I have a question about the new parameter
etsiEnSimultaneousChannelOperationRestriction and the phrase "If it is
provided, the Device MUST NOT ignore it."

I can understand that if this parameter is provided and is set to "1", that
the device must honor it (reduce output power when using multiple channels).

But what if there is a device that "hard coded" to always apply the power
restriction when using multiple channels?  This "conservative" approach
would always remain below the permitted emission limits regardless of
whether this flag is set to "1" or "0".

Are we saying that if this parameter is provided and is set to "0" that the
device must not apply the multi-channel power restrictions?  What does it
mean to say "MUST NOT ignore it" in such a case.





Andy Lee | Google Inc. | [email protected] | 408-230-0522


On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Vincent Chen <[email protected]> wrote:

> PAWS,
>
> Draft 11 contains the following changes:
>  - Separation of protocol and regulatory requirements. In essence, MAY,
> MUST , SHOULD has been replaced where the text describes regulatory
> requirements and device behavior. They are replaced with just explanatory
> text.
>
>  - Added the new ETSI parameter for simultaneous channel-operation
> restrictions
>
> Diff:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-paws-protocol-10&difftype=--html&submit=Go%21&url2=draft-ietf-paws-protocol-11
>
> -vince
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:09 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories.
>>  This draft is a work item of the Protocol to Access WS database Working
>> Group of the IETF.
>>
>>         Title           : Protocol to Access White-Space (PAWS) Databases
>>         Authors         : Vincent Chen
>>                           Subir Das
>>                           Lei Zhu
>>                           John Malyar
>>                           Peter J. McCann
>>         Filename        : draft-ietf-paws-protocol-11.txt
>>         Pages           : 108
>>         Date            : 2014-03-05
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    Portions of the radio spectrum that are allocated to licensees are
>>    available for non-interfering use.  This available spectrum is called
>>    "White Space."  Allowing secondary users access to available spectrum
>>    "unlocks" existing spectrum to maximize its utilization and to
>>    provide opportunities for innovation, resulting in greater overall
>>    spectrum utilization.
>>
>>    One approach to manage spectrum sharing uses databases to report
>>    spectrum availability to devices.  To achieve interoperability among
>>    multiple devices and databases, a standardized protocol must be
>>    defined and implemented.  This document defines such a protocol, the
>>    "Protocol to Access White Space (PAWS) Databases".
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-paws-protocol/
>>
>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-paws-protocol-11
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-paws-protocol-11
>>
>>
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>> submission
>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> paws mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -vince
>
> _______________________________________________
> paws mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
>
>
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws

Reply via email to