3 ms·
Could they just disable support for the U-NII-2 channels in the hardware? Those are the ones that require DFS and I would find losing them to be preferable to m
by ryao 10y ago
Could they just disable support for the U-NII-2 channels in the hardware? Those are the ones that require DFS and I would find losing them to be preferable to manufacturers trying to prevent people from using OSS.
- ZenoArrow 10y agoWhat are U-NII-2 channels used for? I've not come across that term before. As an alternative suggestion, couldn't the transmit power be capped in hardware? I don't see why you'd need to have hardware that could exceed the specified transmit limits, other than to save money for the manufacturers (allowing them to tweak transmit power in software to meet the regulations in different countries, assuming the maximum transmit power for wireless routers varies from country to country). As a side note, the L4Re hypervisor the article proposes using looks very promising, first I've heard of it, was hoping someone would make a hypervisor based on a provably secure kernel like L4 one day, seems like it already exists. http://kernkonzept.com/l4re.html http://kernkonzept.com/l4re.html
- ryao 10y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII