Hi Luzango, Thanks for your suggestions.
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Luzango Mfupe <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Vince, Folks, > > I am glad to see things are moving to the right direction and hopefully > soon we will finalise this work. > > I just found some few not very critical issues that needs some fixing in > in my opinion: > > *5.11. Spectrum* > > > Here the document talk about the FCC and OFCOM/ETSI spectral profile > presentation requirements (i.e, power levels over a set of frequency > ranges. However, there is only one type of example (OFCOM/ETSI specific) > that is provided throughout the document. I think we need to add another > set of example that is FCC specific. > > > Would something like this below suffice for the FCC specific example? > > > > “resolutionBwHz”: 1e5, > > “profiles”: [ > > { > > "Hz": 5.18e8, > > "Hz": 5.24e8, > > “dbm”: 24 > > ] }, > > > > Ah. I see. We can add a single resolution-bandwidth example for completeness. > *6.8.3. Antenna Characteristics* > > We only have the *AMSL* and *AGL *as options for antenna height Types. > > I don't see why we should not also list *HAAT* as a third option, I am > pretty sure this is/can be used in some implementations. > Actually, these height types represents what can be directly measured by the device itself or by the installer. I do not believe HAAT is directly measurable. It also tends to be US-centric. If, however, there were to be new enum values, we could add them via the IANA process. -vince > > Kind Regards, > > *Luzango.* > > >
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
