5GHz Consultation Event – Second Round
Friday 2 June 2000

Agenda

The Attendance list is available.

Workshop proposals

Group 1

What is the high volume sales application in these bands?

The list of applications that were returned in the first round differs from our proposed list in the level of detail given. We suggested broad services; we received back the following:

• Public access to high speed data networks

• Local delivery of broad band internet access

• ‘last mile’ distribution

• high speed data office and home applications

• conference and classroom/lecture theatre scenarios

• video point to point

• portable video

• short range links in transport environments such as railway platforms

• vehicle to vehicle links

• mobility within the corporate network for notebook/laptop

• IP access to ISPs

• Hot spot access for travelling business people at locations like airports, conference centres and hotels

• Infotainment

• High quality voice and video to the nomadic user

• Dispersing an incoming broadcast signal around the home

• Linking multiple users within a building

• Uses ancillary to programme making

• Outdoor campus LANs

• Indoor wireless LANs

• Interactive museum guides

Completion of 3G cellular services with Hiperlan type services for corporate and home environments.

No indication has been given of where the largest volume market lies. The answer to this question is key to all decisions on the future of the bands, especially issues concerning partitioning and the potential introduction of public services

Summary of Group 1 Meeting

Group 2

Co-ordinated regulated services versus licence exemption, what kind of regime is best suited to the development of this market? What kind of restrictions should apply?

In the first round there was a clearly identified need for some co-ordinated, regulated services. However there is an established requirement for licence exempt services. How should these two markets be evaluated against each other? Should there be provision for public services in licence exempt spectrum? If so, how should it be co-ordinated?

Summary of Group 2 Meeting

Group 3

HIPERLAN Type 2 versus other standards.

What is the future for HIPERLAN Type 1? Should IEEE 802.11a be permitted in UK and Europe? With or without complying to the ERC Decision? What restrictions should apply?

Summary of Group 3 Meeting

Group 4

Band partitioning. What are the trade offs?

Should HIPERLAN Type 1 be partitioned from HIPERLAN Type 2 and IEEE 802.11a? Should licensed and licence exempt services be partitioned? If public access systems are permitted should they have access to licence exempt spectrum and licensed spectrum?

Summary of Group 4 Meeting

Group 5

How much spectrum is really needed for these services?

This question depends on the applications that will be deployed. What are the required bit rates? How many devices are to be sold? How much coverage is required, over what distances? What are the re-use distances? Is equipment going to be service specific or will one box serve all?

Summary of Group 5 Meeting

RA Proposals

1. IEEE 802.11a be permitted to operate in these bands.

2. The question of HIPERLAN 0 versus just acceptance of IEEE 802.11a should be investigated further. The initial position, based on the results of the consultation, is that HIPERLAN 0 is not a sound proposition because of the need to foster co-existence between competing systems, especially in sub-bands used for licence exempt operation.

3. The bands be partitioned according to the following plan:

Band	Use
5150-5250 MHz	HIPERLAN Type 1 for indoor systems only, licences exempt. Max EIRP 200mW. This use to be reviewed after two years
5250-5350 MHz	HIPERLAN Type 2/IEEE 802.11a, for indoor systems only, licence exempt. Max EIRP 200mW
5470-5550 MHz	HIPERLAN Type 2/IEEE 802.11a, licence exempt. Outdoor and indoor systems. Max EIRP 1W
5570-5725 MHz	HIPERLAN Type 2/IEEE 802.11a, for systems on a licensed basis. Outdoor and indoor systems. Max EIRP 1W
5725-5875	Low power devices, licence exempt. Max EIRP 25 mW

4. Licensing and regulation issues should follow from the partitioning of the band. If there is a clearly demonstrated requirement for a part of the band to be ring fenced for public networks, then that service should be regulated by licensing if it is to be used by national networks. If some of the band is to be used by smaller local services e.g. ISPs, educational networks and community services then there is more scope to devise a low cost, easy entry to the spectrum regime that may be more appropriate for the types of service envisaged.

5. Public access systems in this band be further regulated to enhance/enable small regional ISPs and or other local and community services to gain access to spectrum.

6. Widespread, licence exempt and comprehensive access to spectrum for private networks should be retained.

Notes

• Band partitioning is the key issue. The consultation results showed that the majority of respondents were in favour. This consultation covers a huge tranche of spectrum (455 MHz HIPERLAN plus 150 MHz ISM) and some partition must be inevitable. Licence exempt uncoordinated spectrum use has advantages to certain types of users but is not the best use of spectrum for services requiring guaranteed quality of service levels.

• Only 5150-5250 MHz has currently been agreed by footnote in the Radio Regulation as an allocation to the mobile services by the ITU-R. The ERC Decision has allocated the other parts of the band within Europe only.