I ask this question in ignorance of how IETF works.
In the last 3 months the FCC has published NPRM (notice of proposed rule 
making) for 2 new spectrum sharing – white space bands. Specifically 4.9GHz and 
3.5GHz. In the case of the former they did not say much about how sharing was 
to be accomplished but in the 3.5GHz NPRM they introduce some new concepts, 
like secondary and tertiary use.
So how far do we want to go with the PAWS requirements? Personally I would 
prefer we create a solution for TVWS and then see what changes or additions are 
required by new TVWS regulations or regulations in new bands. Otherwise I fear 
we will never get anything done. But is seems there is a bias towards trying to 
get this completely right the first time and have something that is going to 
cover all the options. I want to try to make constructive comments on the 
document but I ask for some guidance on where we draw the line on scope.
Thanks,
Peter S.

From: Nancy Bravin <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:58 AM
To: Anthony Mancuso <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Gabor 
Bajko <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [paws] what is missing and does it matter?

I just can't help myself, here are my thoughts:

1. Do we, by combining use cases, leave a hole that needs to be plugged by the 
FCC regulations?
2. In the FCC NPRM that is out now, "remote" is mentioned, as well as in 
supporting documents, "rural and remote", have we addressed remote as a use
case and should we? To me it seems that we should for there needs to be an 
inexpensive way to service these areas globally.
3. Not being an engineer, I do not know how to model, leave room for extensions 
nor do I know if this is the time to do so, or in fact,
will much of that be done by the DB's and not as much on the WSD side. I think 
both, but there seems to be views on both sides.

I think the protocol is really super…I ask for more response from those who may 
still be on the reflector,
and or involved on their own for guidance and input.

Sincerely, Nancy

“He who breaks a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of 
wisdom.<http://thinkexist.com/quotation/he_who_breaks_a_thing_to_find_out_what_it_is-has/152173.html>”
J.R.R. Tolkien
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws

Reply via email to