FCC regulatory progress needs worldwide continuation to ensure adoption and progress.
Editor’s Note: In an attempt to broaden our interaction with our readers we have created this Reader Forum for those with something meaningful to say to the wireless industry. We want to keep this as open as possible, but we maintain some editorial control to keep it free of commercials or attacks. Please send along submissions for this section to our editors at: dmeyer@rcrwireless.com.
In the history of wireless networking, regulations on the use of spectrum across the world have played a decisive role in shaping the adoption of technologies and use cases.
Imagine if Wi-Fi, the most well-known unlicensed spectrum technology today, were only available in licensed frequencies and required everyone with a Wi-Fi network (for their business, or even their home) to obtain a license from their local regulator first.
What would the result be? Almost certainly only a fraction of the Wi-Fi networks we have today would exist, with a similarly small and barren ecosystem of devices, services and partners. Compare this to Wi-Fi as we know it today, implemented in billions of devices across the world and the primary method of internet access for hundreds of millions with the term Wi-Fi itself now synonymous with connectivity.
The licensed approach
At the same time, LTE and other cellular technologies use licensed spectrum, where a small number of operators bid huge sums of money, often multiple billions of dollars, for exclusive rights to operate their network on a range of spectrum over a given geographic area, often nationwide.
Whilst it’s hard to argue that this model hasn’t been successful – LTE and other cellular service is available to hundreds of millions of people worldwide, after all – it’s also best suited to lower frequencies, below 1.8 GHz, which travel and penetrate much further than the unlicensed 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands typically used for Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and other noncellular networks, indoors and outdoors.
Due to the long distances these lower frequencies are able to travel, they lend themselves well to the macro-cell deployment model traditionally used for cellular network deployment, a model which itself is well-suited to a licensed spectrum scheme.
Such a scheme is typically put in place to protect operators using the spectrum from harmful interference. This is a worthy goal; after all, cellular carriers must be able to offer a certain level of service across the vast geographic areas they cover, to ensure customer satisfaction and the viability of their own businesses for the long term to justify investment; both into the carrier from outside and by the carrier on new infrastructure.
Protecting network innovation
But, what a spectrum licensing scheme is not put in place to do is ensure that the most innovative use is made of the spectrum. It’s not just the major carriers deploying wireless networks; smaller operators such as local or regional wireless internet service providers, enterprises, governments and non-profit organizations all deploy networks of varying size and capability.
Whilst not all spectrum licensing schemes cost network operators billions of dollars, unlicensed spectrum regulation has proven to allow the most innovative use of spectrum – consider the wide range of uses of the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands today, from long-range outdoor wireless networks connecting otherwise underserved rural areas, to networks in the home, with many use cases that weren’t imagined when the spectrum was first considered for use.
V-Band spectrum, typically considered to be the range of frequencies from 57 GHz to 64 GHz, is a prime example of spectrum that can only reach its fullest innovative potential with unlicensed regulation.
Why V-Band?
Physical characteristics of the V-Band lend it well to unlicensed use. Ideal for shorter-range outdoor use providing gigabits of bandwidth, V-Band transmissions are significantly attenuated not just by their short wavelength but also by the effect of oxygen absorption, which peaks across the 60 GHz frequency range. This means the potential for interference with other operator’s networks is greatly reduced compared to lower frequencies which propagate much further, limiting the impact of any rogue actor.
A typical V-Band link distance is below 1 kilometer, a tiny fraction of that achievable with the lower-frequency spectrum used for LTE and other cellular services with licenses owned by the major carriers.
This attenuation also forces V-Band equipment to use narrower beam widths than is common in lower bands, which often use 90 degree or omnidirectional antennas. The narrower beam widths used by V-Band transmissions, under 10 degrees, are needed to increase the effective range of the transmission but also help to further limit interference to surrounding networks.
Recent FCC progress
The Federal Communications Commission recently made significant encouraging moves in improving the viability of V-Band communications, by increasing the available spectrum and improving power limitations.
Under the FCC, the V-Band now consists of 14 GHz of unlicensed spectrum, spanning 57 to 71 GHz. This is significant not just for doubling the size of the band, but because the spectrum near the top of this newly-expanded frequency range begins to suffer less from oxygen absorption-based attenuation.
In support of network densification
In urban areas, network densification is a key topic for network operators, equipment vendors and end users as we move towards a suite of “5G” technologies capable of meeting the demands that more users, more data and new applications will put on networks worldwide. The traditional macrocell deployment model for cellular technologies has reached its limits, and needs to be supplemented by denser, shorter-range connectivity capable of gigabits of data throughput, from a range of network operators.
Due to its ability to support data throughput measured in gigabits, comparatively short link ranges and narrow beam widths, unlicensed V-Band spectrum will be key to unlocking the capacity and network densification needed in the coming years.
Measuring densification
Today we measure the efficiency of networks in bits per second per hertz; the higher the better, as it means we’re making the best use of the available spectrum. In the next few years as network densification becomes a focus of network enhancements to support the increasing volumes of users and data, a new measurement will be used to evaluate networks:
Bits per second per hertz, per square kilometer – or, the network densification score.
This allows us to measure how much bandwidth is being provided to a given area, not just by one network as we do today but by the sum of all networks in that area. Operators scoring higher will reap the benefits in customer satisfaction and the resulting business success.
The characteristics of V-Band communications make them well-suited to delivering substantial improvements to the network densification score, primarily for urban and suburban areas where they can be connected to a fibre backbone network.
Putting all these factors together, it’s clear that V-Band spectrum must be used in the most innovative way possible worldwide to support the needs of coming years, with market dynamics, service offerings and economics shaping its use, rather than licensing.
Global view
While the FCC has made significant progress in advancing the regulation of V-Band spectrum in a way that provides more opportunity for innovative use of the spectrum, other regulatory bodies across the world are lagging behind. In some countries, the band is prohibited from use, and in others is split into different pieces, some licensed, some lightly-licensed, some unlicensed.
This creates uncertainty for manufacturers of V-Band network equipment. A globally unlicensed approach to V-Band spectrum, following the FCC model, would allow manufacturers significantly more confidence in their market size and allow investment in product development to support future needs.
This is likely to be a multi-year process, as manufacturers and network operators take note of the FCC regulatory changes and adapt their offerings accordingly. As they do so, their counterparts in other countries will see the advantages and begin to pressure their own regulatory bodies for similar changes.
Conclusion
To truly enable network densification in support of 5G infrastructure, organizations such as ETSI and individual government regulatory bodies must ensure the V-Band is regulated in the way that provides the most scope for innovative solutions to be built on it: unlicensed spectrum.
