Re: [802SEC] motion to approve contribution to ITU-R JTG 6-8-9
>I confused by the answer below.
>It is my understanding that the 2500-2690 MHz band is allocated to
>IMTS2000. What is the relationship to space services? I do realize
>that there is a proposed position to allow individual authorities to
>waive this allocation and use the band for other purposes.
No, this band is not allocated to IMT-2000. It
has been identified for IMT-2000 applications,
but this doesn't preclude other applications. The
allocations in the ITU Radio Regulations, of
course, are not to standards like IMT-2000 but to
Radiocommunication Services, such as the mobile
service, the fixed service, the mobile satellite
>However, I am not aware of any space services sharing with terrestrial
>services proposals. I will appreciate any update on my understanding.
There are currently many service allocations in
the band. The details have been compiled by Joint
Task Group 6/8/9 in Document 6-8-9/6-E. If you
check there, you will find many space as well as
terrestrial services. That's a key reason that
JTG 6-8-9 was created. JTG 6-8-9 is "tasked to
conduct studies of the technical, operational and
regulatory provisions applicable to the use of
the band 2 500-2 690 MHz by space services in
order to facilitate sharing with current and
future terrestrial services..."
>I also suggest an editorial change on the third paragraph of the
>"Introduction." The statement in the second sentence "....this
>standard will be a significant part of future broadband wireless
>services...." is conjecture. It does seem necessary nor appropriate
>for one standards body to send another standards body conjecture.
> I request that the complete sentence be deleted.
I prefer not to delete that sentence. First of
all, it includes specific content on the types of
user devices supported by the standard. Also,
while I agree that the statement is conjectural,
I disagree that we are writing to a standards
body. We are writing to a body preparing an
analysis of future scenarios, and that analysis
needs to be based on assumptions of about those
scenarios. I think that it is appropriate to 802
to take the position that 802.16 will be a
"significant part of future broadband wireless
services." If we didn't believe that, we may as
well close down our work. But I am convinced that
the 266 people already preregistered for our
interim in China next month do believe it.
> Finally were the 802.16e estimates included in
>the tables approved by the Task Group members?
The entire document was reviewed by the 802.16
WG. The WG unanimously passed this motion on 18
November: "To task the ITU-R Liaison Official,
Josť Costa, working with the ad hoc ITU-R liaison
group active at Session #34, to draft a
contribution to ITU-R JTG 6-8-9 on the topic
described in IEEE L802.1604/14. The WG Chair is
authorized to submit the document to the IEEE 802
Executive Committee for approval by email ballot,
with the intent to submit to ITU-R as an IEEE
contribution." Although I was authorized to
submit the ad hoc's output for EC approval, I
first posted it to the 802.16 reflector for
comments. Comments were accepted and resolved.
The revised version was again posted to the
reflector for comment, but no further comments
> I vote disapprove pending answers to my questions and editorial request.
> Jerry Upton
>In a message dated 1/3/2005 2:46:03 PM Central
>Standard Time, r.b.marks@IEEE.ORG writes:
>Mike Takefman wrote and asked me "What is it you are trying to
>achieve with the submission?"
>Good question. Since this is not obvious, I'll copy the EC.
>The submittal is intended for ITU-R Joint Task Group 6-8-9, whose
>purpose is to prepare a draft addressing WRC-07 Agenda Item 1.9: "to
>review the technical, operational and regulatory provisions
>applicable to the use of the band 2500-2690 MHz by space services in
>order to facilitate sharing with current and future terrestrial
>In other words, they are studying issues related to the sharing of
>this band between satellite and terrestrial services. One of the
>specific topics includes "Characteristics of terrestrial systems". We
>provided some initial information for their previous meeting, and
>they they are looking for additional detail. That's what's in the
>You can find more background information in:
>Roger B. Marks wrote:
>>I would like to put the following motion before the EC:
>>"Motion: To approve IEEE L802.16-04/42r2, with the intent to submit
>>to ITU-R as an IEEE contribution, subject to editorial revision."
>>The document is available at:
>>*802.18 Chair Mike Lynch would like to second the motion.
>>*I am requesting that the EC ballot close on January 13 in order to
>>make a submission deadline.
>>*This is a followup to a "placeholder" contribution submitted to ITU
>>by IEEE (via 802.18 and 802) in March 2004:
>>I appreciate the EC's indulgence in reviewing this document, given
>>the other ballots currently underway.
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.