Thanks to Doug and Brennan. I spoke with our pal at DOD, Fred Moorefield, who tells me that Rubio hasn't identified the 200 MHz yet, and that it was no more than pulling a number out of thin air. He does not think it is 3300-3500 MHz specifically. 73, Chris W3KD On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Price, Brennan, N4QX <bprice@arrl.org> wrote:
There's a lot to be said about 5 850-5 925 MHz in general and the greater 5 GHz range in particular, more than I can competently say on vacation the night before Field Day. I'll talk about the international aspects of this in greater depth in my July report to the board, but a few things to know now:
Unlicensed broadband is being considered on the international stage under WRC-15 agenda item 1.1. Althouth the agenda item primarily focuses on more spectrum for commercial smartphone use (the ITU term is "International Mobile Telecommunications" (IMT)), it has a provision relating to "the development of terrestrial mobile broadband applications." The latter provision is the hook under which RLANs in the 5 GHz range is being considered.
The focus of RLAN preparatory work for WRC-15 has been 5 350-5 470 MHz, and the NTIA has, thus far, quashed consideration of the 5 850-5 925 MHz band (with a little help from the automotive industry and, if I may be immodest for a moment, me). Although 5 350-5 470 is being considered, pushback from the federal side has been significant, as indicated in the attached shot across the bow sent by the State Department in February, which, in so many words, calls on the RLAN industry to stop cheerleading and show its work.
"Dynamic Frequency Selection" (DFS) is conceived as an automated application of the practice we know as "listen before transmit." It is humorous to see DFS identified as a bad thing in the legislation, because the industry is playing it up as the best thing since spark gap in talks on the 5 350-5 470 MHz band. Federal interests, on the other hand, are not satisfied that DFS will actually work as industry promises. (They share skepticism of amateur implemented listen before transmit as well, but not as vehemently, probably because HF is perceived to be a lower-stakes game.)
Chris and I spoke late this evening, and I expect to work with him on the memo for Rep. Grimm's staffer, vacation or no.
Hope you hear my five watts from the Orange Section tomorrow.
73 de Brennan N4QX/6
Brennan T. Price, N4QX
Chief Technology Officer
American Radio Relay League
3545 Chain Bridge Rd Ste 209
Fairfax VA 22030-2708
Tel +1 703 934-2077
Fax +1 703 934-2079 ------------------------------ *From:* arrl-odv [arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] on behalf of Rehman, Doug, K4AC *Sent:* Friday, June 27, 2014 22:06 *To:* Imlay, Chris, W3KD *Cc:* arrl-odv *Subject:* [arrl-odv:22895] Re: Marco Rubio Legislation affecting 5850-5925 MHz and Who Knows What Else
I should have contact with Senator Rubio’s Office on Monday. I believe they are in recess until after the July 4th holiday weekend so I may be able to catch him in South Florida.
Doing some research, it appears that one piece of legislation has actually been filed (6/20/2014). It is S. 2505, is known as the “Wi-Fi Innovation Act”, and is jointly sponsored by Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) introduced S. 2505.
Here’s a press release about it: http://www.booker.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=95
Here’s a link to the only copy of it that I’ve found so far: http://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve/?File_id=5fe12065-5...
After a very cursory reading, this legislation focuses on 5830-5850 MHz, the upper end of our band where the auto manufacturers also are designing car-car communications and guidance/collision systems.
A potentially troubling aspect of the legislation is the proposed parameters for the new use:
(A) permit outdoor unlicensed operations;
(B) permit unlicensed operations at a maximum conducted transmitter output power limit of not less than 1 watt; and
(C) do not require unlicensed devices to employ Dynamic Frequency Selection.
If I understand the wording correctly, we are talking minimum one watt transmitters that can then be connected to 30+ dB antennas for an erp in the range of a KW or greater. This is exactly what has trashed out 900 MHz and 2.4 GHz.
Requirement (C) sounds like code for the equipment not having to be frequency agile to avoid interfering with existing signals.
The amateur satellite downlink range is 5830-5850. The selected frequency range does not buffer the satellite downlinks at all. I haven’t had an opportunity to verify whether any current satellites, including cubesats, have 5 GHZ downlinks.
Senator Rubio also has the “Wireless Innovation Act”, dealing with freeing up federal allocations, that was filed on June 12th.
Press release at: http://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile/press-releases?ID=f4a03f...
It includes “*Spectrum Reallocation and Auction Pipeline*: Requires NTIA to identify and reallocate 200 MHz of spectrum for mobile use (140 MHz for licensed use; 40 MHz for shared use; 20 MHz for unlicensed use) and establishes an auction pipeline with staggered auctions starting in 2018;“
I haven’t found the actual bill yet, but the references to it indicate that the spectrum in in the “lower 5 GHZ band”. This causes the concern that even if this 200 MHz is below the amateur band, equipment will be built to access both the new allocations, sandwiching the active portion of the amateur allocation. Simple hacks will likely allow the equipment to be put anywhere on 5 GHZ. This is good for amateurs making mesh style networks, but probably far worse is the ISPs and others that will hack the equipment to operate out of their allocation—into ours where it’s quieter…
There is a third unannounced Rubio bill that will promote wireless infrastructure.
Given his extreme interest in spectrum issues, I hope to become good friends my Senator J
A safe ad fun Field Day to all!
73,
Doug
K4AC
*From:* Christopher Imlay [mailto:w3kd.arrl@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, June 27, 2014 3:50 PM *To:* k4ac *Cc:* arrl-odv *Subject:* Re: [arrl-odv:22884] Marco Rubio Legislation affecting 5850-5925 MHz and Who Knows What Else
Doug, that would be* extremely* helpful. I need as much information as possible as quickly as possible about Rubio's effort, not only for ARRL's spectrum protection purposes but also to fulfill an obligation to a very helpful contact that Mike Lisenco and I made on the Hill this week. On Wednesday, Mike and I met with the Legislative Assistant of New York Congressman Grimm, who as of this morning (as the result of our meeting with the LA) agreed to sign on to H.R. 4969. Grimm was actually seeking to be listed as an * original* cosponsor. The LA said that she was coming up to speed on spectrum issues and asked for any information we could give her about Rubio's effort. She was so helpful to us that we promised her a short memo on the Rubio subject as soon as we could get the details. As of this morning she said she wanted that memo and so we have to get it for her as we promised we would do. This is a chance to be a resource for her and that could pay dividends for a long time to come.
So, thanks for stepping up!
73, Chris W3KD
73, Chris W3KD
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Doug Rehman <doug@k4ac.com> wrote:
Chris:
I have a close friend that is well connected within the Cuban American community. I will see if I can make contact with Senator Rubio.
Realistically it is going to be difficult to completely protect bands that are sparsely used. Maybe a strategy is to try to protect the entire bands, but vigorously defend the subsets of the bands were there is actually some activity? Additionally, maybe likening the spectrum to the land preserved for future generations by the National Parks would be of benefit.
I say the forgoing even in light of owning equipment for both 3G and 5G.
Doug
K4AC
*From:* arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] *On Behalf Of *Christopher Imlay *Sent:* Friday, June 27, 2014 11:13 AM *To:* arrl-odv *Subject:* [arrl-odv:22884] Marco Rubio Legislation affecting 5850-5925 MHz and Who Knows What Else
Greetings. I have marveled at how easily we have survived the National Broadband Plan to date. That premature joy may be coming to an end. Senator Marco Rubio has three proposed bills intended to expand broadband spectrum in the hopper. Here is a snippet about one of them:
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said he will soon introduce legislation to reallocate up to 200 MHz of spectrum held by the government for commercial wireless use, establish a new spectrum auctions starting in 2018, and make it easier for federal agencies to relinquish their airwaves.
Rubio also intends to introduce legislation geared toward allowing Wi-Fi in the 5 GHz band, as long as it does not interfere with vehicle-to-vehicle communications. The senator is also planning legislation to promote the deployment of wireless infrastructure.
"Our world has gone wireless, and it did not take long to occur," he said in a speech Wednesday, according to *The Hill*. "That is why I am proposing a wireless innovation agenda with ideas that I believe will ensure the United States is prepared to face the wireless future--an agenda to ensure that Americans can participate in the wireless economy and take advantage of wireless technology to improve their economic well-being."
--
The 5 GHz band reference is to 5850-5925 MHz, which is Amateur spectrum. FCC has an open proceeding asking about unlicensed broadband in that same band, and there is tremendous opposition to it from the Intelligent Transportation Services folks who are interested in that band for vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-roadside communications. Amateur access is in jeopardy and our participation in the FCC docket proceeding was little more than an effort to protect whatever access we have in that segment (which is lightly used by Amateurs as a general matter).
What we don't know yet is where the other 200 MHz of government spectrum is going to come from. It could be up around 3 GHz and it could be 3300-3500 MHz. We will see.....
73, Chris W3KD
Christopher D. Imlay
Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC
14356 Cape May Road
Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011
(301) 384-5525 telephone
(301) 384-6384 facsimile
W3KD@ARRL.ORG
--
Christopher D. Imlay
Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC
14356 Cape May Road
Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011
(301) 384-5525 telephone
(301) 384-6384 facsimile
W3KD@ARRL.ORG
-- Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD@ARRL.ORG