On 02/14/13 07:33, Stuart Henderson wrote:
Amit Kulkarni <amitkulz <at> gmail.com> writes:
I was reading the manpages of athn/iwn for purchasing a suitable wireless card
and found repeated
occurences of 2GHz, when in fact it should be 2.4GHz. That is the standard
frequency when purchasing a
wireless a/b/g/n card. The code is filled with 2GHz references but just
changed to man pages in section 4.
I don't think there is anything 'wrong' in saying "operates in the 2GHz
spectrum". Saying 2.4GHz in documentation seems like it might be a
good idea as it's more common usage, but it seems wrong to say "2.4GHz
spectrum", it seems like "2.4GHz band" would make more sense if doing
this. (But then mixing 'band' and 'spectrum' would also be weird so the
references to 5GHz would need changing to 'bands' (not 'band' there as
there are 3 non-continuous ranges). Is it worth it? I don't know.
Yes, exactly right--2.4GHz band is correct and consistent with many
governmental agencies terminology. This is a picky point that isn't
major, but there are clear definitions of the wireless bands, and
using them is better. And, consistent with OpenBSD's striving to
get it right.
--STeve Andre'
