Hi, all -
I was just reading about the potential of LTE-U to "wipe out half the WiFi"
spectrum on Dave Farber's IP list. I will copy the last post here since it
suggests some political awareness is called for. Sorry for mentioning it if
it's irrelevant.
~ Elisa
*****
... 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.)
Show replies by date