Wi-Fi 6E module certification changes dramatically

In the arena of wireless communication, every update of the standards is like staging a "martial arts tournament". On October 11, 2024, the WIFI6E test standard RSS-248 Issue 3 released by Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) was like a newly unsheathed "sword", cutting through the original certification landscape. With the arrival of the mandatory implementation date on April 11, 2025, this certification reform has already stepped from the "warm-up stage" into the "battlefield moment".

The main changes of the RSS-248 Issue 3 certification are as follows:

1. A new device type is added: Very low-power devices.

2. The warning statements have been adjusted.

3. Only allow modules to apply for the Limited Modular approval (LMA) .

At the "epicenter" of this certification reform, the certification rules for Wi-Fi 6E modules have become the "whirlpool of focus" for manufacturers. Many enterprises are left "dazed" by the wave of new regulations and have raised a series of questions. Don't panic! We have carefully sorted out a series of frequently asked questions about Wi-Fi 6E module certification and the use of certified Wi-Fi 6E modules in complete devices. Our Q&A "puzzle-solving tool" will clear the fog for you, help you quickly grasp the key points of certification, and enable you to easily "overtake on the curve" in the track of new regulations!

Q1: What is the difference between the Limited Modular approval (LMA) and the single module approval (MA)?

A1: The MA is like a "passport for the module in the marketplace", allowing it to freely operate in a wide range of scenarios. On the other hand, the LMA is like a "passport for a specific area", which defines a "small scope" for the usage range and functions of the module. When it comes to "interacting" with other devices, it has to abide by stricter rules.

Q2: Can Wi-Fi 6E modules only apply for Limited Modular approval (LMA)?

A2: Any module certified or to be certified under RSS-248 is automatically considered as Limited Modular approval (LMA) as per section 4.8.7 of RSS-248 issue 3. Except for indoor subordinate devices, which cannot be certified as modules under any circumstances (neither MA nor LMA).

Q3: According to RSS-248 issue 3 section 4.8.7 modular products "All equipment classes, except for indoor subordinate devices, are permitted to be certified under a limited modular approval as per RSP-100." If the module complies with all requirements in section 8.2.1modular approval of RSP-100 why is it a concern that the module be limited?

A3: Any module certified or to be certified under RSS-248 is automatically considered LMA as per section 4.8.7of RSS-248 issue 3;

Even if a module meets all the requirements of RSP-100 Form D (which allows MA), the requirements in RSS-248 takes precedent and restricts the ability to proceed as MA, instead the module is automatically considered for LMA.

Q4: Do I need to submit an application to ISED just to change a previously certified module from MA to LMA?

A4: It is not required to submit applications to ISED for the sole purpose of changing the status of previously certified modules from MA to LMA; i. ISED intends to modify the MA status for previously certified module to LMA directly in Spectra.

Q5: Does ISED require a C4PC application to be submitted for certified modules that are already on the market and integrated into a host?

A5: ISED does not require C4PC applications for certified modules which are already integrated in hosts and are on the market;

i. Module and host manufacturers are nevertheless responsible to assess that hosts currently on the market, which contains RSS-248 modules, meet all the requirements associated to the designated class in RSS-248 issue 3;

Q6: For any RSS-248 modules which are newly integrated in hosts (not yet on the market), does ISED require submission of a C4PC application?

A6: Yes, ISED requires C4PC applications to demonstrate that the hosts do comply with the specific requirements of the applicable class in RSS-248 issue 3.

Q7: Modules that meet all the requirements of RSP-100 Form D (MA allowed). Previously, only when the host needed to test SAR, it was necessary to submit a C4PC application. Now, does it mean that a C4PC is necessary for a RSS-248 certified module installed in a host, regardless of whether the host requires SAR testing or not?

A7: Yes, regardless of the requirements of RF or SAR testing, C4PC is necessary. The C4PC requirements is to ensure the module is not integrated into different classes of equipment where the host class requirements differ.

Well, this Q&A collection has come to an end. In the future, there will be more wonderful Q&A sessions waiting for all the big shots in the manufacturing industry to "set the questions"! Don't hesitate. Feel free to bombard us with your questions. No matter how tricky or difficult they are, we are confident to transform into an "answer generator" and provide you with satisfactory responses. Let's work hand in hand to have a smooth journey on the certification path of Wi-Fi 6E modules!