IP to kill radio in public safety market

It's absolutely amazing (and disturbing) to see these types of what could be deemed mis-leading if not mis-representative articles from so-called industry experts who should know better.

Mr. Filipowski must be what some would call a "futurist". Who knows - perhaps many of his predictions will come to pass in the distant future but, after reading (and re-reading) this article several times to convince myself that he actually said what he said, I'd suggest that his BER needs some immediate attention in the interim.

He is way off-frequency when it comes to his belief that 1) radio is obsolete; 2) IP technology will replace radio; and 3) that cellular/public networks are public safety's salvation.

It might do him some good to get out of his lab and into the real world sometime soon - before making himself look any more foolish than he already has.

NR

Sprint/Nextel Facing Rough Waters, Tough Times

For those wondering just what is and has been happening with Sprint/Nextel the last several years, here's a good review of the mess they've managed to get themselves into.

Excerpt:

"It was supposed to be a formidable competitor in the mobile wireless industry, leading the industry in key financial metrics and in innovative services. But less than three years after Sprint and Nextel merged their operations in a $36 billion deal, the company is now trying to stop the bleeding."

The bleeding has resulted in an extraordinary loss of several hundred thousand subscribers in the last quarter, whose care has been badly neglected primarily due to internal culture conflicts associated with the failed integration of both company's business processes and their incompatible networks.

New CEO Dan Hesse certainly has some challenges ahead of him.

Worth a read....


NR

U.S. Spectrum Management according to Wikipedia.....

The folks at the Portals (FCC) and the NTIA might be interested in this....

Current Spectrum Management in the United States

Wireless (RF or radio) spectrum management in the United States should be a cooperative exercise in balancing disparate stakeholder interests through effective user education and the enforcement of regulatory policies and rules that reflect practical reality, political responsibility, economic common sense, and, an understanding of the laws of physics. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

There is no concise, up-to-date, national radio/RF/wireless spectrum management policy practiced by the FCC and/or the NTIA in the U.S today. In addition, either very out-dated, convoluted, complex or very lax or non-existent regulation (often determined by the agendas of political and special interest groups more than by anything else) is the norm, with little effective enforcement of spectrum use rules.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_management

It looks like the word is beginning to get out to the general public if one takes Wikipedia's definition at face value....although, when one thinks about it, the definition really isn't that far off the mark - is it?

NR

FCC's Strategic I.T. Plan - FY 2008-2012 - Ver 1.0

The Federal Communications Commission's 2008-2012 IT Strategic Plan (ITSP) sets forth the current and future foundation and guidelines that direct Commission-wide IT (information technology) activities for building an information systems architecture that is increasingly interoperable and migrates toward a single vision of IT at the FCC.

The ITSP is a five-year look at managing IT at the FCC. To prevent obsolescence of the information contained within the ITSP, periodic verification and validation activities will occur.

An annual validation of the information contained in the ITSP will be performed and updates will be made accordingly. A shift in Commission goals will trigger a review and update to the ITSP to reflect evolving FCC IT objectives

This ITSP is used in conjunction with the FCC's IT Tactical Management Plan which is an evolutionary document that maps out and schedules all IT initiatives and guides IT projects and activities. The Office of the Managing Director maintains and performs frequent updates to the IT Tactical Management Plan.

Examples of activities in the ITTMP include:

• Hardware Life Cycle Replacement Projects/Initiatives
• Application Software Projects/Initiatives
• Telecommunications (Data/Voice) Life Cycle Projects/Initiatives
• Infrastructure Consolidation Projects/Initiatives
• Federal Compliance Reporting Activities



You'll note that this plan is dated October, 2007 -- but is also labeled Version 1.0 -- something I'd think many would find rather interesting, considering that information technology (and the use and distribution of it) in the private sector is much further advanced.

Hmmm.....could this be part of why the Commission is struggling in so many ways when it comes to the allocation, management, and regulation of the radio spectrum?


NR

Google Pushing the Technological Envelope ?

Recently, Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO had some rather interesting - if not somewhat perplexing - comments about how he thinks technology has and will help the Internet search engine companys' pending venture (read ADventure) into the world of wireless. Here is an excerpt of the portion of the conversation between Schmidt and Spencer Michels of NPR's Online NewsHour that caught my attention:


MICHELS: I talked to an industry analyst a week or so ago, Andrew Seybold, and this is what he said and I'm kind of curious as to how you would answer it. "Google's view of the wireless world is an extension of the Internet. And as much as I respect Google, the wireless industry can't be an extension of the Internet because wireless bandwidth is finite. It's a fixed resource and a shared bandwidth. The more people who use it in a given area the less data speed they have, so you can't take the Internet model and just move it to the wireless world. You have to change that model a little bit as you move forward." Is that fair criticism?

ERIC SCHMIDT: That's exactly the same criticism that was said about the wired Internet 15 years ago. That somehow the wired Internet would not scale, would not grow, that we would not learn how to build applications that could work for example in shared what are called hybrid fiber coax networks which you have at your home. The fact of the matter is that the industry can solve these problems and solves them very well. I completely disagree of the characterization that somehow the wireless network is going to be any different than the wired network. People want to use the Internet and they want to use it at home and in their office and when they're on the go and when they're on the airplanes. And they want to use the same powerful applications whether it's a personal device that they're carrying or on their desktop or at the beach.

SPENCER MICHELS: People want to use all the water they want to use, but there isn't enough water, so some people don't have enough water to water their lawns. That doesn't mean it's there.

ERIC SCHMIDT: Technology is different and the technology can create things out of nothing. The fact of the matter is that there's enormous spectrum becoming available through licensing programs, better radio design, faster computers, and so forth that in the next five or 10 years most of us will be carrying around devices that could speak on networks that are faster than the networks we currently use.

SPENCER MICHELS: Do you agree with the boss?

ANDY RUBIN: Absolutely. This is Moore's Law for wireless, or Moore's Law for spectrum. You know when we're on the wired Internet, in my day we had dial-up modems. Then we got DSL, then we got broadband, we're in the megabit speeds. Same thing happened to wireless. Remember those old analog phones where you'd get a dropped call every mile you traveled? Now we have digital phones, we have newer modulations that are helping us pack, densely pack, more calls in a single channel. And I'm just very optimistic that we'll have newer modulations throughout time that'll just get us faster and faster in the broadband areas.

SPENCER MICHELS: So Seybold saying that the bandwidth is finite, is it relevant?

ANDY RUBIN: Technology doesn't stand still.

With all due respect to Mr. Schmidt et all, may I remind him that there are many major differences between a wired and a wireless network? Technology is indeed advancing, and, has certainly changed a great many elements in our lives and the world. However, the laws of physics, particularly those concerning RF and wireless, remain firmly in place. Last I knew, no one had figured out how to completely circumvent them yet, but I know some are working very hard at it. :>)

May I further suggest that it may be far wiser for Google and company - prior to purchasing ANY wireless spectrum - to invest a few of their many dollars and enroll Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Rubin in a Basic Radio (that's the original name for the resource that everyone now calls wireless) 101 course? (IMHO, Radio 101 should be a prerequisite for any IT professional who wants to become involved with wireless IT) Upon successful completion of the course, perhaps each of them will have a clearer understanding of the many differences between a wired (IT) and wireless (RF) network that RF professionals have been attempting to share with them (and that their own IT professionals may NOT have)

(hmmmm....do you suppose my suggestion will help bring the IT and RF guys/gals a little closer to listening, understanding, and actually working with each other through some much needed and shared mutual collaboration? I suppose we can always hope!)

NR

(Repost)

RF (Wireless) Spectrum Information & Resource Links

Those concerned or interested in learning more about spectrum regulation and frequency allocation policies and their impact on radio and wireless communication devices and users in the U.S. may want to begin paying very close attention to the Notices, actions and decisions made by the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), their new Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHS), and, their Office of Engineering and Technology (OET). More background information on spectrum policy, including the latest on the 700 MHz proceeding, can be found on the FCC's Spectrum Policy Task Force site. And, there's always the FCC's Daily Digest which provides a brief synopsis of Commission orders, news releases, speeches, public notices and all other FCC documents (with links to the full text of each) that are released each business day.

Finally, this 2006 paper Regulating Spectrum Management: Overview and Trends is intended to provide readers with a broad overview of wireless communications spectrum management concepts and issues, including a review of differences between traditional spectrum management methods and policy and recent innovations and practices due to technology advances. The approach taken is more descriptive than prescriptive, allowing readers to make up their own mind on various perspectives. It's interesting to note that the authors have found that there are no standard solutions that fit every situation.

Additional reading:

Spectrum Management Overview

Spectrum Policy and Planning

An introduction to spectrum management including best practices and considerations involved in the use and regulation of radio frequency spectrum. An outline of policy and planning considerations including technical standards and the allocation of spectrum.

Authorization

An overview of the processes by which users gain access to the spectrum resource.

Spectrum Pricing

A review of the role of spectrum pricing and economics as it relates to the method of spectrum authorization being employed.

Spectrum Monitoring and Compliance

An overview of how spectrum monitoring and compliance can help users by avoiding incompatible frequency usage through identification of sources of harmful interference.

International Affairs

An overview of international harmonization of spectrum utilization.

Developing Spectrum Management Capacity

An overview of the strategies for organization, function, process development, staffing, staff retention and training for spectrum regulators.

Oh yes.....I almost forgot; here's how you can "express yourself" should some of the Commission's activities or policies stir you to speak up about spectrum matters.


NR

M2Z Networks to Sue FCC

Startup M2Z Networks is upset that the FCC has yet to take action on a 2006 spectrum application and proposal filed by the company so...... it's going to file a lawsuit against the regulatory agency.

M2Z Networks' proposal is (or maybe was) to offer free ad-supported wireless broadband to 95 percent of the U.S. within 10 years, using 20 MHz of spectrum in the 2 GHz band (2155-2175 MHz). The speed of the free tier — 384 kbps down and 128 kbps up - barely qualifies the service as broadband, but might be acceptable to the average sit-in-the-park-and-surf-the-web wi-fi user who has nothing better to do.

In addition, there would be a 3 Mbps 'premium' service available to paying subscribers. The company proposes to lease the spectrum in exchange for it giving the FCC 5 percent of the gross revenues realized from its premium service. Public Safety entities would also have access to the network at no cost other than for the hardware, if I recall correctly.

However, The Wall Street Journal claims that FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has shared a thumbs down opinion on the proposal with the rest of the commissioners. If the WSJ report is accurate, M2Z's legal threat may be pretty much meaningless.

As to the potential for success for this type of free network? Pretty questionable, at least in my opinion; most ad-supported free wi-fi networks have yet to pan out economically and most have discovered - the hard way - the many real-world realities inherent to wireless performance, coverage, and security. Not many have lived up to the promotional hype generated by their proponents nor delivered the user-experience expected. Besides, how much advertising can one take, anyway?


Check out M2Z's web site, then decide for yourself, though.

NR

"White Space" Proponents to Try Again at FCC

Well....we didn't have to wait that long to learn the answer to the question I posed in a previous post concerning the TV "White Space" device testing proceeding, and, I don't think anyone will be very surprised as to what it is.

Microsoft filed a letter with the FCC today claiming that the scanner in one of two WSD prototypes submitted was damaged and "operated at a severely degraded level." The scanner in the wireless device is supposed to sniff for broadcasts in spectrum before transmitting in the band and switch to another band if the first one is occupied. The FCC found that the prototype did not consistently detect TV broadcast signals and could cause interference.

Also, this past Friday, the FCC extended an invitation to interested parties to participate in an on-site visit to the FCC Laboratory in Columbia, Maryland to observe and discuss the test set up and procedures for evaluating the performance of these devices.

The meeting will occur on Thursday August 16, 2007 at 1 PM at the Commission’s Laboratory in Columbia, Maryland. Parties interested in attending should send an e-mail to Patricia.Goff@FCC.gov, identifying the organization and how many individuals plan to attend (space is limited). At the meeting, Commission staff will provide an overview of the tests, answer any questions, and consider suggestions for any further testing to evaluate the performance of TV White Space Devices. Directions to the Laboratory can be found at http://www.fcc.gov/oet/faqs/lab/directions.pdf

Make your reservations early.....

NR

Invitation to the Spectrum Matters On-Line Discussion Group

Advancements in wireless (RF or radio) communications and information technology over the last decade have unleashed a flood of new devices, products, and services, provocative ideas and intriguing questions, political rhetoric and posturing, market-place confusion, controversy, and, a growing concern by many as to whether FCC and NTIA spectrum allocation, regulation, use, and rules enforcement policies are 'keeping up with the times' - or with technology.

As one might expect, all this hullabaloo has led to increasing calls by wireless stakeholders for something called "spectrum reform" that we're hearing more and more about each day.

Spectrum Matters is an on-line, moderated Yahoo! discussion group focusing on member-shared wireless spectrum news, information, and trends, responsible opinion, debate, ideas, experiences, commentary, and questions related to the real or perceived social, economic, and technical benefits or consequences that may be realized by updating legacy and/or implementing new wireless spectrum management policy to effectively address these important issues and concerns.

Topics and discussions are targeted towards business, educational, industrial, enterprise, public safety, local, state, regional, federal government and similar types of PROFESSIONAL wireless mobile communication users who depend on access to the radio spectrum in their daily activities and who want to learn more about how and why wireless spectrum matters can, will, or already have had an impact on them.

If you are a professional wireless user and have an interest in wireless communications in general and spectrum issues in particular, please consider joining us. (Membership approval requires a response to a New Member Confirmation Request emailed to you during the sign-up process)

Will The Failure of FCC Spectrum Auctions Impact 700 MHz?

hmmmm.....

According to this May 2006 paper from the Center for American Progress (quote) "The Federal Communications Commission’s auctioning of spectrum licenses is a failure. The auctions have been subject to collusion and manipulation by big business, and as a result have failed to meet legislative guidelines." (end quote)


(Quote) "Analysis of the last ten years of FCC spectrum auctions reveals that these auctions have met neither the standards nor the expectations expressed by Congress in their authorization. They do not facilitate the development of robust markets or meet the needs of the broader public interest. Instead these auctions, as they have been conducted, appear to serve the narrow interest of dominant actors in the telecommunications industry. They have systematically resulted in market concentration and the growth of the oligopolistic market power of major actors in the telecommunications industry. They have been pervious to manipulation by tacit collusion among bidders in ways which no minor amendment of the auction process could possibility remedy. Even the often made argument that FCC spectrum auctions maximize revenue fails in the face of both FCC mispricing of licenses, reflected in the large number of licenses which fail to be auctioned because no bidder meets the reserve price, and substantial evidence that strategic behaviors like preemptive bidding can guarantee better capitalized bidders licenses at consistently lower prices than their competitors. What has principally driven the adoption of spectrum auctions by the FCC and Congress has been ideologically-libertarian economic theory, captured in simplistic models which ignore inconvenient facts. Game theory is a powerful tool for analysis of economic behavior. However, a game-theoric model is only as good as its assumptions. Assumptions about information, bidder resources, risk-acceptance and -aversion, and the structure of bidder preference all matter, because they imply things about how the real world operates. All modeling is along a continuum between analytical tractability and empirical verisimilitude: the more mathematically tractable the model is, the less it resembles the real thing being modeled. It is for this reason that social scientists frequent evaluate and refine such models through experiments to see whether an analytically tractable model captures what really matters about the thing it models. The past ten years of FCC spectrum auctions have amounted to such an experiment, and the experiment demonstrates that the models on the basis of which Congress and the FCC were persuaded to adopt spectrum auctions fail dramatically in their prediction of real-world outcomes. When tested by the actual performance of such auctions, the chasm between the outcomes predicted by theory and the outcomes observed is immense. In sacrificing the public interest in pursuit of hypothesized market efficiencies and greater revenue we have arrived at the worst of both worlds: FCC spectrum auctions neither serve the public interest nor realize the promised economic efficiencies and revenue maximization touted by their advocates." (end quote)


(Quote) "Until the FCC can demonstrate that it can conduct auctions in the public interest, Congress should halt the ongoing plans to auction licenses to the public spectrum." (end quote)



Kinda makes one question just how small business entrepreneurs, women, minorities, and public safety/first responders will fare in the up-coming - and perhaps most important auction of all - that of the 700 MHz spectrum.


NR

Wireless Stakeholder Comments in 700 MHz Public Safety Proceeding

For your Memorial Day weekend reading pleasure, here's a compilation of all 300+ Comments made to the FCC by industry stakeholders in the 700 MHz Public Safety broadband proceedings (Dockets 96-86 & 06-229)....and a link to the 9th NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) for your attentive review -- offered in an effort to assist readers in learning more about why spectrum matters.


By the way, Reply Comments are due May 30th unless the Commission extends the date...if you have been thinking about "expressing yourself", now's the time to do so. You can file them here.


NR

An Invitation to the Spectrum Matters Discussion Group

Advancements in wireless (RF or radio) communications and information technology over the last decade have unleashed a flood of new products, services, provocative ideas, intriguing questions, political rhetoric, and marketing posturing - all of which has created a fair amount of confusion and growing concern by many as to whether current FCC and NTIA spectrum allocation, regulation, use, and rules enforcement policies are 'keeping up with the times'. As one might expect, this hullabaloo has led to increasing calls by wireless stakeholders for something called "spectrum reform" that we're hearing more and more about each day.

The Spectrum Matters discussion group focuses on news, information, opinion, responsible debate, and commentary related to the real or perceived social, economic, and technical benefits (or consequences) that may be realized by updating legacy and/or implementing new wireless spectrum management policy to effectively address these important issues.

Topics and discussions are targeted towards business, educational, industrial, enterprise, public safety, local, state, regional, federal government and similar types of PROFESSIONAL wireless mobile communication users who depend on access to radio spectrum in their daily activities and who want to learn more about how and why wireless spectrum matters can, will, or already have had an impact on them.

If you have an interest in wireless communications in general and spectrum issues in particular, please join us. Your ideas, experiences, opinions, and questions are welcome. Membership requires a response to a New Member Confirmation Request emailed to you during the sign-up process.

NR

The FCC's Strategic Spectrum Plan - 2006 - 2011

In a prior post, I shared information on policy and use of that portion of the radio spectrum managed by the NTIA for Federal Government users.

However, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is charged with management and regulation of the spectrum (among their other responsibilities) for all other radio/wireless communication users.

Here's their 2006-2011 strategic plan (as of September, 2005) that gives one an idea of what to expect from the agency in the next 5 years, including:

• An overarching mission statement;
• General goals and objectives defining how the Commission will fulfill major
segments of its mission;
• A description of the means and strategies that will be used to achieve the
general goals and objectives;
• A description of the relationship between performance goals in the annual
performance budget and the strategic goal framework;
• Identification of key factors that could affect achievement of the general goals
and objectives; and
• A description of program evaluations used in preparing the Strategic Plan and a
schedule for future evaluations.

Readers specifically interested in radio and wireless communication spectrum matters should pay close attention to Notices, actions and decisions made by the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), the new Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHS), and, the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET). Additional information on spectrum policy can be found on the FCC's Spectrum Policy Task Force site.

Finally, here's how you can "express yourself" should some of the Commission's activities stir you out of complacency about spectrum matters.

NR

Crowded Spectrum Prompts Need for National Spectrum Coordinator

Here are several excerpts from a Feb 1 2007 article in Military Information Technology relating to the importance of paying attention to spectrum matters.

...spectrum management issues (are) now being confronted within the Department of Defense. Wireless voice and data communications are of ever-growing tactical significance to a networked fighting force. But the introduction of increased radio-based capabilities also results in the greater probability that signals will clash with one another. The Pentagon is taking steps, both at the policy and operational levels, to mediate among competing demands for radio frequencies on the battlefield...

but, ...the quest for access to the electromagnetic frequency spectrum is not limited to the military. Homeland security operations, first responders and commercial interests all have their growing needs for spectrum. In reality, the military competes for spectrum with these other users.

...there will be a tug-of-war between corporate America, wanting to allocate radio spectrum to business and consumer applications, and U.S. defense agencies desiring to allot spectrum to military applications...

...Business interests will deploy their lobbyists to justify why they deserve a certain amount of spectrum, and DoD will have to justify its needs. At the end of the day, they will all have to come to the table and make it work.

...the prospect of protracted battle between national security agencies and the private sector over the control of spectrum also speaks to the need for a single national authority to develop and execute an all-encompassing spectrum strategy.

...A national chief spectrum officer is going to need to be an honest broker, a renaissance man or woman who understands that spectrum is a critical resource...(NOT simply an economic development tool or commodity to be sold to the highest bidder)


The last excerpt will be the most challenging and difficult spectrum management element of all but, in my view, it's one that is absolutely necessary as our reliance and dependency on all things wireless continues to increase.

NR

A Wireless Primer for CIO's & IT Managers

Wireless (RF) technology is increasingly becoming an element of responsibility within the domain of IT managers or CIO's.

Most CIOs are experienced with the management of IT projects centering on computer systems and applications but may have limited or no experience with wireless (RF) communications projects (such as LMR systems) that often support mission critical, lifesaving, or daily enterprise operations.

The management of LMR or wireless networks pose many unique challenges which cannot be dealt with in the same manner as those associated with managing typical IT networks.

The purpose of this primer is to assist CIOs who have been entrusted with the management of LMR networks in addressing potentially unfamiliar issues unique to such networks. This primer highlights some of the similarities and differences between LMR networks and traditional IT networks from the technical, programmatic, and business perspectives.

http://tinyurl.com/a9als (PDF File)

NR