Hi Scott, It is a pity EU cannot report a straightforward plan for usage of white spaces. But steps are taken. The doc has already a ref to ECC Report 159.
Minor comment on: > With the switch to digital transmission for TV, the guard bands that > existed to protect the signals between stations can now be used for > other purposes. I'm not sure this is true. I can't see why analogue broadcasting didn't had white spaces. Maybe it is just an increased demand on spectrum and the opportunities created with new technology, such as PAWS. Teco Op 2 feb. 2012, om 21:26 heeft <[email protected]> <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven: > Hi Andy, > > Very good to cover the UK situation also. I support your proposal and plan to > include the new section in the next update, pending any further discussion on > this thread. > > Kind Regards, > Scott > > From: ext com <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 19:40:01 +0000 > To: Scott <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-02.txt > > Scott > > Section 3 only addresses the US, presumably due to lack of contributions from > elsewhere. I propose a couple of short paragraphs to cover the UK situation. > The wording is not mine but is almost entirely taken from the latest Ofcom > Statement. > > Section 3.2 is copied below for reference, unchanged, and I propose a new > section 3.3, also below: > > 3.2. Background information on white space in US > Television transmission in the United States has moved to the use of > digital signals as of June 12, 2009. Since June 13, 2009, all fullpower > U.S. television stations have broadcast over-the-air signals in > digital only. An important benefit of the switch to all-digital > broadcasting is that it freed up parts of the valuable broadcast > spectrum. More information about the switch to digital transmission > is at : [DTV]. > Probasco & Patil Expires July 30, 2012 [Page 8] > Internet-Draft PAWS: Problem, uses and requirements January 2012 > With the switch to digital transmission for TV, the guard bands that > existed to protect the signals between stations can now be used for > other purposes. The FCC has made this spectrum available for > unlicensed use and this is generally referred to as white space. > Please see the details of the FCC ruling and regulations in [FCC > Ruling]. The spectrum can be used to provide wireless broadband as > an example. The term "Super-Wifi" is also used to describe this > spectrum and potential for providing wifi type of service. > > <Insert> > 3.3. Background information on white space in UK > Since its launch in 2005, Ofcom’s Digital Dividend Review [DDR] has > considered how to make the spectrum freed up by digital switchover available > for new uses, including the capacity available within the spectrum that is > retained to carry the digital terrestrial television service. Similarly to > the US, this interleaved or guard spectrum occurs because not all the > spectrum in any particular location will be used for terrestrial television > and so is available for other services, as long as they can interleave their > usage around the existing users. > > In its September 2011 Statement [Ofcom Implementing] Ofcom says that a key > element in enabling white space usage in the TV bands is the definition and > provision of a database which, given a device’s location, can tell the device > which frequency channels and power levels it is able to use without causing > harmful interference to other licensed users in the vicinity. Ofcom will > specify requirements to be met by such geolocation databases. It also says > that the technology has the possibility of being usefully applied elsewhere > in the radio spectrum to ensure it is used to maximum benefit. For example, > it may have potential in making spectrum available for new uses following any > switch to digital radio services. Alternatively it may be helpful in > exploiting some of the public sector spectrum holdings. Ofcom will continue > to consider other areas of the radio spectrum where white space usage may be > of benefit. > </Insert> > > Regards > > Andy > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > [email protected] > Sent: 26 January 2012 23:43 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [paws] draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-02.txt > > Hi, > > Revision 2 of the PS, Use cases and requirements I-D has been posted. Please > see: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-02.txt > > This version only includes changes requested by the co-chair in his email of > January 12 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/paws/current/msg00516.html > Specifically: > " >> 2. requirements. In the last f2f >> we agreed to modify requirement D.1 to include the suggestions from slide >> 7-10 ofhttp://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf and merge with >> D.6 and D.9 >> slides 7&8 of http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-1.pdf also >> contain suggestions on how to revise this requirement. >> Agreed to revise requirement D.2 as suggested in slide 11 of >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdfand slide 9 of >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-1.pdf >> We seem to have agreed with the reformulation suggested to D.3 in slide 12 >> ofhttp://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf, but we did not agree >> on the format the location would be represented in. The data format part is >> still open, but as this piece does not really belong to requirements but >> rather the data model spec, we are not in a hurry to decide it. >> Delete d.4 >> D.5: augment with lower/upper frequencies and time of availability, as >> suggested on slide 10 ofhttp://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-1.pdf >> D.6: change power to eirp, as suggested in slide 13 of >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf. >> D.7: change to single and multiple locations. Clarify that in case of >> multiple locations the channel availability for each location should be sent >> by the db. >> D.8: delete > > " >> > > And > " >> Operational requirements: slides 22-24 of >> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/paws-2.pdf contain suggestions on >> rewording, I propose the editor considers them. > > " > > > Regards, > Scott & Raj > _______________________________________________ > paws mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
