| |||||||||||||
How does this work?How does this work?Posted Sep 24, 2010 14:03 UTC (Fri) by dtlin (✭ supporter ✭, #36537)In reply to: How does this work? by job Parent article: Broadcom firmware and regulatory compliance
In the past, this was set by option ieee80211_regdom to the cfg80211 module. More recently, this is now configured through the new nl80211 interface, e.g. iw reg. I live in the US and most everything defaults to US regulations, so I haven't dug into how distributions handle this.
(Log in to post comments)
How does this work? Posted Sep 26, 2010 0:48 UTC (Sun) by gutschke (subscriber, #27910) [Link]
I would assume that most modern drivers support 802.11d. I believe it was standardized in 2007. It is supposed to automatically pick the correct regulatory domain based on information broadcast by all the other WiFi users in your vicinity.
In typical urban settings, you can probably see around 50 WiFi devices at any given time. So, this should work pretty reliably. And if you find yourself sufficiently removed from any other WiFi devices, then presumably it wouldn't matter all that much if you pick the wrong regulatory domain as there won't be anybody around that you could interfere with.
How does this work? Posted Sep 26, 2010 7:19 UTC (Sun) by johill (subscriber, #25196) [Link]
Err, no, regulatory restrictions aren't in place to stop wifi devices from interfering with each other (after all, they use carrier sensing and all play nice with each other) -- they are in place to avoid interfering with, to take a recent example, weather radars.
How does this work? Posted Sep 27, 2010 5:55 UTC (Mon) by jzbiciak (✭ supporter ✭, #5246) [Link]
Right, but if there are no other WiFi devices around, presumably the card would fall back into a much more passive mode that's likely to be in the intersection of all domain's requirements. ie. I doubt it'd come out with guns-a-blazin', pumping out 10W until it got a friendly tap on the shoulder that told it "Hey, you're only allowed 100mW peak around these parts."
Rather, if the supported regulatory domains had maximum transmit powers of, say, 120mW, 100mW and 80mW, in the absence of any guidance to the contrary, I'd imagine it'd stick to under-80mW until it got a whiff of what regulatory environment it was in.
After all, when you drive on a new local road you've never driven, do you floor it and go 65MPH until you see a speed limit sign telling you it's 30MPH? (100km/h and 50km/h if you prefer.) Somehow I doubt it. You probably look at the other cars and see what range of speeds they're going, and if there's no other traffic, you probably make an educated guess what an appropriate speed would be.
How does this work? Posted Sep 27, 2010 5:57 UTC (Mon) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
the biggest problem isn't the power level (as you point out it's easy to do something that's safe everywhere)
the problem is what frequencies are you allowed to transmit on. guess wrong and you will never talk on the same frequency as the access point, or you could start interfering with other things and get into more trouble.
How does this work? Posted Sep 27, 2010 6:29 UTC (Mon) by jzbiciak (✭ supporter ✭, #5246) [Link] Fair enough and a good point I hadn't considered. On further reflection, it seems like a computer operating in something resembling a infrastructure mode client would have little reason to transmit until it saw something that gave it an idea of what frequencies and powers were appropriate. And, since I'm actually allergic to too much idle speculation[*] without a good dose of raw facts, I actually had a go at looking up the relevant standard. Indeed, the actual default is "passive scanning" (highlighted below): 9.9.1 Operation upon entering a regulatory domain (Quoted from here.) So, I guess that's the ultimate way to not break any transmit laws... transmit nothing until you hear a valid local transmission. [*] That's not to say I haven't been guilty of such in the past, nor does it say I won't be guilty of it in the future. ;-)
|
|||||||||||||