Shared between Location and monitoring service and Part 15 operations. Power limit: 1W to 6dbi
Antenna or + 36dBm (4W EIRP). Frequency Hopping or DSSS. 26 MHz
total band. Cordless Phones.
1000 MHz
Wavelength: 30 cm. Use: Cellular radio, top of UHF TV
band
short-range, high speed (54Mbps) wireless digital.
Large bandwidth (83.5 MHz). Can be used for last mile access, wireless
networking, and line of sight over distance. Unaffected by
weather. Bluetooth.
The C-band satellite downlink, also used by fixed
service stations
Emergency
4.3 GHz
Public Safety Band
4.9 GHz
5.0 - 5.15 GHz
Air traffic control operations
5.091 - 5.25
"WRC-95 allocated this band on a primary basis to fixed-satellite (Earth-to-space) service (FSS uplinks) to provide feeder links for non geostationary satellite systems in the mobile satellite service (MSS) on a coprimary basis with government aeronautical radionavigation."
short-range, high speed wireless digital. Can be used
for last mile access, wireless networking, and line of sight over
distance. 1W in to 6 dBi Antenna or + 36dBm (4W EIRP). Cordless phones.
Formerly Digital Electronic
Messaging Service
Fixed wireless. 10 year license
term. Licensed in 40 MHz pairs, can use contiguous bandwidth up
to 200 MHz through aggregation.
FCC OET will reportedly issue an NOI in late 2000
concerning possible uses of band including licensed and unlicensed
use. Band is currently used for military communications.
Law
Radio Acts of 1912 and 1927. Fed Gov takes
over spectrum management. Allocates use between private and govt users.
Emergency and military needs have priority. Airwaves are a scarce
public resource licensed for private use under a public interest
standard. Cannot broadcast without a license.
Communications
Act of 1934: Combined elements of the Radio Act of 1927 in
Title III and elements of ICC common carrier regulation in Title II
FCC Busts Pirate Radio Boat. Goodbye RDI.
(Editor Note: A good friend of mine was involved in this boat).
Regulation
Ch. Martin testified before the Feb. 1, 2007 Senate
Commerce Committee that he has a draft order declaring that Internet over Wireless is an Information Service
In a more recent effort to address spectrum access issues, the FCC
established a Spectrum Policy Task Force in June 2002. The Task Force was composed of
senior staff members from several FCC Bureaus and Offices who were asked to assist the FCC in
identifying and evaluating changes in spectrum policy necessary to reflect advances in
technology that were likely to increase the public benefits from spectrum use. In November
2002, the Task Force released its findings. Its report noted that, while certain frequency bands
are heavily used, many bands either are not in use in all geographic areas or are only heavily
used part of the time. Furthermore, the Task Force determined, that these characteristics served
to limit access to available spectrum and that such limitations are a more significant problem
than the physical scarcity of spectrum itself. The report identified three unique approaches to
spectrum policy based on the establishment of a set of legal rights: 1) an exclusive use approach;
2) a commons approach; and 3) a command-and-control approach. 19
The Task Force urged that the FCC evolve its spectrum policy from its traditional “command
and control” model to a more market-oriented approach to achieve spectral efficiency. The Task
Force set out four key recommendations to accomplish this policy reform. Recommendations
include:
1. Migrate toward more flexible, consumer-oriented policies. The Task Force recommended
that the Commission evolve its spectrum policy toward more flexible and market-oriented
spectrum policies that will provide incentives for users to migrate to more technologically
innovative and economically efficient uses of spectrum.
2. Adopt quantitative standards to provide interference protection: interference temperature.
The Task Force recommended the creation of a quantitative standard for acceptable
interference that provides both greater certainty for licensees and greater access to unused
spectrum for unlicensed operators.
3. Improve access through the time dimension. The Task Force found that new technological
developments now permit the Commission to increasingly consider the use of time, in
addition to frequency, power and space, as an added dimension permitting more dynamic
allocation and assignment of spectrum usage rights. This would provide access to unused or
underused spectrum through time-sharing of spectrum between multiple users and lead to
more efficient use of the spectrum resource.
4. Shift from “command and control” model to exclusive and commons models. The Task
Force recommended that the Commission base its spectrum policy on a balance of three
spectrum rights models: an exclusive use approach, a commons approach and, to a more
limited degree, a command-and-control approach. While the command-and-control model
currently dominates today’s policy, the Task Force recommended altering the balance to
provide greater use of both the exclusive use and commons models throughout the radio
spectrum and limiting the use of the command-and-control model to those instances where
there are compelling public policy reasons, such as some public safety applications. To the
extent feasible, more spectrum should be identified for both licensed and unlicensed uses
under flexible rules and existing spectrum that is subject to more restrictive command-andcontrol
regulation should over time be transitioned to these models.
On of the most notable of the Task Force’s recommendations, from an unlicensed device
perspective, is that it urges the adoption of an “interference temperature.” The new metric would
allow the FCC to quantify and manage interference on a band-by-band basis, by establishing
limits on the noise environment in which receivers would be required to operate. To the extent,
however, that the interference temperature in a particular band is not reached, the report argues,
users who emit energy below that temperature could operate more flexibly – with the
interference temperature serving as the maximum cap on the potential RF energy any device
could introduce into the band.
Notes
Radio spectrum is that portion of the electromagnetic
spectrum used for communications.
What spectrum can be used for depends on its physical
characteristics
High or low frequency
Amount of bandwidth
It is assumed that spectrum is finite (researchers
working on smart radios are trying to challenge this)
Frequency is the number of times per second a radio wave
undergoes a complete cycle
Hertz (Hz) = 1 cycle per second
Kilohertz (kHz) = 1 thousand cycles per second
Megahertz (MHz) = 1 million cycles per second
Gigahertz (GHz) - 1 billion cycles per second
Wavelength = (speed of light) / (frequency)
Amplitude = signal strength or power
Interference: Effect of unwanted energy due to one or a
combination of emissions, radiations, or inductions under reception in
a radio communications system, manifested by any performance
degradation, misinterpretation, or loss of information which could be
extracted in the absence of such unwanted energy. 47 CFR 2.1
Bandwidth: Amount of spectrum a signal occupies
Dramatic cost reduction of wireless broadband technology.
Increasing processing power; new modulation techniques making better
use of spectrum; improvements in antenna and radio technology;
architectural improvements.
New Builds
Advantage over wireline: physical trench from street or
drop from poles for each house. Physical connect at street by
installer. Cost of drop cabling. Mode of wireline modem. Onsite
installation.
Wireless: shared wireless network access point - no
physical connection. Cost of wireless modem. No on site visit (truck
role).
But wireless unlikely to have enough capacity
to compete for full service video for 5-7 years?? (Stagg
Newman in 2006)
In light of the ever increasing demand for radio
spectrum, and recognizing the additional challenges this presents for
effectively managing interference, the FCC today adopted a Notice of
Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that sets forth and seeks
comment on a possible new way to quantify and manage interference among
different services. Termed "interference temperature," this model for
addressing interference takes into account the actual cumulative
radiofrequency (RF) energy from transmissions of spectrum-based
devices, and would set a maximum cap on the aggregate of these
transmissions. In contrast, the current approach for managing
interference focuses on specifying and limiting the transmit powers of
individual spectrum-based devices as the chief way to prevent
interference. The "interference temperature" approach may facilitate
more intensive use of the radio spectrum, creating the opportunities
for new services and improving the predictability of any interference
to existing services. The Notice of Inquiry seeks comment on a number
of issues related to the need for, development, and implementation of
an interference temperature model for managing interference. To test
the potential usefulness and applicability of this approach, which was
included as one of the recommendations of the Spectrum Policy Task
Force, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeks comment on various
technical rules that would establish procedures and use the
interference temperature model on a limited basis in the following two
bands: 6525-6700 MHz and portions of the 12.75-13.25 GHz bands.
Specifically, these procedures would enable unlicensed devices to
operate in these bands, which are used primarily for satellite uplinks and fixed point-to-point
microwave services. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking also seeks
comment on whether the possible introduction of unlicensed operation
into these bands would impact these existing services. Action by the
Commission November 13, 2003, by Notice of Inquiry and Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 03-289). Chairman Powell, Commissioners
Abernathy, Copps, and Martin with Commissioner Adelstein approving in
part and concurring in part. Chairman Powell, Commissioners Copps and
Adelstein issued separate statements. ET Docket No. 03-237
Two-way Digital ITFS and MDS Communications Approved;
New Services, Faster Internet Access Available for Consumers (MM Docket
97-217) FCC
Press Release Sept 17, 1998 "The Commission has cleared the
way for Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS) and Instructional
Television Fixed Service (ITFS) licensees to offer two-way digital
services. As a result of today's action, a new, competitive group of
players may emerge for delivery of high speed two-way communications
service to consumers. Both individual and business consumers will be
able to use the high-speed and high-capacity
data transmission and Internet service that will be available through
the new systems..."
"Multipoint and/or Multichannel Distribution Services
(MDS), popularly referred to as "Wireless Cable," is a service that
permits the delivery of video programming to subscribers through
microwave transmitting and receiving antennas. The channels allocated
to MDS are generally used to provide a multichannel video programming
service that is similar to cable television, but, rather that being
hard-wired, MDS uses microwave frequencies. A total of 493 MDS licenses
were auctioned, one for each of the Basic Trading Areas (BTAs) in the
United States and territories. Initially, there were 155 qualified
bidders. One hundred forty one of the qualified bidders were small
businesses. The number of winning bidders totaled 67. "
Spectrum was previously intended for wireless cable.
Range: 35 miles.
Request for Declaratory Ruling on the Use of Digital
Modulation by Multipoint Distribution Service and Instructional
Television Fixed Service Stations, 11 FCC Rcd 18839 (1996)
Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 to Enable Multipoint
Distribution Service and Instructional Television Fixed Service
Licensees to Engage in Fixed Two-Way Transmission, Report and Order,
Docket No. 97-217, 13 FCC Rcd 19112 (1998)., Order on Reconsideration,
14 FCC Rcd 12764 (1999).
Marvin Sirbu & Kanchana Wanichkorn (Carnegie Mellon
University) MMDS Internet Access: a Cost Model (PPT)
2000 Internet & Telecoms Convergence Consortium
24 GHz
Fixed Wireless
Formerly the Digital Electronic Messaging
Service, the 24 GHz band will be available for fixed wireless use
including broadband services. The service will have the following
characteristics:
Determined 24 GHz licensees,
including incumbent Digital Electronic Message Service licensees, will
be
governed by Part 101 of the
FCC's Rules;
licensed in 40 MHz flexible
channel pairs;
either the upper or lower
side of the 40 MHz channel pairs can be used for the nodal station or
the subscriber station
a ten-year license term from
the date of grant.
licensees may partition
and/or disaggregate their licenses and allowed licensees to aggregate
24 GHz band spectrum.
allowing the use of
non-directional antennas as well as one-foot diameter parabolic
antennas;
eliminating individual
licensing for nodal stations;
allowing a maximum contiguous
bandwidth of up to 200 MHz through aggregation.
FCC Promotes Development
Of Wireless Broadband Services Adopts Rules For A Future Auction Of 24
GHz Fixed Wireless Licenses (Text
, Word)
Permissible Uses: "A local multipoint
distribution system (LMDS) is capable of offering subscribers a variety
of one and two-way broadband services, such as video programming
distribution; video teleconferencing; wireless local loop telephony;
and high speed data transmission, e.g. internet access. Because of its
multi-purpose applications, LMDS has the potential to become a major
competitor to local exchange and cable television services. LMDS
systems may consist of a multicell configuration distribution systems
with return path capability within the assigned spectrum. Generally,
each cell will contain a centrally located transmitter (hub), multiple
receivers or transceivers, and point-to-point links interconnecting the
cell with a central processing center and/or other cells." FCC LMDS
Reauction Fact Sheet.
Range: 3-5 miles.
Report
No: AUC-98-23-B. Released: January 29, 1999. AUCTION OF LOCAL
MULTIPOINT DISTRIBUTION SERVICE SPECTRUM .Auction Notice and Filing
Requirements for 168 Local Multipoint Distribution Service Licenses
Scheduled for April 27, 1999/Minimum Opening Bids and Other Procedural
Issues. (Auction No. 23). (DA No. 99-266). Contact: Auctions Hotline:
888-CALL-FCC, FCC Technical Support Hotline: (202) 414-1250, TTY: (202)
414-1255.
39 GHz licensees may provide fixed communications
including point-to-point and point-to-multipoint communications.
Mobile communications are subject to the
development of inter-licensee and inter-service interference criteria.
See Report and Order and Second Notice of
Proposed Rule Making at para. 25.
Licenses will be issued for a ten-year term from the initial license
grant date. Licensees have a renewal expectancy based on the provision
of substantial service and substantial compliance with applicable
Commission rules, policies, and the Communications Act. (See 47 C.F.R.
§ 101.13 (d)).
Auctions
Govt Activity
Kwerel, Evan and Williams (2002) “A Proposal for A Rapid Transition to Market Allocation of Spectrum”, Federal Communications Commission OPP Working Paper No. 38 (Nov. 15).
1993 Pres Clinton signs authorization for FCC to auction spectrum
Auctions Papers
Hazlett, Thomas W., and Roberto E. MuZoz (2004). "What Really Matters in Spectrum Allocation De-sign,” Working paper (April 26).
Rothkopf, Michael H., and Coleman Bazelon (2003) “Interlicense Competition: Spectrum Deregulation Without Confiscation or Giveaways”, New America Foundation Spectrum Policy Program, Spectrum Series Working Paper No. 8 (August).
Klemperer, Paul (2002) “What Really Matters in Auction Design”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 16, pp. 169-189.
Hazlett, T. H. (2001), .The Wireless Craze, the Unlimited Bandwidth Myth, the Spectrum Auction Faux Pas, and the Punchline to Ronald Coase’s .Big Joke.: An Essay on Airwave Allocation Policy,. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 14(2), Spring, 2001.
Prat, Andrea and Tommaso Valletti (2001), “Spectrum Auctions Versus Beauty Contests: Costs and Benefits,” Rivista di Politica Economica, vol. 91, N. 4-5, pp. 59-10-9, April-May.
Rosston, Gregory L. (2001) “The Long and Winding Road: The FCC Paves the Path with Good Intentions”, SIEPR Discussion Paper No. 01-08.
Kwerel, Evan (2000) “Spectrum Auctions Do Not Raise the Price of Wireless Services: Theory and Evidence,” FCC, October.
Cramton, Peter. (1998) “The Efficiency of the FCC Spectrum Auctions.” Journal of Law and Economics, 41, pp. 727-736, October.
Crampton, Peter, and Suzi Kerr (1998) Tradable Carbon Allowance Auctions: How and Why to Auction. Washington, D.C.: Center for Clean Air Policy. March.
Hazlett, Thomas W. (1998) “Assigning Property Rights to Radio Spectrum Users: Why Did FCC License Auctions Take 67 Years?” Journal of Law & Economics 41 (Oct.), 529-75.
Noam, Eli (1998) “Spectrum Auctions: Yesterday’s Heresy, Today’s Orthodoxy, Tomorrow’s Anachronism.” Taking the Next Step to Open Spectrum Access. Journal of Law and Economics, 56(2). pp. 765-790. December.
Rosston, Gregory L., and Jeffrey S. Stein berg (1997) “Using Market-Based Spectrum Policy to Promote the Public Interest,” Federal Communications Law Journal, vol 50(1).
FCC (1997) “The FCC Report to Congress on Spectrum Auctions, Federal Communications Commission,” Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, FCC 97-353 (Oct. 9).
CBO (1997) “Where Do We Go From Here? The FCC Auctions and the Future of Radio Spectrum Management,” Congressional Budget Office (April).
McMillan, John (1994) “Why Auction the Spectrum?” Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 19. No. 3.
Reed, D. P. (2002), .How Wireless Networks
Scale: the Illusion of Spectrum Scarcity,. presented at International
Symposium on Advanced Radio Technology, Boulder , Colorado , March 4,
2002 .
Eszter Hargittai, Radio's Lessons for the Internet, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 43, No. 1 (Jan. 2000) (contrasting early days of radio with early days of Internet)
Auctions
Hazlett, Thomas W., and Roberto E. MuZoz
(2004). "What Really Matters in Spectrum Allocation De-sign,” Working
paper (April 26).
Rothkopf, Michael H., and Coleman
Bazelon (2003) “Interlicense Competition: Spectrum Deregulation Without
Confiscation or Giveaways”, New America Foundation Spectrum Policy
Program, Spectrum Series Working Paper No. 8 (August).
Klemperer, Paul (2002) “What Really
Matters in Auction Design”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 16,
pp. 169-189.
Kwerel, Evan and Williams (2002) “A
Proposal for A Rapid Transition to Market Allocation of Spectrum”,
Federal Communications Commission OPP Working Paper No. 38 (Nov. 15).
Hazlett, T. H. (2001), .The Wireless
Craze, the Unlimited Bandwidth Myth, the Spectrum Auction Faux Pas, and
the Punchline to Ronald Coase’s .Big Joke.: An Essay on Airwave
Allocation Policy,. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 14(2),
Spring, 2001.
Prat, Andrea and Tommaso Valletti
(2001), “Spectrum Auctions Versus Beauty Contests: Costs and Benefits,”
Rivista di Politica Economica, vol. 91, N. 4-5, pp. 59-10-9, April-May.
Rosston, Gregory L. (2001) “The Long and
Winding Road: The FCC Paves the Path with Good Intentions”, SIEPR
Discussion Paper No. 01-08.
Kwerel, Evan (2000) “Spectrum Auctions
Do Not Raise the Price of Wireless Services: Theory and Evidence,”
FCC, October.
Cramton, Peter. (1998) “The Efficiency
of the FCC Spectrum Auctions.” Journal of Law and Economics, 41, pp.
727-736, October.
Crampton, Peter, and Suzi Kerr (1998)
Tradable Carbon Allowance Auctions: How and Why to Auction. Washington,
D.C.: Center for Clean Air Policy. March.
Hazlett, Thomas W. (1998) “Assigning
Property Rights to Radio Spectrum Users: Why Did FCC License Auctions
Take 67 Years?” Journal of Law & Economics 41 (Oct.), 529-75.
Noam, Eli (1998) “Spectrum Auctions:
Yesterday’s Heresy, Today’s Orthodoxy, Tomorrow’s Anachronism.” Taking
the Next Step to Open Spectrum Access. Journal of Law and Economics,
56(2). pp. 765-790. December.
Rosston, Gregory L., and Jeffrey S.
Stein berg (1997) “Using Market-Based Spectrum Policy to Promote the
Public Interest,” Federal Communications Law Journal, vol 50(1).
FCC (1997) “The FCC Report to Congress
on Spectrum Auctions, Federal Communications Commission,” Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau, FCC 97-353 (Oct. 9).
CBO (1997) “Where Do We Go From Here?
The FCC Auctions and the Future of Radio Spectrum Management,”
Congressional Budget Office (April).
McMillan, John (1994) “Why Auction the
Spectrum?” Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 19. No. 3.
Jun 14 Senate Communications Subcommittee
To hold hearings to examine wireless internet access for rural areas.
SR-253 9:30 a.m.
Released: November 16, 1999. FCC'S OFFICE
OF COMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES AND
OFFICE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY TO HOST FORUM ON OPPORTUNITIES FOR
NEW WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES FEBRUARY 16, 2000. Contact: Maura McGowan at
(202) 418-0987 of OCBO or Dr. Lynn L. Remly at (202) 418-2930. Internet
URL: http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Miscellaneous/Public_Notices/1999/pnet9025.doc
OFFICE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY TO
SPONSOR A TUTORIAL ON WIRELESS ACCESS TO THE INTERNET ON NOVEMBER 30,
1999. Office of Engineering and Technology Contact: Jack Linthicum at
(202) 418-2442. Materials from
Tutorial.
Released: November 15, 1999. THE OFFICE
OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY ADDS A MORNING SESSION TO THE "WIRELESS
ACCESS TO THE INTERNET" TUTORIAL ON NOVEMBER 30, 1999, COMMISSION
MEETING ROOM, 9 A.M.Contact: Jack Linthicum 202-418-2441.
1993: there were two providers per market w an average
monthly bill of $67.31 that included local, long distance and roaming
charges as well as a landline surcharge. With 11 million customers, the
adoption rate was 5 percent.
2003: over 98 percent of consumers can choose from between
three to eight providers with an average monthly bill of $49.46 that
includes nationwide coverage and no roaming fees or long distance
charges. With 148 million consumers, the adoption rate is 50 percent.