[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
stds-802-16: sub10. RE:Bands of Interest (II)
This is one of the subjects for the definition of scope of the PAR. In addressing frequency bands under 10 GHz, we need to be cognizant of overlap in jurisdiction between 802.16 and 802.11. 802.11 has jurisdiction over unlicensed bands below 10 GHz, which lend themselves to wireless LAN applications, but can also be used in access applications for Internet. To avoid overlap with 802.11, 802.16 should focus on Licensed bands under 10 GHz, which will primarily be used for access network rather than LAN applications. Obviously, the interference and RF coexistence issues are radically different between licensed and unlicensed bands, and 802.11 is better equipped to deal with these issues in unlicensed bands.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 1:17 AM
To: ccwang@MalibuNetworks.com; Sward.Dong@ic.gc.ca; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; Ken@peirce.net
Subject: stds-802-16: sub10. Bands of Interest (II)
Unless specific limits are defined, unlicensed bands for public
applications might present problems, in my view, to the operators, in
the sense that they will not be able to control neither the quality of
service to the end-users (think in terms of committed or granted
information rates for example) nor the grade of service (or blocking
probability thresholds), because as they do not enjoy exclusive usage
of the frequency band, there is no way to avoid somebody else
(normally an outside, asyncronised system) launching radiofrequency
energy on the same band at the same place, thus creating an
undesirable level of interference, and all this, regardless of the
network dimensioning or level of infrastructure equipment the operator
has put in place. These two parameters (QoS, GoS) are essential when a
given operator (typically a CLEC) has to compete with an ILEC or other
CLECs targeting at the same market with competing technologies.
(Even with specific limits defined, there is a penalty introduced when
designing the network thinking in the worst case scenario)
On the other hand, I fully agree with your comments to look for
maximum commonality of equipment.
It is not my intention to "discriminate" specific bands, but please do
not forget cost targets!