Via Dewayne-Net, word is circulating that 802.11Y has been approved.
802.11Y is a standard for the 3.65 - 3.70 GHz band in the US. The distinguishing features of this band are some unique rules that the FCC has crafted for it:
- All systems are licensed, but the licensing is pretty easy; basically just an application / registration form, done online, stating where the base stations are and who the responsible party is, and that the systems will be outside a "protection zone" for the incumbent satellite earth stations.
- Systems used must adhere to a "contention protocol"; essentially - all users must "get along"
- Early users have no inherent preference
- Later users must be accommodated by earlier users
The Dewayne-Net posting pointed to a Wikipedia article - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11y. It's well-written, and a better explanation of the particulars of 802.11Y than I can offer, given that I haven't followed the development of 802.11Y.
This sets up something of a battle... as the vast majority of the systems being deployed to date in 3.65 GHz are based on 802.16 - Fixed (the older version) WiMAX, and more recently, Mobile WiMAX. That's pretty natural given that one of the first bands that WiMAX was developed for was 3.5 GHz. Most countries, except the US, have opened up bands centered around 3.5 GHz for deployment of Broadband Wireless Internet Access. (In the US, the 3.5 GHz band was previously allocated to, and is in use by, the US military.
But Fixed WiMAX and Mobile WiMAX weren't designed with contention in mind - they were really designed for use in licensed spectrum where there is no contention issues; one company has been allocated exclusive use of spectrum and therefore doesn't have to worry about contention; they can self-coordinate.
I haven't read 802.11Y to see the particulars, but one issue comes immediately to mind - channel size. (Entirely from memory...) One key advantage that 802.16 would seem to have over 802.11Y is that the former has specific provisions for channel sizes as small as 5 MHz; that's a good fit for the 3.65 GHz's 50 MHz. But (again, entirely from memory) 802.11's "base" channel size, if 802.11Y doesn't modify it, is 22 MHz (2.4 GHz) and 20 MHz (5 GHz); that's not such a great fit for a band that's 50 MHz wide.
It's good to see things progressing, such as new standards evolving, and good to see 3.65 GHz being so actively used, such as Towerstream's recent deployment of Mobile WiMAX technology, using 3.65 GHz, in Chicago. My kudos to Julius Knapp of the FCC and Robert Pepper, formerly of the FCC, who championed 3.65 GHz against considerable skepticism of the "licensed lite" concept. In particular, I'll admit that my fears that the licensing would quickly be "gamed" by unscrupulous speculators, was apparently unfounded.
By Steve Stroh
This article is Copyright © 2008 by Steve Stroh except for specifically-marked excerpts. Excerpts and links are expressly permitted (and encouraged).
This article was written and posted via Broadband Wireless Internet Access (BWIA); Sprint Mobile Broadband service using a Sierra Wireless 595U USB modem - 1xEV-DO Rev. A on a MacBook Pro laptop.
Steve, the most interesting thing in the Wikipedia article is the section "Beyond the US 3650 band." If the FCC can accept 802.11y's dependent station enablement (DSE) at 3650 MHz, could this be extended, over time, to allow secondary uses in (most) other bands? Long term, DSE may be the lever that gets license-exempt equipment onto vast swaths of spectrum. Maybe I'm dreaming, but this is the first thing I've seen that gives me hope that we'll ever overcome the licensing regime put in place in 1927/1934.
Posted by: Brough Turner | October 03, 2008 at 14:29
Thanks Steve, for the 802.11Y update - I had not been paying attention to this at all.... Ed
Posted by: Ed | October 11, 2008 at 18:40