NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: Google pleads for more unlicensed spectrum instead of more auctions

I'm not very familiar with licensing in the US.
But I'm very familiar with the largest wireless ISP in Italy, who covers 
most of the territory where there's no wired broadband in northern italy 
(think of all the mountains and population density, it's not an easy 
task), a company I restructured few years ago.
They are very successful using only unlicensed spectrum, for access and 
backhauling, using wimax access in the 5GHz range for fixed wireless 
links (e.g. broadband replacement) with access distances well over 10-20Km.
This network makes a very efficient use of rather small chunks of 
spectrum in a range that's not interesting to MNOs
My point here is that I don't think the distinction made by Fried is 
Although it's about 3 years I'm not directly envolved, I think that the 
situation has not changed dramatically.
IMHO the key point is not "long haul" vs. "short field" (which exists, 
and depends mostly on power and directivity issues) but rather fixed use 
vs. mobile use; mobile use implies you don't know precisely where your 
device is and you need to radiate covering large sectors and 
successfully managing the handovers.
Eventually we'll have mobile devices with adaptive beamforming and 
cognitive radios, but it seems to me we're not quite there yet.
I said I'm not familiar with licensing in the US; IMHO Licensing should 
be precisely that: granting a license for a period after which the 
rights expire and spectrum can eventually be used with different criteria.
ciao, s.

On 13/01/2012 02:51, Lauren Weinstein wrote:
> Ironically, the current licensing regime not only makes projects that
> large enterprises like Google would like to see happen difficult or
> impossible, but also has a massive negative impact on relatively small
> ISPs who are held hostage by the dominant ISPs and have to depend on those
> giant to provide backhaul and other facilities.  So for smaller players,
> the current licensing situation is lose-lose.
> --Lauren--
> NNSquad Moderator
> ----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber<dave@farber.net>  -----
> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:20:42 -0500
> From: Dave Farber<dave@farber.net>
> Subject: [IP] Google pleads for more unlicensed spectrum instead of more
> 	auctions
> Reply-To: dave@farber.net
> To: ip<ip@listbox.com>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Dewayne Hendricks<dewayne@warpspeed.com>
> Date: Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:01 PM
> Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Google pleads for more unlicensed spectrum instead
> of more auctions
> To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net<dewayne-net@warpspeed.com>
> Google pleads for more unlicensed spectrum instead of more auctions
> Cites inability to compete with big carriers in auctions
> By Brad Reed, Network World
> January 12, 2012
> <http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/011212-google-spectrum-254842.html>
> LAS VEGAS - Google would really, really like to see the Federal
> Communications Commission open up a huge swath of unlicensed spectrum for
> mobile broadband.
> However, it doesn't look like the company will get its wish. During a panel
> discussion at the Consumer Electronics Show yesterday, Google senior policy
> counsel Rick Whitt outlined his company's case for making more unlicensed
> spectrum available instead of simply auctioning off spectrum to the highest
> bidders. In particular, Whitt cited Google's inability to compete with
> Verizon when bidding on the so-called "C Block" of spectrum on the 700MHz
> band that the FCC auctioned off in 2008 that now forms the backbone of
> Verizon's nationwide LTE network.
> "We thought, 'What would it take for us to outbid Verizon?' And every one
> of the game theorists we talked to across the spectrum said the same thing:
> 'You'll never outbid Verizon,' " he said. "They are the incumbents and they
> will do everything they can to foreclose your entry into the market."
> Whitt also cited concerns about the proposed spectrum auction legislation
> that recently passed in the House of Representatives. In particular, Whitt
> said that an all-licensed approach to spectrum wouldn't give carriers the
> spectrum they need to build out common infrastructure.
> "The concern that many of us have ... is that [the proposed House
> legislation] seems to say, 'Everything that's cleared must be auctioned and
> everything that's auctioned must be licensed,' which in our mind would rule
> out unlicensed," said Whitt. "If nothing else, if you are an advocate of
> licensed usage there are things like guard bands or things like duplex gaps
> that are going to be really necessary to have the next generation of LTE
> networks built... This is beachfront spectrum. How about a couple public
> beaches?"
> But Neil Fried, the chief telecommunications counsel for the House Energy
> and Commerce Committee, said that the spectrum in question would be wasted
> if it was used for short-field communications and said that it needed a
> national telecom carrier to properly build out and manage a nationwide
> mobile broadband network.
> "There is a need for unlicensed spectrum and that will remain," said Fried.
> "The type of things we're talking about, the offloading? That's short haul,
> that's not long haul. If we're talking about beach-front property, are we
> talking about a place to go surfing or are we talking about a shipping
> lane? ... What we've done is we've set the right balance. The 700MHz and
> below, that's the prime stuff for the long-haul licensed wireless broadband
> use ... creating an oasis for unlicensed use would be essentially
> preventing the use for licensed."
> [snip]
> Dewayne-Net RSS Feed:<http://www.warpspeed.com/wordpress>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> _______________________________________________
> nnsquad mailing list
> http://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad

nnsquad mailing list