Breaking News
Qualcomm Drives LTE-A to 5 GHz
1/23/2014

A diagram of a unified licensed and unlicensed spectrum, using LTE Advanced. (Source: Qualcomm)
A diagram of a unified licensed and unlicensed spectrum, using LTE Advanced.
(Source: Qualcomm)

Return to Article

View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
LarryM99
User Rank
CEO
Re: What is unlicensed band today may not be unlicensed tomorrow
LarryM99   1/27/2014 1:32:30 PM
NO RATINGS
Good point, @Bert22306. When I heard '5 GHz' I was only thinking of the ISM band there and what damage a carrier would do in it. It does make more sense that they would license other spectrum around it. Thanks for the link to the FCC presentation, BTW. It was interesting.

Bert22306
User Rank
CEO
What is unlicensed band today may not be unlicensed tomorrow
Bert22306   1/26/2014 7:35:04 PM
NO RATINGS
The FCC only licenses frequency bands up to 3700 MHz, but it seems to me pretty obvious that this will have to change over time. As it has had to change in the past.

In order to increase RF channel capacity, ultimately one has to go up in frequency. It has always been thus. Can't do very much FM if you're restricted to LW, MW, or SW. Can't do much TV either. So, to guarantee interference-free FM radio and TV, those higher frequencies became licensed, years ago. Wireless broadband, at the speeds they're talking about for 5G, will have to follow this upward trend in frequency bands too.

Check this out:

http://www.puc.sd.gov/commission/Events/Wireless2004/Mcneil-Furth%20FCC.pdf

Quoting some excerpts:

Unlicensed devices have no vested right to continue using any frequency

But FCC has designated some bands for extensive use by unlicensed devices (e.g., 902-928 MHz, 2400-2483.8 MHz, and 5725 - 5850 MHz)

So bottom line, "the 5 MHz band" is a nebulous concept. Only if operating within the 5725-5850 MHz range can anyone expect "the 5 MHz band" to be unlicensed in the future. My bet is, LTE service up there would end up using a new licensed portion of "the 5 MHz band."

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
Re: Why carriers?
rick merritt   1/26/2014 12:44:32 PM
NO RATINGS
@Alex: Good point. Carriers have a closed model of using only licensed spectrum (then compaining it is scarce).

Will that shift when we get to 5G and push for 28, 29 and 60 GHz premium servcies?

alex_m1
User Rank
CEO
Why carriers?
alex_m1   1/25/2014 5:36:55 AM
NO RATINGS
Since it's unlicensed, why should carriers operate it ? and not consumers (in the wifi model) ? or even small entrepreneurs(for example in an automated pay as you go model or some share model) ? less industry concentration should be usefull.

 

Kinnar
User Rank
CEO
Re: Coexistance will be better
Kinnar   1/25/2014 1:15:20 AM
NO RATINGS
Yes is they get accommodated in the same place where the present WiFi goes then it will surely be limiting the usability of the network as compared to current scenario, but yes at the same time statutory authorities will not allow them to do so especially in the free ISM band.

LarryM99
User Rank
CEO
Re: Coexistance will be better
LarryM99   1/24/2014 7:22:49 PM
NO RATINGS
That depends on the reality of that coexistence. Would carriers have the same power limits as current ISM users? What about channel width? If they start pushing these limits and crowding out competing municipal wifi, for example, then coexistence starts taking a nasty turn. This seems to me like turning the fox loose in the henhouse.

zewde yeraswork
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Coexistance will be better
zewde yeraswork   1/24/2014 10:25:53 AM
NO RATINGS
It will definitely have to coexist with WIFI, and there are and will continue to be questions about what to do with this technology....still, it's pretty exciting to be where we are at with it right now.

Kinnar
User Rank
CEO
Coexistance will be better
Kinnar   1/23/2014 1:52:39 PM
NO RATINGS

If coexisting with WiFi works out for this technology then it will help deployment of the technology in terms of the cost of equipment as Wifi has become much matured and the chip-sets have become cost effective, yes but the coexisting should be demanding fundamental change in the existing Wifi architecture.

JimMcGregor
User Rank
Blogger
This is not going to be easy!
JimMcGregor   1/23/2014 12:03:25 PM
NO RATINGS
While I agree that this would increase the utilization of available bands, which is key to meeting bandwidth demands, seeking approval will be difficult.

Top Comments of the Week
August Cartoon Caption Winner!
August Cartoon Caption Winner!
"All the King's horses and all the KIng's men gave up on Humpty, so they handed the problem off to Engineering."
5 comments
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.
Flash Poll