IMHO, the duty cycle based time sharing system used by LTE-U doesn't seem
to be harmful. The fact that wifi is poor in using its air time is
802.11's fault.
On 09/08/2015 09:55 AM, Dave Taht wrote:
Well, so far there has not been enough technical analysis. It is the
game theory fail that bothers me most - users of LTE spectrum can
encroach upon the wifi bands, and retreat to their own, but wifi users
cannot, and further, cannot even detect when or if lte-u is messing up
their lives, nor complain to a responsible party.
In only one of the two analyses published to date:
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.de/2015/06/encouraging-innovation-wi-fi-and-lte-in.html
This document does not prove unfairness. It shows wifi is inefficient
in recovering after a LTE-U busy period.
They buried the lede here -
"A distinctive aspect of LTE in unlicensed—as compared to other
unlicensed technologies developed to date—is that it is a license
anchored system that operates simultaneously across licensed and
unlicensed bands. Furthermore, LTE in unlicensed allows traffic to be
moved dynamically, on a peruser and even on a pertraffic flow basis,
across the licensed and unlicensed bands. This makes LTE in unlicensed
substantially less sensitive to interference and collisions in the
unlicensed band, because it is able to move traffic so quickly from
the unlicensed band to the licensed band, in a very granular fashion,
whenever congestion occurs in the unlicensed band. Purely unlicensed
operations, by contrast, can fail entirely if there is interference in
that spectrum. Reduced sensitivity to the conditions in the unlicensed
bands significantly reduces the incentives that designers of LTE in
unlicensed have to develop wellfunctioning coexistence mechanisms."
I agree in part. Mostly because LTE-U isn't really a technology designed
to compete with 802.11. It's mostly an offloading technique
that of course integrates better to LTE than wifi.
On the other hand LTE-U can be used as a full unlicensed technology
with DL/UL in the 5GHz band. I do not see how full unlicensed mode
can be forbidden.
If I build an LTE-U AP with DL/UL in 5GHz band and I efficiently use
my fair share of air time, what's the problem? It's a different way
of using the public spectrum, which tends to waste a lot
of public air time.
I do not like public resources to be wasted that way. Do you?
secondly, having another user of this spectrum (in addition to the DFS
mess), will make it harder for wifi to continue to evolve. Certainly
we have here a lot of fixes stacked up that will make wifi a lot
better, and future versions of the wifi standards will do better.
I am no fan of the wifi mac, believe me, and if LTE-U was something I
could buy in a store, and hack on, and use for private use, and deploy
any way I wanted, I would probably favor it's deployment. But that is
*not* the case, which is why I am saying that 1) "unlicensed spectrum
= the public's spectrum" and 2) HANDS OFF OUR WIFI to the carriers.
Places like forbes are pitching this as a battle between isps that use
wifi, and the carriers... which bugs me. 5.x ghz is the people's
spectrum, that we should be free to use any way we want... and to make
it faster, easier to use, and more reliable, my goal - LTE-U is a huge
step backwards.
In a way you are saying that competition does not help innovation
while I've always heard people saying the opposite to be true.
I feel like carriers gave up trying to integrate LTE and wifi, because
the latter sucks. Wifi is selling Gbps with 70% overhead.
Wifi chip makers are selling 10Gbps wifi which is ridiculously far from
reality.
Again, public air time is valuable and shouldn't be wasted that way.
I would like vastly more spectrum opened up to free public use - the
rules and regs around 24ghz and 60ghz are quite insane and
restrictive, and - for example - I'd like a uhf band opened up for
general use also....
Agree. But not wasted.
On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 2:02 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
is there any serious study that proves that LTE U is a threat?
-------- Message d'origine --------
De : Dave Taht
Date :2015/09/06 12:06 AM (GMT+01:00)
À : Rich Brown
Cc : [email protected], cerowrt-devel , bloat
Objet : Re: [Bloat] Save WiFi from the FCC - DEADLINE is in 3 days
*September* 8
while the current FCC course sucks, I personally have been unable to
summon the moxy to fight anymore. Decided to migrate to the eu
instead, only to find the same ruling going into play here. Is there
no place left on the planet safe to innovate in?
and: LTE-U is an even greater threat, and I'm low on ideas on how to counter
it.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/cell-carriers-battle-for-wi-fi-airwaves-1440543853
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Rich Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
Folks,
Dave may have buried the lede in his previous note... The date for
comments
to the FCC is not a month away, but only three days away - 8 Sep 2015.
To see the talking points for preparing your comments, go to:
https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Save_WiFi
To submit a comment, click the green "SUBMIT A FORMAL COMMENT" button on
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/08/06/2015-18402/equipment-authorization-and-electronic-labeling-for-wireless-devices
Please post a link to your comments when you're done.
Rich
On Sep 5, 2015, at 6:42 AM, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote:
In other news:
I am glad to see the more political save-the-wifi coming online rapidly:
https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Save_WiFi
I HAD NO IDEA that the follow-on rules for 2016 would basically ban
modifiable firmware entirely, nor that the DFS problem was due to only 41
old radars that need to be replaced anyway.
Comment deadline for the fcc is sept 8th, not oct 8, which means we should
strap ourselves into the writing console, like, today.
--
Dave Täht
endo is a terrible disease: http://www.gofundme.com/SummerVsEndo
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu
ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
