The first profiles the WiMAX Forum will establish for mobile WiMAX
(802.16e-2005) will be for 2.3GHz (WCS bands) and 2.5GHz (2.5-2.696GHz BRS &
EBS bands). Commercial products confirming to the STANDARD will begin to hit
the market over the next few months, and these will take the form factor of
fixed products, but especially "portable" and nomadic, indoor only
self-install CPE. Later this year and early next year, this will likely be
bridged by PCMCIA versions by vendors until such time as the mass devices
makers begin to role out devices. 

The first e-2005 WiMAX Certifications are not scheduled though to occur
until late this year. Officially, this certification is called "Wave III."
There will also be a fourth wave that tests for full mobility (i.e. includes
things like controllers and home agents).

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
-----Original Message-----
From: George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UL WiMAX update

That was a great answer Patrick.
You should post more often. This is the information all wisps crave.

What frequency is the mobile WIMAX?
And what is the expected release dates.

Thanks again

George


Patrick Leary wrote:
> Well George, ready for long answer that may not actually answer your
> question? I'd prefer to give you the full story. 
> 
> First,...so, is Alvarion building UL WiMAX? Of course, and I personally
see
> lots of potential for it. When will it come? A few things are in line
first,
> so there is no firm date but we'll have it roughly around the same time as
> other main suppliers. If I could give a better and more useful date, I
> would.UL 
> 
> Second, WiMAX is not a simple story. Here are the issues revolving around
> it:
> 
> 1. 3650MHz is a better UL band for WiMAX than 5.8GHz:
> Vendors and operators know that this band is more favorable for a scaled
BWA
> deployment than 5.8GHz for both reasons of physics, higher power
allowances,
> and less interference. So far, the only UL profile for WiMAX is
> 5.725-5.850GHz. But most vendors are not eager to invest too much in that
> profile while 3650MHz is up in the air. If 3650MHz goes UL, as it most
> likely will, at least in part, then that would take the wind out of 5.8GHz
> WiMAX's sales and a new profile will have to be created to support
3650MHz.
> 
> 2. The UL profile is limited to upper 5GHz only:
> The UL WiMAX profile excludes 5.25-5.35GHz, as well as 5.47-5.725GHz. That
> is 355MHz of spectrum that the WiMAX Forum so far does not support. Who
> wants to build a UL WiMAX network that only uses 5.8GHz? The profile needs
> to be broadened.
> 
> 3. The scheduled MAC of 802.16 is designed for licensed:
> The reality is that the 802.16 MAC was originally developed for licensed
> LMDS bands. In order to push through a standard quickly, when 802.16 was
> amended to be applicable to sub-11GHz frequencies, they co-opted that same
> MAC. Now it's a great MAC...for licensed. Scheduled MAC's are highly
> efficient, but they are intended to be used in licensed where the only
> interference risks are self-inflicted. With a scheduler, when your slot
> comes to talk, you talk, regardless of what is happening in the spectrum.
In
> the UL world where there is contention for the spectrum, a scheduler
results
> in lost packets AND hurts the other systems already in the air.
> 
> The IEEE knows this is a problem, so they formed a new task group about 9
> months ago called 802.16h, or TG H. The charter of this task group is to
> come up with a mechanism that somehow enables UL co-existence of systems
> using shared (UL) spectrum. The idea of the TG is to find some type of
> technology neutral soft patch that can be overlaid atop not just any .16
> device, but any 802.11, or even proprietary system. Alvarion chairs this
TG.
> It is a tough nut, because we and the IEEE are trying to make this a joint
> TG with the 802.11 crowd, but so far the 802.11 groups in the IEEE refuse
to
> joint. The challenge is that the TG can come with some super slick
> technique, maybe some time sharing mechanism, but unless other systems in
> the air adopt it, it will not be as effective as it would otherwise be.
> 
> Suppliers are aware of all this and it adds to the reluctance to release
UL
> WiMAX as it exists today.
> 
> 4. The UL WiMAX profile was designed for PMP backhaul, NOT last mile
access:
> Most may not be aware of this, but if you take note that the
channelization
> options in the 5.8GHz UL profile are 10MHz and 20MHz, you come to realize
> that the intention is to make big pipes. Consider that the current
> efficiency of WiMAX is a bit better than 3.5Mbps NET usable throughput per
> megahertz used and you'll see that in UL WiMAX you can create pipes
> delivering over 70Mbps NET in a 20MHz channel. Then note that the last
mile
> centric licensed profiles deal in 3.5MHz and 7MHz wide channels. You
quickly
> begin to realize that UL WIMAX is intended for backhaul only, for things
> like mesh clouds, hotspots, and outdoor PMP enterprise bridging.
> 
> What does this mean? This means that the market is scrambling to build
> residential CPE for UL WiMAX. Instead, the CPE will be that you would
expect
> at the remote end of an enterprise bridge or backhaul. In other words, we
> are not talking about sub-$200 devices.
> 
> 5. There will be no indoor only, self-install UL WiMAX CPE:
> Unlike licensed WiMAX, for which the power and bands are suitable to
support
> a no-truck-roll CPE, we have no such luck in 5GHz. This leaves us with the
> same installation paradigm we live under today in the UL world.
> 
> 6. UL WiMAX profile in only supported in the fixed WiMAX standard of
> 802.16-2004. There is no profile for 802.16e-2005:
> While we and a handful of others remain excited about fixed WiMAX, most of
> the large telecom suppliers are bypassing it entirely and going straight
to
> 802.16e-2005. Now, and this is key, while the -2005 standard is about
> mobile, IT CAN be used also for fixed and it WILL be the basis of nomadic
> and portable (semi fixed, self-install) CPE. So that is where all the big
> R&D money is at now and vendors planning to participate in the main WiMAX
> market (the 802.16e-2005 world) have to invest to stay ahead. This makes
> 802.16-2004, and all the profiles that go along with it, including the UL
> profiles, a lesser priority, at least relative to 802.16e-2005.
> 
> 
> So the net result of all these issues is that the suppliers are cautious
and
> not certain about the market size for UL WiMAX, or even who will be the
big
> buyers. Is there a large enough market to drive down prices? Who knows,
> currently the main growth in the UL BWA market is happening at the Wi-Fi
> muniwireless level and there is a sense that this needs to play out, even
> while WiMAX may make a good PMP backhaul solution for those projects. 
> 
> I continue to hear that some vendors out there continue to say something
> like, "we have UL WiMAX just around the corner!" the fact is that as of
the
> last WiMAX Forum meeting (in Paris last month), not a single vendor had
yet
> submitted UL WiMAX product for certification testing. And keep in mind
that
> it takes three to submit before any testing can even begin. 
> 
> I do not hear enough suppliers being blunt to WISPs and others about all
> these issues revolving around UL WiMAX and the WiMAX Forum itself needs to
> be more clear about the different types of WiMAX.
> 
> Also, as operators you really have to ask yourself, what do I want out of
UL
> WiMAX? Can you get that with other or current gear? Finally, when UL WiMAX
> product first hits the market, if it comes from a new entrant with no
> current customers to piss off, approach it with healthy skepticism and see
> if it addresses the issues put forth above. Heck, do that even if it comes
> from respectable long term players like us.
> 
> Lastly, I'd advise that while you keep an eye out for progress on the UL
> WIMAX front, you continue to deploy and put your faith in current
> technology. From our end, solutions like BreezeACCESS VL are developed
> specifically for the UL world and they are mature (over 300,000 installed
> units) and ever improving. We will continue to invest in VL for the
> foreseeable future, including making sure it supports ALL the 5GHz ranges
so
> operators have choice and can scale. And to lend weight to the "continue
to
> invest" claim, we have a firmware version entering beta right now that
will
> blow the doors off you. We have basically stripped it down and rebuilt it.
> Not only is it enabling a massive packet per second increase, but we have
> added a prioritization feature that allows an operator to prioritize
certain
> types of traffic network wide. For example, it can be configured to let
all
> voice (or video) traffic from all CPEs be transmitted first, with less
time
> sensitive traffic like basic data released second. This is true no matter
> the users' placement geographically in the network -- on the edge or near
> the base station. At the same time, we have a starvation prevention
> algorithm to make sure other apps are not starved out. This all happens
> dynamically. We have tentative (lab) data showing this improves concurrent
> voice sessions per sector from 40'ish to over 250. We'll see how this
plays
> out in our voice and video betas.
>  
> In addition, we have added QinQ VPN ability, so individual clients can
> create secure VPN tunnel within an operators own VPNs. And there are a
host
> of other new features.
> 
> Obviously, this is the one example I can speak about with authority, but I
> am sure the other vendors will continue to invest and support their own
> current UL technologies for a long time to come.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Patrick Leary
> AVP Marketing
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> Vonage: 650.641.1243
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 5:52 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Quick note of hello
> 
> Welcome back Patrick
> 
> How is Alvarion doing concerning UL WIMAX?
> 
> George
> 
> 
> Patrick Leary wrote:
> 
>>Hi all,
>>
>> 
>>
>>I just wanted to drop you guys a note that I have re-subscribed after 
>>being off the list for maybe two years. Hope all is well.
>>
>> 
>>
>>Patrick Leary
>>
>>AVP Marketing
>>
>>Alvarion, Inc.
>>
>>o: 650.314.2628
>>
>>c: 760.580.0080
>>
>>Vonage: 650.641.1243
>>
>>Skype: pleary
>>
>>     
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 
 

 

Attachment: 'Patrick Leary'.vcf
Description: Binary data

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to