*****
... is absolutely on track writing to the list "more limited the LAA, the better." It's
designed to take half of all available WiFi spectrum. (40 MHz channels
by 4 telcos = 160MHz.) WiFi is too valuable to give the telcos half.
...is wrong speculating there isn't much to be done about it. While
the U.S. press hasn't picked up much, there is D.C. opposition so strong
it surprised me. If WISPs and others write the FCC,
this could be stopped dead. The FCC can and should develop "rules of the
road" to ensure continued vitality of WiFi, now routinely delivering
300-500 megabits with LOS.
Wall
Street Analyst Paul de Sa thinks the important 5GHz band can and will
be protected, writing this week "We are skeptical that it will be easy
to persuade regulators that this is indeed the case and think LTE-U is
more likely to be deployed at scale in the new 3.5GHz band rather than
at 5GHz." (deSa is a former FCC Chief of Staff.)
There
are major filings at the FCC from Microsoft, Google, Broadcom &
Michael Calabrese. Michael Ha of the FCC indicated at a conference LTE-U
is so controversial everyone has an opinion.
The other big problem: Interference is likely
There
has not been a single field test of LAA, which has only been tried in
the company labs of supporters. A Stanford professor tells me he expects
interference will show up when LAA gets out there. Several in FCC
filings have indicated similar.
What can and should block the spectrum grab
Something
with so many problems and so little data would normally never make it
through the 3GPP Standards Committee, loaded with excellent engineers.
Qualcomm, Ericsson and the giant telcos are pushing hard to get it
included in the forthcoming release 13 of the LTE standards.
A Qualcomm executive chairs a crucial committee at 3GPP.
Mostly
the committee makes sound technical decisions good for both companies
and the public interest. But on issues like this, public and private
interests differ. If 3GPP had strong public participation, LTE-U/LAA
would at least be deferred until after substantial independent field
tests.
That public participation may be in sight. The U.S. and the EU have a very strong U.S. and EU commitment to "multi-stakeholderism" and open standards. Decker
Anstrom, Chair of the U.S. Delegation to the major ITU World Radio
Conference, and others discussed the issue at last week's State
Department Advisory meeting.
There's
no U.S. government position yet, but our international leads,
Ambassador Sepulveda and Larry Strickling, will look very foolish
calling for "multi-stakeholder" at the ITU while doing nothing about the
attempt to clobber WiFi being decided behind closed doors.
The
EU is ahead of the U.S., with "listen before talk" required. That
should also be in the standard. Verizon, I'm told, is trying to block
that in the United States. Good engineers are working on the problem;
LTE-U/LAA standards should be deferred until we have some results. They
don't belong in this years' Release 13 of LTE.
The
U.S. government is a member of 3GPP and could prevent a consensus on
Release 13 if it contains widely questioned extensions into WiFi
spectrum. Something as important as this should not be decided without
vigorous public debate.
The
Internet Society support for U.S. State Department efforts is crucial
to Ambassador Sepulveda. He almost certainly would follow the Internet
Society lead if a forceful request was made. ISOC CEO Kathy Brown and
policy lead Sally Wentworth speak eloquently at the ITU about the
importance of public participation in governance. The
WiFi spectrum issue is much more important than anything at the ITU,
which at the last big meeting (Busan Plenipot) made clear they will not
challenge U.S. policy.
FCC
Chairman Kennard once explained how things like this go down. "There
are some people I call Black Ninjas. They work in the dark and are very,
very good"
Time to shine some sunlight here.
(The
right solution would be sensible "rules of the road" to resolve
contention in unlicensed spectrum, today and in the future. The Qualcomm
lab test was against against already obsolete WiFi. The WiFi folks - in
an IEEE open standards process - are working at developing more
effective contention schemes. Marty Cooper, who won the Marconi Award
for building the first mobile cellphone, identified better contention
methods as WiFi's biggest problem. Ideas on how to do this very welcome.
I'll be writing more.)