Closed mikev closed 2 years ago
I created a branch of packet-forwarder-test/sx13xx-conf to verify the channel plan matches the following frequencies:
pub const AS923_1L_UPLINK_FREQUENCIES: [usize; 8] = [
922_000_000,
922_200_000,
922_400_000,
922_600_000,
922_800_000,
923_000_000,
923_200_000,
923_400_000,
];
The test output passes:
Running `target/debug/sx13xx-conf /home/louis/sx1302_hal/packet_forwarder/global_conf.json.sx1250.AS923_M AS923_1L`
1 922 MHz
2 922.2 MHz
3 922.4 MHz
4 922.6 MHz
5 922.8 MHz
6 923 MHz
7 923.2 MHz
8 923.4 MHz
My only gripe is that I think the name for this plan should:
I propose AS923-1L for "lower channels", which would imply the current "AS923-1" plan is AS923-1H. I'm open to other conventions than L or H notation, but feel strongly about the two points above.
I'm fully amenable to both points. To expand on this, all listed plans have defined arbitrary frequencies based on limited research or cloning from TTN. For dynamic plans the primary plan feature is the two or three hard-coded Join frequencies, while all other frequencies must only be chosen between the min and max. For fixed plans the primary plan feature is which channel sub-band is chosen. All current Helium plans are not set in stone and can be modified in the future depending on interference or legal issues.
For these reasons, we should name all plans with some arbitrary name, e.g. EU868_XYZ. That way when we decide to switch in the future to some new arbitrary plan, e.g. EU868_ABC there is no misunderstanding that the original plan frequencies were arbitrary. I'd advise against the L/H notation. We might also devise plans where the Join channels are in the middle.
What about AS923-1TV (short for Thiery - Vierling)? [Update: global_conf.json.sx1250.AS923_1B]
AS923-1TV is fine by me. I would suggest to just do AS923-1A, AS923-1B, etc. But either way is fine.
Changes required to support Hotspots in Malaysia and avoid the illegal 924Mhz frequency band.
New file is named global_conf.json.sx1250.AS923_1B