We should all be complaining, vociferously, about LTE-U. I've seen the tests and as it exists today LTE-U completely creams WiFi and is only usable by someone who owns a LTE license. WiFi APs will cohabitate fairly well, even if they share the same channel, because WiFi is a listen before transmitting protocol. LTE and LTE-U is a centrally scheduled protocol and doesn't have a back off mechanism.
Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms -------------------------------- On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Yury Shefer <[email protected]> wrote: > And the same guys (NCTA) complain about LTE-U - how dangerous it is for > their s/business/WiFi > > > http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/verizon-and-t-mobile-join-forces-in-fight-for-wi-fi-airwaves/ > > > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Scott Helms <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This sounds like a hypothetical complaint, AFAIK none of the members of >> the >> CableWiFi consortium are deploying APs outside of their footprint. Since >> most of the APs use a cable modem for their backhaul it's not really >> feasible to be without at least one broadband option (the cable MSO) and >> be >> impaired by the CableWiFi APs. >> >> Now, there is one potential exception to this I'm aware of which is >> Comcast's Xfinity on Campus service, but I'd expect the number of colleges >> they're servicing that aren't already getting cable broadband service to >> approach zero. >> >> >> http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20150909_Comcast_streams_onto_college_campuses.html >> >> https://xfinityoncampus.com/login >> >> >> Having said all of that, I'd agree that a good radio resource management >> approach would benefit all of us, including the CableWiFi guys. >> >> http://www.cablelabs.com/wi-fi-radio-resource-management-rrm/ >> >> >> Scott Helms >> Vice President of Technology >> ZCorum >> (678) 507-5000 >> -------------------------------- >> http://twitter.com/kscotthelms >> -------------------------------- >> >> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Jared Mauch <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > >> > > On Sep 10, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > > 5 GHz noise levels affecting people whose primary means of Internet >> > access is via fixed wireless . >> > > >> > >> > This is a huge deal for those people like myself that depend on fixed >> > wireless for access at home because there is no broadband available >> despite >> > incentives given by cities and states and the federal government. >> > >> > The local WISPs are good at coordinating access in these ISM bands >> amongst >> > themselves but when someone appears with a SSID without doing a peek at >> the >> > spectrum (note: not a site survey, but actual spectrum view w/ >> waterfall, >> > as site survey only checks for the channel width that the client radio >> is >> > configured for, not al the 10, 15, 8, 30mhz wide variants). >> > >> > It’s just poor practice to show up and break something else because you >> > can’t be bothered to notice the interference or noise floor you >> created. I >> > suspect the hardware that Comcast is using doesn’t notice this >> interference >> > or adjacent channel issues. With the FCC aiming to let cell carriers >> also >> > clog the 5ghz ISM band it’s only going to get worse. >> > >> > - Jared >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Yury. >
