Brought to you as a public service of the Open Spectrum Foundation (Stichting Open Spectrum), Amsterdam - Prague

NEWS

Europe's agenda for expanding wireless "commons"

We previously reported on a study funded by the European Commission on "Technical, Regulatory and Economic issues relating to Collective Use of Radio" (see " 'Spectrum commons' and interference tenders from the EC" [27 August 2005]; "Workshop on the collective use of spectrum" [21 April 2006]; "Questionaire and Workshop Presentations on Wireless Commons" [4 May 2006]).

"Collective use of spectrum" (CUS) should be understood as meaning "spectrum commons" - bands where multiple users can operate without pre-assigned channels. Such bands are often license exempt, but they can also be licensed (e.g., with "class" licenses, or with dynamically coordinated access, as in the maritime and aeronautical mobile bands).

On 3 October, the consortium conducting the EC's study convened a public workshop in Brussels to present their recommendations. A powerpoint summary is now available. Some highlights:

• The consortium estimates that by 2009, the market for "collective use" devices and applications will be worth nearly $27 billion:

• The economic benefits of this approach to spectrum use include productivity gains, system cost savings (e.g., eliminating wiring), health improvements (medical implants, accidents prevented by proximity radar for cars, etc.) and greater convenience. One study cited put the annual net economic benefit from public WiFi hotspots in the UK at €100 billion!
• "Collective use" should be preferred if the risk of interference (i.e. congestion) is low; the cost of interference mitigation is low; quality of service requirements are low; spectrum "refarming" is not a major issue; licensing costs are high; and band use is not constrained by other policy obligations.
• But we still lack clear methods for deciding whether a service should be licensed or license-exempt and how much spectrum to allocate for "collective use." More and better spectrum monitoring and market surveillance are needed to guide "collective use" allocation decisions. "A source of independent expertise should be established, to undertake such work directly under instruction from the [EC's Radio Spectrum Committee]..."
• Ultra-low power (ULP) applications - with ranges measured in centimetres or a few metres - can co-exist with higher-power licensed users (as with iTrips in the FM broadcasting band). The US, Japan and Korea have authorised ULP use of many more bands than Europe, suggesting that more spectrum in Europe could be opened to ULPs.
• Europe can also support innovation and expand opportunities for collective use by increasing flexibility in the bands now allocated to specific applications, and by speeding up the process of creating new harmonised license-free bands: "The degree of harmonisation of collective spectrum bands across the [EU] Member States is mixed and in some cases insufficient to support an EU-wide market... [There is need for a] more proactive EU backed harmonisation process including mandatory implementation of agreed bands..."
• Another improvement would be to simplify service categories. The consultants suggest 3 types of "collective use" bands:
• Category A: licensing or registration required; devices may share spectrum with licensed users. Example: wireless microphones using empty TV channels for programme production.
• Category B: no licensing or registration required; allocation restricted to specific technologies or applications to ensure quality of service. Examples: RFID, road traffic telematics.
• Category C: no licensing or registration required; minimum constraints on usage, only to avoid harmful interference. Examples: WLANs, nonspecific short-range devices.

• Some specific bands to consider for expansion of "collective use":
• 47 - 68 MHz will be "largely unused" after the migration to DTV. This band has "propagation anomalies" that make high-power unlicensed use inappropriate, but it is "well suited to low cost, short range applications." Part of the band is already used this way (49 MHz).
• 862 - 872 MHz is "largely unused currently" and is a "logical extension" of the existing 863 - 870 MHz band. Increasing the available bandwidth to 10 MHz would allow spread spectrum applications.
• 915 - 917 MHz could be used for higher power RFID services. Predicted growth in RFID use of the 866 MHZ band is likely to lead to congestion. But the risk of interference to mobile services below 915 MHz means RFID at 915-917 MHz might have to be restricted to indoor use.
• The 40.5 - 42.5 GHz band's high directivity and limitation to line-of-sight propagation reduces the risk of interference, making it suitable for "collective use." Could cater for high bandwidth outdoor applications like Fixed Wireless Access. (Previous attempts to develop this band failed but technology costs have fallen.)

If the Commission decides to set up "a source of independent expertise" to determine allocations for "collective use" - as the consultants recommend - competition for seats at that table will surely be fierce.
__________

Meanwhile, the European Radiocommunications Office's Working Group on License Exempt Commons (RA LEC) released their work plan for the next 12-15 months. Four projects are listed:

• Starting this month they will gather data about existing procedures for exemption from individual licencing in the 46 countries forming the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT). In June 2007, they will publish an overview of the criteria on which exemptions are based.
• In January 2007, RA LEC will start analyzing the regulatory frameworks for radio licence exemption in the CEPT countries, with the aim of producing a draft proposal for a common CEPT framework for license exemption by October 2007.
• In January, RA LEC will also review the recommendations of the "common use of spectrum" consortium and develop a response by December 2007.
• And starting in January, a related workgroup will look at the ways CEPT members are implementing "light licensing," analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of the various approaches, to develop a draft proposal for a common CEPT regulatory framework for "light licensing" by October 2007.

Alexander Gulyaev is the "rapporteur" for both RA Light Licensing and RA License Exempt Commons.

[Spectrum Policy: 16 October 2006]