Note: this e-mail is on a public mailing list.

Adding Michael and David again.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 11:17 AM, John W. Linville[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:46:29PM +0700, Phattanon Duangdara wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Luis R.
Rodriguez[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Note: this e-mail is in a public mailing list.

Adding Michael and David. Michael, I'd appreciate your review on this,
if possible.

Phattanon, thanks for your review of the TH document and sharing it
with us. Please see my reply inline below.

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:13 AM, Phattanon Duangdara[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I corrected redgb from my knowledge.

Did you see my patch? I corrected TH to be:

country TH:
       (2402 - 2482 @ 20), (N/A, 20)
       (5170 - 5250 @ 20), (3, 17)
       (5250 - 5330 @ 20), (3, 20), DFS
       (5490 - 5710 @ 20), (3, 20), DFS
       (5735 - 5835 @ 20), (3, 30)

quoted

For 5150-5350 is for Indoor Use Only.
Most of the regulartory

What do you mean by that? Do you mean that the document refers to FCC
and ETSI/ITU standard for regulatory purposes for some items?

quoted

refer _either_ FCC or ETSI/ITU standard, so I
guess that from the document 40MHz can also be used (same as US)
because TH regulatory mostly cover all bandwidth on 40MHz.

Are you saying the Thailand document refers to FCC for max allowed
bandwidth spacing and therefore US max bandwidth spacing should be
used (ie allow 40 MHz width channels)?

I am not sure about this. But if equipment that comply with FCC
standard allow to use 40MHz, I think we can because, for example
Translated rule for 2.4GHz says

<snip>

So, is the patch from Luis wrong?  If so, what is the correct patch?

Although Phattanon didn't post a patch I interpreted it as he was
suggesting we can enable 40 MHz channels on Thailand as well since he
points out that Thailand regulatory rules refer to the FCC for
bandwidth compliance.

Michael does this interpretation match yours? Can we allow 40 MHz in TH?

Phattanon also specified some differences on max EIRP but I think that
should go as a separate patch and reviewed as such.

  Luis