add 57-66 GHz range. It must be outdoors only, so we don't specify
NO-OUTDOOR at all, right?
* In 5470-5725 changed the bandwidth from 80 to 160 (typo?)
As I understand it, there is no DFS requirement for the 5725-5850
range anywhere in the [2] document.

I can suggest this change. Please check if everything is correct?
---
# [1] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730
# [2] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010375
country KZ: DFS-ETSI
    (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (20)
    (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW
    (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW
    (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
    (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR
    (57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)

---
Thanks,
Pavel


On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:16 AM Pavel Starosek <starosekpd at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Updates, based on [1] (search for word "RLAN" to jump to the desired part on the page):
>
> * Extended range 2400-2483.5
> * 5150?5250 MHz range may be up to 200 mW
> * The same is about 5250 - 5350 MHz according to our local regulations, but looks like this is incorrect because of TPC? Therefore, I didn't change this value
> * Add 5725-5850 MHz range for indoor usage
> * Add 57-66 GHz range. It must be outdoors only, so we don't specify NO-OUTDOOR at all, right?
> * In 5470-5725 changed the bandwidth from 80 to 160 (typo?)
> As I understand it, there is no DFS requirement for the 5725-5850 range anywhere in the [2] document.
>
> I can suggest this change. Please check if everything is correct?
> ---
> # [1] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730
> # [2] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010375
> country KZ: DFS-ETSI
>     (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (20)
>     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW
>     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW
>     (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
>     (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR
>     (57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)
>
> ---
> Thanks,
> Pavel
>


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Mon Nov  9 18:16:49 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:16:49 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory
 rules for Croatia (HR)
In-Reply-To: <20200913172140.66439-1-robert.marko@sartura.hr>
References: <20200913172140.66439-1-robert.marko@sartura.hr>
Message-ID: <20201109231649.GH6125@ubuntu-x1>

On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 07:21:40PM +0200, Robert Marko wrote:
> Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries (HAKOM) has
> updated the general licenses OD-85 and OD-86 with the new OD-85a
> and OD-86a versions.
> 
> These introuduce the following changes:
> * Outdoor usage for 5150-5250 and 5250-5350 MHz ranges is permitted
> * 5150-5250 MHz range TPC requirment was dropped and power output raised to 200mW
> 
> OD-85a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_85a.pdf
> OD-86a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_86a.pdf
> 
> Signed-off-by: Robert Marko <robert.marko at sartura.hr>
> Cc: Luka Perkov <luka.perkov at sartura.hr>
> ---
>  db.txt | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> index ac32483..52d0fab 100644
> --- a/db.txt
> +++ b/db.txt
> @@ -693,8 +693,8 @@ country HR: DFS-ETSI
>  # Harmonized CEPT countries (July 2019): https://www.ecodocdb.dk/download/25c41779-cd6e/Rec7003e.pdf
>  # HR: http://tablice.hakom.hr:8080/vis?lang=en
>  	(2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
> -	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> -	(5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> +	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI

Based on the translation I'm reading the 200 mW applied to elevations
from 5 degrees to 30 degrees, and for elevations above 30 degress the
limit is 125 mW. I'm not expeienced with regulations that vary with the
elevation angle. Why should we use 200 mW instead of 125 mW, which is
allowed for any elevation?

> +	(5250 - 5350 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI

The translation of OD-86a I'm reading says "use mostly indoors." Is that
an accurate translation? How does this compare to the language from
OD-86? I'm a little unsure how to interpret it.

Thanks,
Seth

>  	(5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
>  	# short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1)
>  	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW)
> -- 
> 2.26.2
> 


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Mon Nov  9 20:42:02 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:42:02 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: update regulatory
 rules for Egypt (EG)
In-Reply-To: <20200528210607.16154-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com>
References: <20200528210607.16154-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com>
Message-ID: <20201110014202.GI6125@ubuntu-x1>

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 04:06:07PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> Update the rules to the frequency ranges and power limits
> documented in [1], and update 5GHz rules to comply with
> EN 301 893.
> 
> [1] https://www.tra.gov.eg/en/industry/importing-of-equipment/Pages/Regulations-for-use-of-Wireless-Networks-Devices.aspx
> 
> Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee at canonical.com>

Applied.

> ---
>  db.txt | 7 ++++---
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> index ac3248350956..699bce9fb9d8 100644
> --- a/db.txt
> +++ b/db.txt
> @@ -516,10 +516,11 @@ country EE: DFS-ETSI
>  	# 60 GHz band channels 1-4 (ETSI EN 302 567)
>  	(57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)
>  
> +# https://www.tra.gov.eg/en/industry/importing-of-equipment/Pages/Regulations-for-use-of-Wireless-Networks-Devices.aspx
>  country EG: DFS-ETSI
> -	(2402 - 2482 @ 40), (20)
> -	(5170 - 5250 @ 40), (20)
> -	(5250 - 5330 @ 40), (20), DFS
> +	(2402 - 2483.5 @ 40), (20)
> +	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> +	(5250 - 5330 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
>  
>  # ES as part of EU/CEPT accepted decisions 2005/513/EC (5GHz RLAN, EN 301 893)
>  # and 2006/771/EC (amended by 2008/432/EC, Short-Range Devices, EN 300 440)
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Mon Nov  9 20:42:28 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:42:28 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: restore channel 12 &
 13 limitation in the US
In-Reply-To: <840438bf70c72d2ab933aee9ae5aa6985b6c1531.1601902881.git.b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh@gmail.com>
References: <840438bf70c72d2ab933aee9ae5aa6985b6c1531.1601902881.git.b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20201110014228.GJ6125@ubuntu-x1>

On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 03:01:22PM +0200, bkil wrote:
> The precisely allowed transmission power on channel 12 & 13 is not clear.
> 
> I did some fact checking and document reviews in the past, but still
> failed to come up with an exact reference or calculation regarding what TX
> power should be allowed in general to reduce interference in the
> neighboring restricted band 2483.5-2500 MHz and whether indoor vs. outdoor
> and b/g/n modulation would make a difference (probably yes).
> 
> Existing documents that discuss this are vague and pretty much out of date:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels#endnote_B
> 
> Following these guidelines, I failed to come up with an approximate
> formula that would prohibit usage of channel 12 & 13, but still allow
> usage of channel 11 with full power, hence at least part of the argument
> for prohibiting channel 12 & 13 needs to be refined.
> 
> Until further research, just to stay safe, I propose that we restore the
> previous limitation of disabling channel 12 & 13 as before. We should
> work towards finding a safe transmission power to use on both and specify
> that (like 50mW on channel 13 and 100mW on channel 12?).
> 
> I've also started a discussion for investigation on Wikipedia:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_WLAN_channels#Should_the_2.4GHz_channel_12_and_13_in_the_USA_need_updating?
> 
> Signed-off-by: bkil <b.K.il.h.u+tigbuh at gmail.com>

I tried doing a little research, and it does appear that use of channels
12 and 13 is more complicated than it might seem on the surface. I
cannot find any clear guidance on power limits and lack the background
to determine appropriate limits from the information I did find, so it
does seem prudent to restore the previous limitation.

Applied, thanks!

> ---
>  db.txt | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> index ac32483..68613cf 100644
> --- a/db.txt
> +++ b/db.txt
> @@ -1568,8 +1568,12 @@ country UG: DFS-FCC
>  
>  # https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=eed706a2c49fd9271106c3228b0615f3&mc=true&node=pt47.1.15&rgn=div5
>  # Title 47 Part 15 - Radio Frequency Devices, April 2, 2020
> +# Channels 12 and 13 are not forbidden, but are not normally used with full
> +# power in order to avoid any potential interference in the adjacent restricted
> +# frequency band, 2,483.5?2,500 MHz which is subject to strict emission limits
> +# set out in 47 CFR ? 15.205. TODO: reenable and specify a safe TX power here.
>  country US: DFS-FCC
> -	(2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (30)
> +	(2400 - 2472 @ 40), (30)
>  	# 5.15 ~ 5.25 GHz: 30 dBm for master mode, 23 dBm for clients
>  	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), AUTO-BW
>  	(5250 - 5350 @ 80), (23), DFS, AUTO-BW


From robert.marko at sartura.hr  Tue Nov 10 05:35:38 2020
From: robert.marko at sartura.hr (Robert Marko)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 11:35:38 +0100
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory
 rules for Croatia (HR)
In-Reply-To: <20201109231649.GH6125@ubuntu-x1>
References: <20200913172140.66439-1-robert.marko@sartura.hr>
 <20201109231649.GH6125@ubuntu-x1>
Message-ID: <CA+HBbNHfxt7pggPDtz2gTyg74OD9KmYto7-Lck3qF_pTGvuQqQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:16 AM Seth Forshee
<seth.forshee at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 07:21:40PM +0200, Robert Marko wrote:
> > Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries (HAKOM) has
> > updated the general licenses OD-85 and OD-86 with the new OD-85a
> > and OD-86a versions.
> >
> > These introuduce the following changes:
> > * Outdoor usage for 5150-5250 and 5250-5350 MHz ranges is permitted
> > * 5150-5250 MHz range TPC requirment was dropped and power output raised to 200mW
> >
> > OD-85a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_85a.pdf
> > OD-86a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_86a.pdf
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robert Marko <robert.marko at sartura.hr>
> > Cc: Luka Perkov <luka.perkov at sartura.hr>
> > ---
> >  db.txt | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> > index ac32483..52d0fab 100644
> > --- a/db.txt
> > +++ b/db.txt
> > @@ -693,8 +693,8 @@ country HR: DFS-ETSI
> >  # Harmonized CEPT countries (July 2019): https://www.ecodocdb.dk/download/25c41779-cd6e/Rec7003e.pdf
> >  # HR: http://tablice.hakom.hr:8080/vis?lang=en
> >       (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
> > -     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > -     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > +     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
>
> Based on the translation I'm reading the 200 mW applied to elevations
> from 5 degrees to 30 degrees, and for elevations above 30 degress the
> limit is 125 mW. I'm not expeienced with regulations that vary with the
> elevation angle. Why should we use 200 mW instead of 125 mW, which is
> allowed for any elevation?

You can see in the OD-86a that now 1W (30 dBm) EIRP is the maximum
allowed power.
Then in usage conditions, they state that if median EIRP power larger
than 200mW (23 dBm) is used then the listed
angle and power limits should be used.
That is why I used 200mW as it has no limitations associated.
>
> > +     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
>
> The translation of OD-86a I'm reading says "use mostly indoors." Is that
> an accurate translation? How does this compare to the language from
> OD-86? I'm a little unsure how to interpret it.

Yes, it's accurate.
In OD-86 this was strictly written as "exclusive use indoors", Hakom
even stated in their press release that the
changes to OD-86 now allow outdoor usage.
https://www.hakom.hr/default.aspx?id=10442
It's in English.

They are just trying to encourage the band to still be mostly used for
indoor stuff.

Regards,
Robert
>
> Thanks,
> Seth
>
> >       (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
> >       # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1)
> >       (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW)
> > --
> > 2.26.2
> >


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Tue Nov 10 09:28:03 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:28:03 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory
 rules for Croatia (HR)
In-Reply-To: <CA+HBbNHfxt7pggPDtz2gTyg74OD9KmYto7-Lck3qF_pTGvuQqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200913172140.66439-1-robert.marko@sartura.hr>
 <20201109231649.GH6125@ubuntu-x1>
 <CA+HBbNHfxt7pggPDtz2gTyg74OD9KmYto7-Lck3qF_pTGvuQqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20201110142803.GK6125@ubuntu-x1>

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:35:38AM +0100, Robert Marko wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:16 AM Seth Forshee
> <seth.forshee at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 07:21:40PM +0200, Robert Marko wrote:
> > > Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries (HAKOM) has
> > > updated the general licenses OD-85 and OD-86 with the new OD-85a
> > > and OD-86a versions.
> > >
> > > These introuduce the following changes:
> > > * Outdoor usage for 5150-5250 and 5250-5350 MHz ranges is permitted
> > > * 5150-5250 MHz range TPC requirment was dropped and power output raised to 200mW
> > >
> > > OD-85a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_85a.pdf
> > > OD-86a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_86a.pdf
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Robert Marko <robert.marko at sartura.hr>
> > > Cc: Luka Perkov <luka.perkov at sartura.hr>
> > > ---
> > >  db.txt | 4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> > > index ac32483..52d0fab 100644
> > > --- a/db.txt
> > > +++ b/db.txt
> > > @@ -693,8 +693,8 @@ country HR: DFS-ETSI
> > >  # Harmonized CEPT countries (July 2019): https://www.ecodocdb.dk/download/25c41779-cd6e/Rec7003e.pdf
> > >  # HR: http://tablice.hakom.hr:8080/vis?lang=en
> > >       (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
> > > -     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > > -     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > > +     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> >
> > Based on the translation I'm reading the 200 mW applied to elevations
> > from 5 degrees to 30 degrees, and for elevations above 30 degress the
> > limit is 125 mW. I'm not expeienced with regulations that vary with the
> > elevation angle. Why should we use 200 mW instead of 125 mW, which is
> > allowed for any elevation?
> 
> You can see in the OD-86a that now 1W (30 dBm) EIRP is the maximum
> allowed power.
> Then in usage conditions, they state that if median EIRP power larger
> than 200mW (23 dBm) is used then the listed
> angle and power limits should be used.
> That is why I used 200mW as it has no limitations associated.

Right, but OD-86a applies to 5250-5350 MHz. I don't see this same
statement in OD-85a.

However, digging into it a little more, it looks like the elevation
restrictions come from WRC-19 resolution 229 [1], which has more detail.
Based on my reading of that it seems that the situation here actually is
similar to that for 5250-5350 MHz, i.e. that 200 mW is the general limit
but that operation at 1W is allowed subject to the stated elevation
angle restrictions. So it sounds like the 200 mW limit for 5150-5250 MHz
should be okay.

[1] https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/act/R-ACT-WRC.14-2019-PDF-E.pdf

> >
> > > +     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> >
> > The translation of OD-86a I'm reading says "use mostly indoors." Is that
> > an accurate translation? How does this compare to the language from
> > OD-86? I'm a little unsure how to interpret it.
> 
> Yes, it's accurate.
> In OD-86 this was strictly written as "exclusive use indoors", Hakom
> even stated in their press release that the
> changes to OD-86 now allow outdoor usage.
> https://www.hakom.hr/default.aspx?id=10442
> It's in English.
> 
> They are just trying to encourage the band to still be mostly used for
> indoor stuff.

Great, thanks for clarifying.

I've applied the patch. Thanks!


From robert.marko at sartura.hr  Tue Nov 10 10:22:36 2020
From: robert.marko at sartura.hr (Robert Marko)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:22:36 +0100
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory
 rules for Croatia (HR)
In-Reply-To: <20201110142803.GK6125@ubuntu-x1>
References: <20200913172140.66439-1-robert.marko@sartura.hr>
 <20201109231649.GH6125@ubuntu-x1>
 <CA+HBbNHfxt7pggPDtz2gTyg74OD9KmYto7-Lck3qF_pTGvuQqQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201110142803.GK6125@ubuntu-x1>
Message-ID: <CA+HBbNFfgCfdnikHpJeXjBrbu7FUnQ3rcDWoHrjPZg-hMmg3EQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 3:28 PM Seth Forshee <seth.forshee at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:35:38AM +0100, Robert Marko wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:16 AM Seth Forshee
> > <seth.forshee at canonical.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 07:21:40PM +0200, Robert Marko wrote:
> > > > Croatian Regulatory Authority for Network Industries (HAKOM) has
> > > > updated the general licenses OD-85 and OD-86 with the new OD-85a
> > > > and OD-86a versions.
> > > >
> > > > These introuduce the following changes:
> > > > * Outdoor usage for 5150-5250 and 5250-5350 MHz ranges is permitted
> > > > * 5150-5250 MHz range TPC requirment was dropped and power output raised to 200mW
> > > >
> > > > OD-85a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_85a.pdf
> > > > OD-86a: https://www.hakom.hr/UserDocsImages/op%C4%87e%20dozvole%20prosinac%202009.g/Opca_dozvola_86a.pdf
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Robert Marko <robert.marko at sartura.hr>
> > > > Cc: Luka Perkov <luka.perkov at sartura.hr>
> > > > ---
> > > >  db.txt | 4 ++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> > > > index ac32483..52d0fab 100644
> > > > --- a/db.txt
> > > > +++ b/db.txt
> > > > @@ -693,8 +693,8 @@ country HR: DFS-ETSI
> > > >  # Harmonized CEPT countries (July 2019): https://www.ecodocdb.dk/download/25c41779-cd6e/Rec7003e.pdf
> > > >  # HR: http://tablice.hakom.hr:8080/vis?lang=en
> > > >       (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
> > > > -     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > > > -     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > > > +     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > >
> > > Based on the translation I'm reading the 200 mW applied to elevations
> > > from 5 degrees to 30 degrees, and for elevations above 30 degress the
> > > limit is 125 mW. I'm not expeienced with regulations that vary with the
> > > elevation angle. Why should we use 200 mW instead of 125 mW, which is
> > > allowed for any elevation?
> >
> > You can see in the OD-86a that now 1W (30 dBm) EIRP is the maximum
> > allowed power.
> > Then in usage conditions, they state that if median EIRP power larger
> > than 200mW (23 dBm) is used then the listed
> > angle and power limits should be used.
> > That is why I used 200mW as it has no limitations associated.
>
> Right, but OD-86a applies to 5250-5350 MHz. I don't see this same
> statement in OD-85a.
>
> However, digging into it a little more, it looks like the elevation
> restrictions come from WRC-19 resolution 229 [1], which has more detail.
> Based on my reading of that it seems that the situation here actually is
> similar to that for 5250-5350 MHz, i.e. that 200 mW is the general limit
> but that operation at 1W is allowed subject to the stated elevation
> angle restrictions. So it sounds like the 200 mW limit for 5150-5250 MHz
> should be okay.
>
> [1] https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/act/R-ACT-WRC.14-2019-PDF-E.pdf

OD-85a covers 5150-5250 MHz and power limits for it have not changed,
they remain the same as before.
I simply remove the no-outdoor limit as it was dropped.
>
> > >
> > > > +     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (200 mW), DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> > >
> > > The translation of OD-86a I'm reading says "use mostly indoors." Is that
> > > an accurate translation? How does this compare to the language from
> > > OD-86? I'm a little unsure how to interpret it.
> >
> > Yes, it's accurate.
> > In OD-86 this was strictly written as "exclusive use indoors", Hakom
> > even stated in their press release that the
> > changes to OD-86 now allow outdoor usage.
> > https://www.hakom.hr/default.aspx?id=10442
> > It's in English.
> >
> > They are just trying to encourage the band to still be mostly used for
> > indoor stuff.
>
> Great, thanks for clarifying.
>
> I've applied the patch. Thanks!

Thanks,
Robert


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Tue Nov 10 16:40:18 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 15:40:18 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for
 Kazakhstan (KZ)
In-Reply-To: <CAPgWZqx-bHc5iEn-fWbzarrUNB5kbMnay_Pr5BKROznOAO0nWQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPgWZqzskMUOnmdBwh6TEh5yfrbdzg+4bZOUMQPkJffWizZweg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPgWZqx-bHc5iEn-fWbzarrUNB5kbMnay_Pr5BKROznOAO0nWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20201110214018.GM6125@ubuntu-x1>

On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:19:01AM +0600, Pavel Starosek wrote:
> Updates, based on [1] (search for word "RLAN" to jump to the desired
> part on the page):

Thanks for the updates. I think there are some questions though be
answered in the documents you linked to. I find that tables like these
often have incomplete information. Sometimes they refer to other
documents, but I'm not seeing any such references here. I've tried to
find more complete documents, but I haven't had any luck.

Overall these look okay, but if you are able to find any additional
information to clarify some of these points it would be helpful.

> * Extended range 2400-2483.5
> * 5150?5250 MHz range may be up to 200 mW
> * The same is about 5250 - 5350 MHz according to our local
> regulations, but looks like this is incorrect because of TPC?
> Therefore, I didn't change this value

It would be nice to know for sure, but without any additional
information keeping it at 20 dBm is the safe bet. Many countries do
require TPC in this range.

> * Add 5725-5850 MHz range for indoor usage

Here it would be nice to know if there are any additional restrictions
on use, e.g. TPC or DFS. That appears to be rare though, so it seems
unlikely.

> * Add 57-66 GHz range. It must be outdoors only, so we don't specify
> NO-OUTDOOR at all, right?

That is generally the case for this range. What you suggest looks fine.

> * In 5470-5725 changed the bandwidth from 80 to 160 (typo?)

Probably not a typo, if 160 MHz channels are allowed the entry probably
just hasn't been updated. But those documents don't really state whether
or not they are allowed.

> As I understand it, there is no DFS requirement for the 5725-5850
> range anywhere in the [2] document.

I don't it documenting any DFS requirement at all though, and severaly
entries in the db have a DFS requirement, so I'm not sure that really
clears up the question. I'm reading a translation of the document
though, so maybe I'm just not finding them.

Let me know if you're able to find any more information to clear up
these questions. Are you able to send the changes as a patch? If you
don't know how, that's fine, I can create a patch.

Thanks,
Seth

> 
> I can suggest this change. Please check if everything is correct?
> ---
> # [1] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730
> # [2] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010375
> country KZ: DFS-ETSI
>     (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (20)
>     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW
>     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW
>     (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
>     (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR
>     (57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)
> 
> ---
> Thanks,
> Pavel
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:16 AM Pavel Starosek <starosekpd at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Updates, based on [1] (search for word "RLAN" to jump to the desired part on the page):
> >
> > * Extended range 2400-2483.5
> > * 5150?5250 MHz range may be up to 200 mW
> > * The same is about 5250 - 5350 MHz according to our local regulations, but looks like this is incorrect because of TPC? Therefore, I didn't change this value
> > * Add 5725-5850 MHz range for indoor usage
> > * Add 57-66 GHz range. It must be outdoors only, so we don't specify NO-OUTDOOR at all, right?
> > * In 5470-5725 changed the bandwidth from 80 to 160 (typo?)
> > As I understand it, there is no DFS requirement for the 5725-5850 range anywhere in the [2] document.
> >
> > I can suggest this change. Please check if everything is correct?
> > ---
> > # [1] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730
> > # [2] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010375
> > country KZ: DFS-ETSI
> >     (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (20)
> >     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW
> >     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW
> >     (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
> >     (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR
> >     (57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)
> >
> > ---
> > Thanks,
> > Pavel
> >


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Tue Nov 10 16:41:00 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 15:41:00 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory
 rules for Pakistan (PK) on 5GHz
In-Reply-To: <20201020181731.GA18865@leagueoflegends>
References: <20201020181731.GA18865@leagueoflegends>
Message-ID: <20201110214100.GN6125@ubuntu-x1>

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:17:31PM +0500, Abdul Rauf wrote:
> Update range to 5.725 - 5.875 Ghz
> as mentioned at https://fab.gov.pk/type-approval/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abdul Rauf <abdulraufmujahid at gmail.com>

Applied, thanks!

> ---
>  db.txt | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> index ac32483..ce8449c 100644
> --- a/db.txt
> +++ b/db.txt
> @@ -1243,8 +1243,10 @@ country PH: DFS-FCC
>  	(5735 - 5835 @ 80), (30)
>  
>  country PK: DFS-JP
> +	# https://fab.gov.pk/type-approval/
> +	# https://pta.gov.pk/media/Pakistan_Table_of_Frequency_Allocations.pdf
>  	(2402 - 2482 @ 40), (20)
> -	(5735 - 5835 @ 80), (30)
> +	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (30)
>  
>  # PL as part of EU/CEPT accepted decisions 2005/513/EC (5GHz RLAN, EN 301 893)
>  # and 2006/771/EC (amended by 2008/432/EC, Short-Range Devices, EN 300 440)
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Tue Nov 10 16:41:12 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 15:41:12 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: update 5.8 GHz
 regulatory rule for GB
In-Reply-To: <20201106215324.91265-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com>
References: <20201106215324.91265-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com>
Message-ID: <20201110214112.GO6125@ubuntu-x1>

On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 03:53:24PM -0600, Seth Forshee wrote:
> Based on [1], the 5.8 GHz limit for GB is 200 mW and requires DFS
> and TPC. Update the rule accordingly.
> 
> While at it, expand the 5470 - 5725 rule to 5730 as specified in
> the same document to allow channel 144 to be used.
> 
> [1] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf
> 
> Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee at canonical.com>

Applied.

> ---
>  db.txt | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> index 699bce9fb9d8..39e1928fe384 100644
> --- a/db.txt
> +++ b/db.txt
> @@ -593,9 +593,9 @@ country GB: DFS-ETSI
>  	(2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
>  	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
>  	(5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> -	(5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
> +	(5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
>  	# short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1)
> -	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW)
> +	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (100 mW), DFS
>  	# 60 GHz band channels 1-6
>  	(57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40)
>  
> -- 
> 2.27.0
> 


From starosekpd at gmail.com  Wed Nov 11 13:36:29 2020
From: starosekpd at gmail.com (Pavel Starosek)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 00:36:29 +0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for
 Kazakhstan (KZ)
In-Reply-To: <20201110214018.GM6125@ubuntu-x1>
References: <CAPgWZqzskMUOnmdBwh6TEh5yfrbdzg+4bZOUMQPkJffWizZweg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPgWZqx-bHc5iEn-fWbzarrUNB5kbMnay_Pr5BKROznOAO0nWQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201110214018.GM6125@ubuntu-x1>
Message-ID: <CAPgWZqwycT=84krWfyb9HPTEqznnzfqQtUB6JpHW_D66hOBvAQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 3:40 AM Seth Forshee <seth.forshee at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:19:01AM +0600, Pavel Starosek wrote:
> > Updates, based on [1] (search for word "RLAN" to jump to the desired
> > part on the page):
>
> Thanks for the updates. I think there are some questions though be
> answered in the documents you linked to. I find that tables like these
> often have incomplete information. Sometimes they refer to other
> documents, but I'm not seeing any such references here. I've tried to
> find more complete documents, but I haven't had any luck.
>
> Overall these look okay, but if you are able to find any additional
> information to clarify some of these points it would be helpful.
>
> > * Extended range 2400-2483.5
> > * 5150?5250 MHz range may be up to 200 mW
> > * The same is about 5250 - 5350 MHz according to our local
> > regulations, but looks like this is incorrect because of TPC?
> > Therefore, I didn't change this value
>
> It would be nice to know for sure, but without any additional
> information keeping it at 20 dBm is the safe bet. Many countries do
> require TPC in this range.

Probably DFS is required in 5470-5650 MHz range because of 5.450? rule
in [2].
> > * Add 5725-5850 MHz range for indoor usage
>
> Here it would be nice to know if there are any additional restrictions
> on use, e.g. TPC or DFS. That appears to be rare though, so it seems
> unlikely.

I didn't find any TPC or DFS requirements about this 5725-5850 range.
> > * Add 57-66 GHz range. It must be outdoors only, so we don't specify
> > NO-OUTDOOR at all, right?
>
> That is generally the case for this range. What you suggest looks fine.
>
> > * In 5470-5725 changed the bandwidth from 80 to 160 (typo?)
>
> Probably not a typo, if 160 MHz channels are allowed the entry probably
> just hasn't been updated. But those documents don't really state whether
> or not they are allowed.
>
> > As I understand it, there is no DFS requirement for the 5725-5850
> > range anywhere in the [2] document.
>
> I don't it documenting any DFS requirement at all though, and severaly
> entries in the db have a DFS requirement, so I'm not sure that really
> clears up the question. I'm reading a translation of the document
> though, so maybe I'm just not finding them.
>
> Let me know if you're able to find any more information to clear up
> these questions. Are you able to send the changes as a patch? If you
> don't know how, that's fine, I can create a patch.

In fact, I'm not sure at all if document [2] applies to our case. Since the
rules in it regulate the actions for transportable radio navigation services
(used in sea, air, space). So these are additional regulations.

The main rules are described in document [1]. And according to them,
these rules do not apply to Wi-Fi devices, according to
chapter 1, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1. Please read from this paragraph:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730#z34
Since Wi-Fi devices refer to the table in Appendix 1, I think they are
priority.

I'll send a patch soon.
>
> Thanks,
> Seth
>
> >
> > I can suggest this change. Please check if everything is correct?
> > ---
> > # [1] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730
> > # [2] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010375
> > country KZ: DFS-ETSI
> >     (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (20)
> >     (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW
> >     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW
> >     (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
> >     (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR
> >     (57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)
> >
> > ---
> > Thanks,
> > Pavel


From starosekpd at gmail.com  Wed Nov 11 13:46:34 2020
From: starosekpd at gmail.com (Pavel Starosek)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 00:46:34 +0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules
 for Kazakhstan (KZ)
Message-ID: <CAPgWZqy_bD7KP_ONv1C7tUVw4TLw3QK_xcyYXpi_WH1=4VJwQw@mail.gmail.com>

Based on [1]:
* Extend 2400-2483.5 MHz range
* 5150?5250 MHz range may be up to 200 mW
* Add 5725-5850 MHz range for indoor usage
* Add 57-66 GHz range.
* In 5470-5725 range change the bandwidth from 80 to 160

[1] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730

Signed-off-by: Pavel Starosek <starosekpd at gmail.com>
---
 db.txt | 12 +++++++-----
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
index 0bf6287..c71a03a 100644
--- a/db.txt
+++ b/db.txt
@@ -872,13 +872,15 @@ country KY: DFS-FCC
     (5735 - 5835 @ 80), (30)

 # Source:
-# http://mic.gov.kz/sites/default/files/pages/pravila_prisvoeniya_polos_chastot_no34.pdf
-# http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/P000001379_
+# http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730
+# http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010375
 country KZ: DFS-ETSI
-    (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (20)
-    (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW
+    (2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (20)
+    (5150 - 5250 @ 80), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW
     (5250 - 5350 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW
-    (5470 - 5725 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
+    (5470 - 5725 @ 160), (20), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS
+    (5725 - 5850 @ 80), (20), NO-OUTDOOR
+    (57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)

 country LB: DFS-FCC
     (2402 - 2482 @ 40), (20)


From lists at wildgooses.com  Fri Nov 13 13:49:40 2020
From: lists at wildgooses.com (Ed W)
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 18:49:40 +0000
Subject: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB
In-Reply-To: <20201106214446.GG6125@ubuntu-x1>
References: <4d07581c-a3be-a3c6-bf32-7007eb45d541@wildgooses.com>
 <20201106214446.GG6125@ubuntu-x1>
Message-ID: <2a710032-f2ec-d55b-5da4-d881089fe0cd@wildgooses.com>

Hi Seth

Thanks for patching this. Can I also bring a later patch that I posted to your attention, the actual
patch is now out of date, but I'm posting verbatim since I think there is a 25Mhz discrepancy (?)
and also my patch is almost certainly wrong, so I'm after your guidance!! :-)

Essentially there has been a recent result of a consultation in the UK (GB) to expand wifi into 6Ghz
*AND* to NOT require DFS on high 5Ghz channels.

So in summary, the change you just made (sorry) can now be set to *NOT* need DFS in the high
channels around 5.7Ghz. More details in the links below.

In particular one of the additional frequency ranges (6Ghz) has an intended use of indoor where it
has large power outputs (and encouraged to use larger powers by request of Intel), but it is *ALSO*
allowed to be used outdoor with very low power requirements (possibly it will later fall under the
UK's allowance to use higher output power if you buy a ?50 licence?). I've marked it as INDOOR-ONLY
since that seems safest - I'm unclear how to mark something for dual use?

These changes significantly expand the available 5Ghz space in the UK, so would be nice to get
upstream for general use


Notes:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf

Thanks if you might make this second change!

Ed W


On 06/11/2020 21:44, Seth Forshee wrote:
> Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when
> you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick
> it back up.

-------------- next part --------------
From ee0aad4566b206f313e92ab4ae98f786767892cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: root <root at twocubed.nippynetworks.lan>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:31:18 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Update regulatory rules for UK (GB)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

The IR-2030 document on p47 clarifies a difference for the UK on
5725-5850Mhz from the rest of the UK. Power levels are higher and it's
possible to raise these further by purchasing a 50 GBP radio licence.

Since Jan 2020 Ofcom has solicited comments on further deregulating this
band to bring it into global alignment. DFS requirements have been
removed and a new band in the 6Ghz space has been made available with
250mW power levels (indoor, 25mW outdoor), also with no DFS requirement.

Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists at wildgooses.com>
---
 db.txt | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644
--- a/db.txt
+++ b/db.txt
@@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI
 # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf
 # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf
 # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf
+# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf
 country GB: DFS-ETSI
 	(2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
 	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
 	(5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
-	(5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
+	(5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
 	# short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1)
-	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW)
+	# See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47
+	(5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
+	(5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
 	# 60 GHz band channels 1-6
 	(57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40)
 
-- 
2.26.2


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Fri Nov 20 12:54:44 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:54:44 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] Correction of wireless-regdb for GB
In-Reply-To: <2a710032-f2ec-d55b-5da4-d881089fe0cd@wildgooses.com>
References: <4d07581c-a3be-a3c6-bf32-7007eb45d541@wildgooses.com>
 <20201106214446.GG6125@ubuntu-x1>
 <2a710032-f2ec-d55b-5da4-d881089fe0cd@wildgooses.com>
Message-ID: <20201120175444.GN5439@ubuntu-x1>

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 06:49:40PM +0000, Ed W wrote:
> Hi Seth
> 
> Thanks for patching this. Can I also bring a later patch that I posted to your attention, the actual
> patch is now out of date, but I'm posting verbatim since I think there is a 25Mhz discrepancy (?)
> and also my patch is almost certainly wrong, so I'm after your guidance!! :-)
> 
> Essentially there has been a recent result of a consultation in the UK (GB) to expand wifi into 6Ghz
> *AND* to NOT require DFS on high 5Ghz channels.

I've looked through the 6 GHz statement. One thing I'm not clear on is
whether the decision is effective immediately or only once the relevant
regulatory documents have been ammended (as noted in section 6.3). I did
not find an updated IR 2030 at least, so I wonder if these changes
should wait for that.

> So in summary, the change you just made (sorry) can now be set to *NOT* need DFS in the high
> channels around 5.7Ghz. More details in the links below.

The document only seems to state that the DFS requirement is removed for
indoor use up to 200 mW EIRP. So this range may also need to have
NO-OUTDOOR added if DFS is removed. Hopefully when IR 2030 is updated
the restrictions will be clear.

> In particular one of the additional frequency ranges (6Ghz) has an intended use of indoor where it
> has large power outputs (and encouraged to use larger powers by request of Intel), but it is *ALSO*
> allowed to be used outdoor with very low power requirements (possibly it will later fall under the
> UK's allowance to use higher output power if you buy a ?50 licence?). I've marked it as INDOOR-ONLY
> since that seems safest - I'm unclear how to mark something for dual use?

I don't think that's something we've ever done. The regdb can contain
two entries for the same range in a given country, I'm not sure how that
will be handled by the kernel though. I'll have to look at the code.

> These changes significantly expand the available 5Ghz space in the UK, so would be nice to get
> upstream for general use
> 
> 
> Notes:
> 
> https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf
> 
> https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf
> 
> Thanks if you might make this second change!
> 
> Ed W
> 
> 
> On 06/11/2020 21:44, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > Sorry for not responding sooner. I had started to look into this when
> > you sent the message, but I had to set it aside and then forgot to pick
> > it back up.
> 

> From ee0aad4566b206f313e92ab4ae98f786767892cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: root <root at twocubed.nippynetworks.lan>

Can this be changed so that the patch author is the same as the
information in the sign-off?

> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:31:18 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] Update regulatory rules for UK (GB)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> 
> The IR-2030 document on p47 clarifies a difference for the UK on
> 5725-5850Mhz from the rest of the UK. Power levels are higher and it's
> possible to raise these further by purchasing a 50 GBP radio licence.
> 
> Since Jan 2020 Ofcom has solicited comments on further deregulating this
> band to bring it into global alignment. DFS requirements have been
> removed and a new band in the 6Ghz space has been made available with
> 250mW power levels (indoor, 25mW outdoor), also with no DFS requirement.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ed Wildgoose <lists at wildgooses.com>
> ---
>  db.txt | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
> index ac32483..cc5ffd0 100644
> --- a/db.txt
> +++ b/db.txt
> @@ -588,13 +588,16 @@ country FR: DFS-ETSI
>  # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/136009/Ofcom-Information-Sheet-5-GHz-RLANs.pdf
>  # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/84970/ir-2030.pdf
>  # GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/126121/Statement_Implementing-Ofcoms-decision-on-the-57-71GHz-band.pdf
> +# GB: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0036/198927/6ghz-statement.pdf
>  country GB: DFS-ETSI
>  	(2400 - 2483.5 @ 40), (100 mW)
>  	(5150 - 5250 @ 80), (200 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
>  	(5250 - 5350 @ 80), (100 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, DFS, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI
> -	(5470 - 5725 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI
> +	(5470 - 5730 @ 160), (500 mW), DFS, wmmrule=ETSI

This looks okay to me.

>  	# short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1)
> -	(5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW)
> +	# See UK specific notes in ir-2030.pdf, p47
> +	(5725 - 5850 @ 80), (200 mW), AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI

To echo what I said above, I'm unclear whether this change is in effect
yet, and based what I've seen so far I think it would need to include
NO-OUTDOOR.

> +	(5925 - 6425 @ 160), (250 mW), NO-OUTDOOR, AUTO-BW, wmmrule=ETSI

I'm also unclear on whether this change is in effect yet.

Thanks,
Seth

>  	# 60 GHz band channels 1-6
>  	(57000 - 71000 @ 2160), (40)
>  
> -- 
> 2.26.2
> 



From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Fri Nov 20 14:09:15 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:09:15 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [PATCH] wireless-regdb: Update regulatory
 rules for Kazakhstan (KZ)
In-Reply-To: <CAPgWZqy_bD7KP_ONv1C7tUVw4TLw3QK_xcyYXpi_WH1=4VJwQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPgWZqy_bD7KP_ONv1C7tUVw4TLw3QK_xcyYXpi_WH1=4VJwQw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20201120190915.GO5439@ubuntu-x1>

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:46:34AM +0600, Pavel Starosek wrote:
> Based on [1]:
> * Extend 2400-2483.5 MHz range
> * 5150?5250 MHz range may be up to 200 mW
> * Add 5725-5850 MHz range for indoor usage
> * Add 57-66 GHz range.
> * In 5470-5725 range change the bandwidth from 80 to 160
> 
> [1] http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010730
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Starosek <starosekpd at gmail.com>

Applied, thanks!


From seth.forshee at canonical.com  Fri Nov 20 14:31:09 2020
From: seth.forshee at canonical.com (Seth Forshee)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:31:09 -0600
Subject: [wireless-regdb] [ANN] wireless-regdb: master-2020-11-20
Message-ID: <20201120193109.GP5439@ubuntu-x1>

A new release of wireless-regdb (master-2020-11-20) is available at:

https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/network/wireless-regdb/wireless-regdb-2020.11.20.tar.xz

The short log of changes since the master-2020-04-29 release is below.

Thanks,
Seth

---

Abdul Rauf (1):
      wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for Pakistan (PK) on 5GHz

Pavel Starosek (1):
      wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for Kazakhstan (KZ)

Robert Marko (1):
      wireless-regdb: Update regulatory rules for Croatia (HR)

Seth Forshee (3):
      wireless-regdb: update regulatory rules for Egypt (EG)
      wireless-regdb: update 5.8 GHz regulatory rule for GB
      wireless-regdb: update regulatory database based on preceding changes

bkil (1):
      wireless-regdb: restore channel 12 & 13 limitation in the US


