|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Thanks for the post. I’d like to add some alternative views that I think are relevant to 802’s future activities:
The Radiocommunication Assembly (RA) report is available. It’s called the Book of Resolutions <http://www.itu.int/pub/R-VADM-RES-2015>. I don’t believe that the Radiocommunication Assembly (RA) restructured SG 5. It did appoint the chair and vice chairs, including a new chair to fill a vacancy, and it assigned questions to the SGs. This information is in the Book of Resolutions.
Following the RA, it’s my understanding that SG 5 leadership decided to maintain the current structure of Working Parties (WPs). Also, I believe that the chairs of the WPs will be unchanged, at least with respect to the WPs that 802 has been mostly engaged with. I don’t anticipate any rotation from private sector to government leadership of the SG 5 WPs.
There will be one change to the SG 5 structure, driven by the Conference Preparatory Meeting for WRC-19 (CPM19-1). CPM decided <http://www.itu.int/md/R00-CA-CIR-0226/en> “on an exceptional basis” to “invite” SG 5 to create a new Task Group 5/1 (TG 5/1) to conduct preparatory studies on WRC-19 agenda item 1.13, with the TG 5/1 chair to be determined by SG 5. This new TG 5/1 will be relevant to 802, as it deals with IMT in some specific bands between 24.25 and 86 GHz. The WRC press release talks about “bands above 6 GHz,” but I’m not sure if it includes anything below 24.25 GHz. Note that
“the organization of the work of TG 5/1 should be carried out making maximum use of modern means of communication, including remote participation to the extent practicable.”
Also, I have some different views about the WRC results. While the press release refers to “mobile broadband,” that term is not typically used by WRC. Instead, the WRC identifies bands for “IMT”, which narrowly refers to a particular set of ITU standards, not to general mobile broadband technologies. Also, while historically IMT would probably be considered “mobile broadband,” is appears that the WRC believes it may grow beyond that application. In particular, the resolution underlying the work of TG 5/1 considers “that IMT systems are now being evolved to provide diverse usage scenarios andapplications such as enhanced mobile broadband, massive machine-type communications and ultra- reliable and low-latency communications.”
I think that a number of these issues are worth considering within 802.
Roger---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.