On 23 Jul 2013, at 19:13, Michael Head <[email protected]> wrote: > As I understand it, PAWS spectrum is described in terms of total power output > over a bandwidth of frequencies (typically these are 6mhz-wide channels in > the US, I guess?). This seems to assume that the devices will all use the > same sized chunks of the available spectrum and precomputes the total power > over those chunks. > > I believe some devices could use shorter bandwidth chunks (say 100khz) for > various purposes. From what I can tell, they'll need to convert the > "maxPowerDBm" value (for the given "bandwidth" size) down to an appropriate > value for 100khz. > > Wouldn't it be more general to just give the per-hertz spectral density value > here and let the device decide how much spectrum it wants to use and compute > the appropriate power output over that range?
I've no view in terms of narrowband vs wideband usage, but I'd note that the current "Spectrum" block is an inefficient way of specifying both a total EIRP and a maximum permitted spectral density. The example given for OFCOM / ETSI usage of providing separate tables for 8 MHz vs 0.1 MHz where the only difference is the power level results in a _lot_ of duplication in the spectrum-related messages. Ray _______________________________________________ paws mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
