Zigbee stack on 926MHz possible?

Go To Last Post
10 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Is there any way to tweak the Zigbee stack to use 926MHz?

The chip does up to 928MHz according to the datasheet but the Zigbee specs are limiting it for whatever reason to 924MHz. As the stack is not availabe as source, is there any way to "tweak" it.
Loss of Zigbee compatibility and/or lower frequency channels would be no problem.

Thanks, BC

Last Edited: Fri. Oct 16, 2015 - 02:19 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

The only way is to ask for this, but for a small project there almost no chances that it will actually be done.

NOTE: I no longer actively read this forum. Please ask your question on www.eevblog.com/forum if you want my answer.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Wouldn't the choice of frequency in that band be a simple config item?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Not in ZigBee, so not in BitCloud.

NOTE: I no longer actively read this forum. Please ask your question on www.eevblog.com/forum if you want my answer.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Guess, it would be very difficult (and expensive, too) to get the stack source from Atmel to alter it?

What part is actually available? The Zigbee stack as a library with header files, sure. What about SerialNet?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Everything can be obtained for free, you just have to sign NDA. I don't know what the requirements for NDA are, you should ask avr@atmel.com.

SerialNet is closed source as well and the source code is available only under NDA.

NOTE: I no longer actively read this forum. Please ask your question on www.eevblog.com/forum if you want my answer.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

ZigBee is certainly NOT an open standard as are the IEEE standards, ISO standards, and IETF RFCs.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Openness of a particular implementation has nothing to do with openness of a standard.

ZigBee sucks, but IETF, IEEE and ISO never produced anything that is even close to ZigBee. Unfortunately, there are no good WPAN standards.

NOTE: I no longer actively read this forum. Please ask your question on www.eevblog.com/forum if you want my answer.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

alexru wrote:
Unfortunately, there are no good WPAN standards.
There appears to be some work on some of that per Contiki for IETF RPL and CoAP.

"Dare to be naïve." - Buckminster Fuller

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I had a lot of hope for it, but unfortunately it all turned out to be a real mess because of politics and bureaucracy. Minimal (but full) implementations already require 512+ kB of Flash, where original goal was < 128 kB.

This is only my opinion, and I might be wrong.

LE: In this area good standards are created by one entity for one particular application, but they all turn out to be proprietary and authors usually don't care for pushing them out (and ultimately facing politics and bureaucracy).

NOTE: I no longer actively read this forum. Please ask your question on www.eevblog.com/forum if you want my answer.