Gabor, I agree on possible renaming, if we want to specify unavailable channels.
Please see comments inline. On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 12:56 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Vince,**** > > This proposal of yours below could potentially become very confusing. The > message itself is named Available Spectrum Request, and you propose the > Available Spectrum Response to include a bunch of channels with unspecified > power levels, which are btw, not available channels. **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > So far, we have 4 proposed ways to indicate unavailable channels:**** > > **a) **Not listing it, implicit unavailability > This has the drawback of not distinguishing between being silent about a channel that is within the database's purview (channel off), and being silent about a channel that is outside the database's purview (out of scope for given ruleset). > **** > > **b) **List unavailable channels and specify the power limit, eg > -56dbm > Since the protocol should stand on its own, independent of any particular regulatory rule, do we really want to rule this out? In our interpretations of the FCC rules, for example, a Database is not prevented from doing this. > **** > > **c) **List unavailable channels and specify –inf as power limit > "-Inf" is not really workable, because JSON does not allow Infinity or NaNs (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4627), hence the d) proposal. **** > > **d) **List unavailable channels and do not specify any power limit > **** > > ** ** > > So far, we have majority in favour of a), few people who could live or > prefer c) and sort of consensus to strike out option b) from the list above. > **** > > ** ** > > We’ll wait for more input on the list before declaring rough consensus for > the question above; then we’ll go back to the original question on whether > the encoding of spectrum profile should be option 1 or option 2.**** > > ** ** > > p.s. It looks to me, that if we want to specify unavailable channels, we > may need to modify the names of the paws messages to ‘Spectrum schedule’ or > sg along these lines.**** > > ** ** > > **- **Gabor**** > > ** >
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
