Thank you Anthony for your insight off line as to my concerns. I apologize for my comments, and feel more comfortable that my concerns have been managed well in the current draft.
Sincerely, Nancy Bravin On Dec 21, 2012, at 9:58 AM, Nancy Bravin wrote: > HI Gabor, > > I do not understand when doing a global standard, and only referring to > underserved areas, which is more common in developed countries, > why use cases are left out for not only rural, but remote, which happens to > involve many countries that can or do not relate to underserved, > implying that some use is already there. > The constant use of the term wifi, and no other technology or use cases left > out seems to promote one technology over others. > This is not agnostic in my view, it is if all other efforts done or in > process globally are irrelevant. > Combining use cases as was done is not in the best interests of the market, > their choices of what to use, or a global effort in demographics, > whether population, terrain, or different regs that apply or options that > other countries can use to determine what is the best course for their > sovereign nation. > > Sorry to violently disagree, but even the device regs from the US are ignored > as stated before. > > Nancy > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: [email protected] >> Subject: [paws] I-D Action: >> draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-09.txt >> Date: December 21, 2012 9:10:51 AM PST >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected] >> >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Protocol to Access WS database Working >> Group of the IETF. >> >> Title : Protocol to Access White Space (PAWS) Database: Use >> Cases and Requirements >> Author(s) : Anthony Mancuso >> Basavaraj Patil >> Filename : draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-09.txt >> Pages : 27 >> Date : 2012-12-21 >> >> Abstract: >> [Editor's Note: This version is submitted for review. A final, post- >> review version is anticipated that will supersede this version]. >> >> Portions of the radio spectrum that are assigned to a particular use >> but are unused or unoccupied at specific locations and times are >> defined as "white space." The concept of allowing additional >> transmissions (which may or may not be licensed) in white space is a >> technique to "unlock" existing spectrum for new use. An obvious >> requirement is that these additional transmissions do not interfere >> with the assigned use of the spectrum. One approach to using white >> space spectrum at a given time and location is to verify spectrum >> availability with a database that manages spectrum sharing and >> provides spectrum-availability information. >> >> This document describes a number of possible use cases of white space >> spectrum and technology as well as a set of requirements for the >> database query protocol. The concept of white spaces is described >> along with the problems that need to be addressed to enable white >> space spectrum for additional uses without causing interference to >> currently assigned use. Use of white space is enabled by querying a >> database that stores information about spectrum availability at any >> given location and time. >> >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts >> >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-09 >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-paws-problem-stmt-usecases-rqmts-09 >> >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> paws mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws >
_______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
