Michael gives a good over view of the situation.  The bottom line is that a
device CANNOT transmit on any frequency that it has not been shown to
comply.  So, even if the device passive scans, it still cannot transmit on
channels 12 and 13 unless those channels have been shown to comply in the
application for certification.  If channels 12 and 13 were part of the
initial filing, and they passive scan, then they can transmit.  Even if they
do not passive scan, but have been shown to comply with the rules they can
transmit.  If they have not been shown to comly then they cannot transmit -
period passive scan or not.

 

But here is the real issue.  If a device has been shown to comply and has
channels 12 and 13 on the grant, then there would be no need to passive scan
any more than on any of the other channels 1-11.  The question then is why
passive scan on these channels in the first place. The answer, other
countries use these channels and at the same or similar power as the other
channels; so using the incorrect concept that "the US does not have these
channels, so it should be OK to passive scan because it won't transmit in
the US"  is simply NOT true.  The US does have and allows these channels,
when properly tested and shown to comply and the channel frequency is
included on the grant.  Since the beginning of the WLAN craze, it has always
been this way.

 

While the FCC, also in the beginning of the TCB program, tried to 'mandate'
that only channels 1-11 could be used, that ended very quickly when a
certain manufacturer basically said, uh NO, nothing in the rules stops me
from using channels 12 and 13 as long as I comply to the rules.  Needless to
say, that manufacturer was and is correct and these channels have been
certifiable all along.  It is difficult, but it is doable. I can remember as
far back as very early in the TCB program when I certified my first channel
12 and 13 WLAN device.  So, they are out there and the concept that ' I
should be able to simply passive scan channel 12 and 13 for when the device
is in a country that uses these channels, and not worry about them in the US
because the US does not have these channels" simply does not fly and never
has.  

 

In essence, the FCC has always allowed properly tested and properly powered
channels 12 and 13 passive scanning when the device has been shown to comply
to the rules in the channels it scans.  It is only when no evidence of
compliance for those channels exists that the FCC, rightfully so, says NO.  

 

Thanks 

Dennis Ward

Senior Certification Engineer

PCTEST

This communication and its attachments contain information from PCTEST
Engineering Laboratory, Inc., and is intended for the exclusive use of the
recipient (s) named above. It may contain information that is confidential
and/or legally privileged. Any unauthorized use that may compromise that
confidentiality via distribution or disclosure is prohibited. Please notify
the sender immediately if you receive this communication in error, and
delete it from your computer system.  Usage of PCTEST email addresses for
non-business related activities is strictly prohibited. No warranty is made
that the e-mail or attachment(s) are free from computer virus or other
defect.  Thank you.

 

From: Michael Derby [mailto:micha...@acbcert.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 1:28 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] FCC draft comments on WiFi operation in channels 12 and
13

 

Hello Curt,

 

It has always been possible to use channels 12 and 13 in the USA because
they are perfectly "in band" channels.   However, it is very difficult for a
WLAN device to pass the FCC tests on those channels, so most manufacturers
simply choose to disable them.   Some manufacturers choose to reduce the
power on those channels.   Of course, if the whole device has sufficiently
low power, then it might pass channels 12 and 13 (or just 12) without
additional power reduction.

 

This means that most WLAN devices use only channels 1 to 11 but some do use
1 to 12 or 1 to 13.   (12 is easier to get passing than 13, since the tricky
test is a band edge issue)

 

It has always been the case that if you only test and certify your device up
to channel 11, then you cannot sell a device which could transmit on
channels 12 or 13.

 

In the past, manufacturers have asked the FCC if their devices can passive
scan on 12 and 13, even if their device is only certified up to channel 11.

Of course the answer was "yes, you can passive scan" because passive
scanning does not include transmission.

Of course, the assumption then should be that if the client device sees a
working access point on channel 12 or 13, it must not actually form a link
and transmit!

 

You can imagine that as a TCB, if we see an application which states that a
device transmits on channels 1 to 11 and can also passive scan on channels
12 and 13; it looks perfectly reasonable.   Many did not realise the need to
ask:  "Please confirm that it cannot transmit on channels 12 or 13 if
instructed to do so by the access point".

 

It seems that some manufacturers did not make that final step.   I am not
going to say if this was a misunderstanding or avoidance of the rules by the
manufacturer or lack of explanation by the FCC; this is not my comment to
make and I'm sure there is a variety of answers.

 

So, last summer 2013, the FCC clarified the point that you can passive scan
on those channels but you cannot transmit on those channels if you are not
certified to use them, even if instructed to do so by an access point.

(Remember that the access point could be using channels 12 and 13 by
implementing power reduction, or could simply be breaking the rules!)

 

This 'clarification' came as a surprise to some manufacturers (but not all).

 

Due to this 'surprise', the FCC gave a "6 month amnesty" where they would
not actively enforce/investigate this issue.   I don't like to call it a
transition period because nothing has actually changed.   It is a
clarification/explanation of the existing rules, it is not a change in the
rules.

 

I believe the "amnesty" expires next month.

 

 

I hope this helps.

 

 

Michael.

 

 

 

Michael Derby

Regulatory Engineer

ACB Europe

 

From: Curtis Mc Namara [mailto:mcnam...@umn.edu] 
Sent: 30 January 2014 23:48
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] FCC draft comments on WiFi operation in channels 12 and 13

 

FCC Draft KDB 594280 Software Configuration Control DR04-41649:
https://apps.fcc.gov/eas/comments/GetPublishedDocument.html?id=352
<https://apps.fcc.gov/eas/comments/GetPublishedDocument.html?id=352&tn=40250
1> &tn=402501

This draft says that operation on channels 12 and 13 in the US cannot rely
on passive scanning alone. However, at this point it is a draft, and the
introductory paragraph says to follow previous guidance.

Has a anyone here evaluated this? I have a customer with products in the
field which use passive scanning, and they are curious whether there will be
a transition time, and whether it is still permissible and practical to ship
devices with passive scanning.

Thanks!

            Curt

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <emcp...@radiusnorth.net>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com> 

-
----------------------------------------------------------------

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in
well-used formats), large files, etc.

Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to
unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> 
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html 

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <emcp...@radiusnorth.net>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> 

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com> 


-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc 
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to 
<emc-p...@ieee.org>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <emcp...@radiusnorth.net>
Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <j.bac...@ieee.org>
David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>

Reply via email to