In that case, I believe the PAWS document should refer to Slave and Master as roles, and I should not include the last sentence in the proposed text.
We probably also need to add: Whether a single device is allowed to serve both Slave and Master roles depends on regulatory rules. -vince On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Ray Bellis <[email protected]>wrote: > > On 26 Jul 2013, at 15:25, Vincent Chen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > In the ETSI / OFCOM model, is Slave a "role" or a static / certified > property of the device? > > I would tend towards the latter. The ETSI draft standard contains this > definition: > > "slave WSD: WSD that is only able to communicate with other WSDs, when > under the control of a master WSD" > > and this: > > "master WSD: geo-located WSD that is able to communicate directly with a > TVWSDB and with WSDs" > > > Consider the use case: > > - A portable device has location capability, but is not yet on a > network > > - It acts like a Slave in this phase to contact a Master in order to > get spectrum > > - It now can establish network connection to the Database directly > using the spectrum > > > > In the ETSI / OFCOM model: > > 1. Can it now ask the Database directly for spectrum? because it may be > able to operate at higher power? > > I believe that this is *not* permitted. A slave device that has > geolocation capability MAY ask for device specific RF parameters, but MUST > do so through its Master. > > OFCOM's specification explicitly prohibits a (master) WSD from talking to > the WSDB over the managed UHF spectrum, it needs to use some other form of > link. > > kind regards, > > Ray > > > -- -vince
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
