Well as I'm sure you know there are only 3 non-overlapping WiFi channels in the US - 1, 6, and 11.
That's why I asked if your system is going to need a dedicated channel.
Some home systems like Sonos (whole house audio) take up one of those WiFi channels (even though it's not a WiFi compatible network).
If your system is going to need a channel of its own, that leaves possibly one channel for general WiFi use.
It can sometimes be tough to provide good WiFi coverage for an entire home with just one channel to use.
Was using 802.11a a possibility?
The data I posted shows the ability to change the channel. This is done in the software, after browsing the 853 page data sheet for programming, it is set up as 1 ~ 13 so you have 14 channels available.
As for certification, sure in theory you have X amount of available channels but as in this article, its not hard to manage or change the channel of your device:
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/2113...ter-channel-to-optimize-your-wireless-signal/
I can tell you from a practical standpoint, the hardware is able to do channels 1 ~ 13, which setting the end user decides is best for his/her use is up to them and is selectable in the UI. Canada as far as I know does not have a SWAT team attached to Industry Canada, so my personal opinion is if you have interference, run, a program as suggested in the above link and simply change the channel to what works best out of the 14 available. Otherwise, I guess we'll default the software to what the NMRA suggests whenever they come up with a 74 pin standard...
If you can set up a completely clear channel, your data rates are up to 150 Mbps. As referenced in the above link, most devices are defaulted to channel 6.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n-2009
The above article is some reference material for 802.11n.
The indoor range of our antenna is approx 200 feet, however a node will retransmit packets so full house coverage is easily done.
Also, you cannot compare data speeds of your smart phone, or wireless internet to that of a pure wireless mesh network as they depend on a "wired" connection for the data so the comparison is like trying to suck more air from a straw. We don't have a straw to suck through plus there are differences between theory and practicality.
DCC can only get 1400 bits per second through the track, if you pick a clear channel, our mesh can do 150,000,000 bits per second.
As for 5.0 GHz or 802.11ac - once they combine a WiFi Module, CPU, Balum, etc. into one SiP that exceed the abilities of our current IC, sure we can change. There are options available for segmented components but to get the Linux ARM9 CPU and RF into a single small package, there is not much available which will do everything with one IC at this point.