WASHINGTON-The Federal Communications Commission Thursday took the first step to altering the way spectrum interference is measured by seeking comment on the controversial interference-temperature concept proposed last year by the FCC’s Spectrum Policy Task Force.
“I have previously noted my belief that the commission should strive to push the boundaries to accommodate new technologies provided that they do not cause harmful interference,” said FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein. “If an interference-temperature model for quantifying and managing interference can be developed so that it truly prevents real harmful interference and allows for the provision of new technologies and services, then we should encourage its development. I do not know if we are there yet, but I very much look forward to the debate.”
The FCC will use the 6 and 12 GHz bands as test beds for the interference-temperature concept. Edmond Thomas, chief of the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology, said the commission’s first rule is “to do no harm.”
The interference temperature would set a cap on the amount of interference a user of a specific band could expect. The concept of using an interference temperature to determine what is harmful interference has been controversial from the beginning, especially by those who opposed the FCC’s approval of ultra-wideband technologies, which employed a type of interference temperature by limiting the amount of interference to those created by other unlicensed devices.
All of the FCC commissioners expressed concern that they must proceed with caution in developing this new concept.
This view was echoed by the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association. “The FCC must take care to ensure that a new and untried spectrum-management technique not be allowed to disrupt the millions of consumers already utilizing the airwaves,” said CTIA President Steve Largent. “An interference-temperature approach should only be considered if it can be shown, based on real-world tests, that current consumers would not experience interference as a result of the new uses.”
The FCC’s action came one day after a blue-ribbon panel suggested that the White House moderate spectrum usage disputes and that a public-private research and development consortium be created to help stave off other countries’ advancements in wireless technologies.
But while the report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies was heralded at its Capitol Hill unveiling as a good first look at how spectrum should be managed in the 21st Century, the additional views at the end of the report paint a different picture.
“I cannot align myself with a recommendation that calls for the creation of a joint government-private-sector group whose purpose would be to undertake research and development of commercial wireless technologies. No case has been presented that there is a need for departure from our current practices. Research and development of commercial products ought to remain a private-sector initiative without government interference or largesse,” said Raul Rodriguez, a partner with the law firm of Leventhal, Senter & Lerman. “It is a classic example of industrial policy setting, which would result in a government-sanctioned method of choosing technology winners and losers. This is something best left to the markets to decide.”
Back at the FCC, the agency patted itself on completing the first phase of implementing the recommendations resulting from the World Radiocommunication Conference held last summer in Geneva.
One of the recommendations was allocating spectrum in the 5 GHz band for unlicensed operations. The FCC finished those rules at its meeting.
“Making spectrum available on an unlicensed basis is essential for continued innovation in a wide variety of products and applications that are important to consumers and businesses alike. Unlicensed technologies, like Wi-Fi and other radio local area networks, have broad market potential, including the possible creation of flexible and inexpensive networks to serve both metropolitan and rural areas,” said Matthew Flanigan, president of the Telecommunications Industry Association.
The FCC proposed making the 5 GHz band available for unlicensed operations in May after negotiations with the Pentagon yielded a solution to protect government radars operating in the band. The 5 GHz rules codify the solution requiring unlicensed devices to use frequency selection-listen before transmitting to ensure a selected channel is free.
Thomas stressed that this 255 megahertz combined with spectrum in other unlicensed bands will make wireless broadband even more possible. Others, including FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, disagreed.
“We obviously don’t want to stop here. If we want to have unlicensed devices play the robust role that they should be playing, we need to examine whether we should be designating lower frequency for unlicensed devices-spectrum that might be better suited for last-mile solutions, or whether we can allow higher power levels without creating harmful interference,” said Copps.
