Tero,
Re: Spectrum Allocation for 3G (Worldwide) - Additional Articles (2)
>> GLOBAL SPECTRUM DECISIONS TO COME
wirelessweek.com
3G Deliberations Enter Final Stage
From the February 28, 2000 issue of Wireless Week
By Peggy Albright
When U.S. government officials and wireless advocates reached a long-sought agreement on radio- frequency bands for third-generation wireless spectrum, the decision capped debates over IMT-2000 services. Without a U.S. spectrum decision, the dream of offering globally uniform 3G wireless systems in this country might be over.
The latest agreement identifies the specific frequencies the United States will recommend as potential spectrum for the IMT-2000: the 1710-1885 MHz and 2520-2670 MHz bands for terrestrial services. Some additional frequencies on either side of the latter bands also will be designated for satellite services.
The spectrum recommendations jibe with those identified by other countries, which will help create the global ribbon of bandwidth advocates have said were needed to provide international services. This news was welcomed with relief.
The successful resolution of the negotiation process will help the industry harmonize spectrum use around the world and it positions the United States to influence the outcome of forthcoming global spectrum deliberations.
The United States will now take the proposal to next week's meeting in Mar del Plata, Argentina. Countries participating in the Organization of American States' Inter-American Telecommunication Commission will complete a World Radio Conference 2000 spectrum proposal on behalf of countries in North, Central and Latin America.
IMT-2000 history
The two conferences cap a spectrum-allocation process that began when the 1992 World Administrative Radio Conference set aside 230 megahertz of spectrum in the 1885 to 2025 MHz and 2110-2200 MHz frequency bands for terrestrial IMT-2000 services.
Global needs
The reasons for this international approach are obvious: Globally uniform spectrum makes international roaming easier and infrastructure equipment and handset designs less costly to produce due to economies of scale, which benefits businesses and consumers.
"It's a resource that everybody has got a finger in. You don't manufacture new spectrum, you adjust and readjust and negotiate and dialog and come to agreements on who's going to use it where and how," says Stephen Blust, director of technology strategy and standards at BellSouth Cellular Corp. Blust co-chaired Task Group 8/1's work on IMT-2000 radio air interface specifications and chaired the group working on spectrum issues. He is now chair of a new international group that will continue global development of IMT-2000.
Those agreements came to fruition in recent weeks, when two of the three global regions completed their proposals defining where they would prefer to allocate the additional 160 megahertz of IMT-2000 spectrum.
Region 1, which includes Europe, Africa and part of the Middle East, adopted a recommendation to add the 2520-2670 MHz frequency band to IMT-2000.
Region 3, also referred to as the Asia Pacific Telecommunity, just adopted a recommendation that the IMT-2000 use the 1710-1885 and 2520-2670 MHz frequency bands. (European countries did not designate 1710-1880 MHz frequency bands because they use portions of this spectrum for DCS 1800 and GSM services.)
Region 2, which represents all of the Americas, is scheduled to make its recommendation at the March CITEL meeting. That organization prefers to designate the 1710 to 1885 bands and may consider others, including the 2520-2670 MHz bands, at the March meeting.
At its December meeting, Brazil, Canada and Mexico developed a proposal that supports designating 1710-1885 MHz for IMT-2000 services. Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Peru and Uruguay administrations also said they support using these bands, however these countries chose to postpone finalizing their views until the March meeting.
Despite the regional support for 1710-1885 MHz at the December meeting, the United States asked for additional time to review the pros and cons of variously considered frequency bands. At the time, the United States said it envisioned completing an initial proposal in February for consideration at the March meeting, however, it stated strongly that it may request further delays.
They continued to press this view while the wireless industry pushed for the spectrum allocation that would bring the U.S. services in line with the rest of the world to recommend use of the 1700 and 2500 MHz frequencies.
Part of the problem of designating spectrum in the United States is the various interests competing for available or potential bandwidth. Proposals were coordinated by the FCC and NTIA, which attempted to bring various industry and government approaches into accord before submitting the documents to the Department of State. The State Department will deliver the U.S. position to international organizations. The FCC and NTIA also co-chaired a committee that worked with businesses to incorporate industry's views.
Companies participating in the deliberations included Bell Atlantic Mobile, BellSouth Cellular, Ericsson, Globalstar and Lucent. Staff from CTIA, PCIA and the Telecommunications Industry Association also participated.
American reluctance to agree to the 1710-1885 MHz band stems from the Department of Defense's use of frequencies in that spectrum. The 2520-2670 MHz band is allocated here for multichannel multipoint distribution services and instructional television fixed services.
While the agreement reached this month does finally identify specific frequency bands for IMT-2000, it doesn't have any regulatory priority over other services, explains Steve Sharkey, spokesman for Motorola. In other words, the United States is recommending that countries have the flexibility to use these bands for any services that they believe are appropriate. It also urges countries to conduct studies on what portions of the bands can be made available.
"That's really the meat of the whole argument," Sharkey says.
Global Spectrum Decisions To Come
From the January 10, 2000, issue of Wireless Week
By Peggy Albright
Before summer comes, industry watchers should have solid information on additional spectrum allocations for third-generation services.
While much of the industry was consumed last year developing the IMT-2000 family of radio air interfaces, others were working around the clock at various global venues to pinpoint spectrum needs for 3G services. That effort should reach its conclusion in late May and early June, when the ?meeting of the global minds? on radio technologies and issues will convene for four weeks at the World Radio Conference 2000 in Istanbul, Turkey.
There, participants will release the final word on spectrum to countries, wireless operators and vendors that are developing 3G businesses. Those attending the marathon session are defining spectrum that will be used until 2010.
Identifying bands that can be used globally remains one of the remaining challenges of IMT-2000, says Stephen Blust, director of technology strategy and standards at BellSouth Cellular Corp.
Blust, who co-chaired Task Group 8/1?s work detailing the radio interface specifications and chaired the group working on spectrum issues, was recently named chair of a new international group that will continue global development of IMT-2000.
The spectrum allocation process dates back to 1992, when the World Administrative Radio Conference set aside 230 megahertz of spectrum for IMT-2000 services. In 1997, realizing that the original allocation would no longer be adequate, the organization revisited it and decided to add new 3G frequencies at WRC 2000.
Members of Task Group 8/1, which submitted the radio specifications to the International Telecommunication Union, concluded last year that 160 additional megahertz are needed on a global basis for the IMT-2000.
Then, at a November conference preparatory meeting held in Geneva, international representatives completed a list of candidate frequency bands for consideration in the WRC 2000 process. The plan includes all of the frequency bands used for first- and second-generation cellular and those where IMT-2000 is not currently allocated. The idea is to try to work as much of the needed spectrum within globally common frequency bands.
?What we?re seeing is that there?s a lot of push for additional spectrum for IMT-2000 that is, to the greatest extent possible, globally uniform,? Blust says. The reasons are obvious: Globally uniform spectrum makes international roaming easier and makes handset designs easier and less costly, for example.
Between now and WRC 2000, countries around the world will be developing their official positions on how much spectrum from specific bands should be allocated. Resolution of the various recommendations from regional groups will take place at WRC 2000.
Groups representing Europe and Asia, working both individually and collectively, have already identified candidate bands that would fulfill the need from their perspectives, Blust says. At this juncture, however, the Americas region, which includes North and South America, has not yet defined its proposed spectrum solution in part because the United States has not yet established its official position.
Blust says: ?We?re coming very much down to the wire, obviously, because these decisions really need to be formulated in the next few months.?
In this country, part of the problem is that the United States consumed available spectrum for PCS. Now, the industry is recognizing that frequency bands that are strong candidates in other parts of the world may not be good candidate bands in the U.S.
The U.S. position and that of the region should be defined by March, when CITEL, a group with the Organization of American States, meets to determine a position on spectrum for the Americas.
It is a very difficult issue, but the outcome is a critical one, Blust says. ?It very much has an impact on IMT-2000 and third-generation deployments.? <<
- Eric - |
