In reply to a post by DrTeeth:

Why did you buy a router with 5GHz ?

I bought it for other reasons, the 5GHz was a bonus

I still don't think you've answered the question- multiple channels are needed on 2.4GHz because it's got quite a reasonable range, and there's a need to be able to avoid nearby routers running on the same frequency. Not to mention all the other stuff that uses the 2.4GHz band.

That doesn't apply to 5GHz (not to the same extent, anyway). Out of interest, there's a note in the manual (on the CD) for mine that says:

IMPORTANT! This device within the 5.15 ~ 5.25 GHz is restricted to indoor operations to reduce any potential for harmful interference to co-channel MSS operations.

Along with a load of EEC directives that I cba'd to look up- complaining that the EEC directives over-ride UK law is a pointless exercise.

So why, on a domestic device intended for indoor use only would you need 17 channels? Future proofing doesn't come into it, unless you're aware of plans to change the laws of physics in the next decade or so.


It sounds to me like "I can legally have it, therefore I want it even though I don't need it" [stamping feet]

And as for the traffic on other forums- a lot of people think that if you make enough noise about something, it must be right.

Edited by billford (Sat 02-Aug-14 20:46:12)

Bill,

First, US routers are being sold to Singapore and there are many issues with 'wrong' locales'. It is not just a case of 'more noise'. You would not say so if you were aware of the issues involved.
Second, I do not like buying crippled kit.
Third, I wonder why Ofcom gave 17 valuable channels if they were not needed on 5GHz?
Fourth, EU directives do NOT over-ride anything wireless related of any significance in the UK. Just have a look at the national differences in the 5GHz band in Europe - both in channels and power.
Fifth, you sound like the sort of chap who thinks all cars should be limited to 70 mph as that is the max speed here .

And as for the traffic on other forums- a lot of people think that if you make enough noise about something, it must be right.

That comment does you no service mate. No further comment needed

In reply to a post by DrTeeth:

First, US routers are being sold to Singapore

That's Singapore's problem, it's up to them to check that they got what they ordered.

You would not say so if you were aware of these issues involved.

So what are these issues? Realistic examples please.

I do not like buying crippled kit.

You didn't. You bought kit to fit your requirements, if it didn't then you had the legal right to return it, under the Distance Selling Regulations if bought online. It's up to you to check it- it did what you wanted it to do, you accepted it therefore it fitted your requirements.

Finding out later that that certain options that were not part of your requirements are not included is no grounds for claiming the equipment is crippled- that's little more than pique.

Same here -

admin@RT-N66U:/tmp/home/root# wl -i eth2 channels
36 40 44 48

Luckily I don't use 5GHz much.

1) UK retailers are not aware of this issue. It is not possible to discover the issue any other way other than dabbling. I have removed **all** regional restrictions on my router so can operate it to proper UK spec. This facility for the end user to change the regulatory locale is being removed at the behest of the American FCC.
2) The Singaporean routers were supplied from a legit source. There have been similar issues with US models being supplied to Australia with Australian plugs.
3) The kit is crippled - I bought it assuming that it would be correctly localised - not an unreasonable assumption. Every time somebody buys some kit, do you seriously expect them to look for some slight of hand on behalf of the supply chain? One does not check if one does not have a reason to suspect something is amiss.

Finally, I would use the Sale of Goods act and not the DSR to return an item. I would also, in future, ask if something were correctly localised for UK use. A *major* online seller of Asus kit (and others) thinks the N66U is correctly set up so asking a box shifter will not get the correct answer, but one can use that answer for SoG Act action.

I believe you, but why is the US FCC wanting this? (A request which many manufacturers would find hard to ignore).

I can understand it for US sales or supply, but as a general principle is this another example of the US believing it has a right to global control? A belief which unfortunately seems very well founded in many other areas than WiFi band allocation.

In reply to a post by DrTeeth:

Every time somebody buys some kit, do you seriously expect them to look for some slight of hand on behalf of the supply chain?

I would expect them to check that it meets their requirements. If it doesn't meet a requirement that they have then they reject it. You didn't (and don't) have a requirement for 17 channels at 5GHz, therefore you have no complaint.

Finally, I would use the Sale of Goods act and not the DSR to return an item.

Then in this case you'd lose. Asus (although why you singled out Asus I don't know, you imply that it affects other manufacturers as well) claim that it operates on the 5GHz band. It does. It may not work the way you have (later) decided you would like it to, but that's your problem not Acer's.

I have a radio here with a switch labelled VHF(FM), ie implying that it will pick up FM broadcasts on the VHF band. It won't- it operates from 88-108MHz, VHF is from 30-300MHz. Do I jump up and down and claim that it's crippled? Of course not.

I would also, in future, ask if something were correctly localised for UK use.

That's fair enough, but you didn't. Caveat emptor, the device does all it is claimed to do.

Edited by billford (Sat 02-Aug-14 22:15:20)

I think it fair enough for a person who appears to be a radio ham to know what the UK regulations are wrt WiFi bands, and automatically to expect that items on sale here are compliant with those regulations. The fact that the majority of us aren't and wouldn't know without this thread is not the point.

Supplying a product that only uses a subset of the bands available is fair enough, but that restricted supply should be clear in the product description and at the point of sale.

I've a feeling that in the case of FM radio this is the case, but wouldn't claim to be sure.

I have a radio here with a switch labelled VHF(FM), ie implying that it will pick up FM broadcasts on the VHF band. It won't- it operates from 88-108MHz, VHF is from 30-300MHz. Do I jump up and down and claim that it's crippled? Of course not.

I would also, in future, ask if something were correctly localised for UK use.

Silly example as everybody knows that the receiver is referring to the VHF *broadcast* band http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/broadcast/vhff...

You would be right to be annoyed if you got a Japanese version for use in the UK though.

Edited by deleted (Sat 02-Aug-14 22:39:32)

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I think it fair enough for a person who appears to be a radio ham to know what the UK regulations are wrt WiFi bands, and automatically to expect that items on sale here are compliant with those regulations.

Not entirely� leaving aside that he only recently appears to have discovered the exact regulations and was happy up until then, your statement would be accurate if he were buying a piece of kit aimed at the expert and knowledgeable user.

But it isn't, it's aimed at the domestic user who can just about manage the setup wizard, and if it works they're happy. If you want all the i's dotted and the t's crossed, buy a Cisco.