Howard Buskirk

The U.S. table of frequency allocations can differ from the international table because of variations in U.S. rules, FCC Office of Engineering and Technology officials explained during an FCBA lunch Thursday. Attendees heard from Nicholas Oro, deputy chief of the Policy and Rules Division, and Jamie Coleman, chief of the Spectrum Policy Branch. The U.S. doesn’t adopt all the allocations in the international table and may adopt additional allocations, Oro said. Most parts of the table match, he said. Oro noted as one example the supplemental coverage from space (SCS) framework that commissioners approved two weeks ago (see [2403150045). In each of the bands affected, across the 600-700 MHz frequency range, the U.S. table now shows a secondary mobile service allocation, he said. That allocation isn’t included in the international table. “This is kind of the case of the U.S. getting out ahead of the international community,” Oro said. Another example is 6 GHz, where the international table has an allocation for mobile communications but the U.S. table doesn't, he said. Changes to the U.S. table often come through NTIA or as a result of actions during a World Radiocommunication Conference, Oro said. In addition, changes are made as a result of commission orders, he said. All changes require that the FCC seek public comment. NTIA has its own rulebook, the “Manual of Regulations for Federal RF Spectrum Management” or “Redbook,” which applies to federal agencies. Making changes doesn’t require a rulemaking process, Oro said. Coleman said her team at OET is largely responsible for managing the frequency table, ensuring updates are made, checking footnotes and issuing Federal Register updates when needed. “It’s a lot of work,” she said. Her office also works with other parts of the commission “to make sure that we’re properly analyzing … revisions and their impact on other areas of the spectrum.”

Wi-Fi advocates and 6 GHz incumbents clashed on an FCC proposal that would expand parts of the 6 GHz band where new very-low power (VLP) devices can operate without coordination, beyond the initial 850 MHz commissioners approved last year (see 2310190054). The VLP rules took effect March 9. 6 GHz incumbents have lined up in opposition to further changes (see 2403270055).

GSMA members and their “technology partners” are “fully engaged” on the group’s application programmable interface (API) initiative, Alex Sinclair, the association’s chief technology officer, said Wednesday during a TelecomTV webinar. Operators worldwide so far have made about 95 APIs commercially available in 21 markets, he said. “It’s exceeding our initial expectations, but there’s a very, very long way to go,” Sinclair said. GSMA launched the gateway a year ago (see 2302270069). “It’s still early days,” but the response from developers “so far has been pretty positive,” he said. Working with developers isn’t “necessarily” the wireless industry’s “strong suit,” he said: “We have to listen more to what they want and what they need. … At the end of the day, we want to reach as many developers as possible.” Sinclair said it’s too early to draw conclusions on what approach on APIs will work best. “We’ve tried this sort of thing before -- we’re not naive,” he said. “Ultimately, the market will decide what the best channel is.” A McKinsey & Co. study found a potential market of $300 billion by 2030, which is a “pretty bold and big number,” he said. On Tuesday, GSMA announced that China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom launched the first API in China.

The National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Radio Frequencies (CORF) and the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council are concerned about an FCC proposal that expands parts of the 6 GHz band where new very-low power (VLP) devices can operate (see 2310190054). Comments were posted on Wednesday in docket 18-295. The FCC has “recognized the public interest need to protect important radio astronomy and remote sensing observations at 6 GHz” and shouldn’t “undercut the protections already enacted in this proceeding,” CORF said. The 6650-6675.2 MHz band is important “for observations of methanol that play a critical role in research into star formation, astrochemistry, and precision astrometry,” the committee said. Frequencies between 6425 and 7250 MHz are used for passive microwave measurements, with 6425-7075 for ocean remote sensing, CORF said: “Observations at these frequencies are an essential component for both weather prediction and observing climate change.” NPSTC counseled against further liberalizing the rules for the 6 GHz band. “Public safety, critical infrastructure, commercial wireless and broadcast entities rely on this spectrum to support licensed microwave links for their respective operations,” the group said. It's clear from decisions made so far that the commission “has no intention of reversing course in this proceeding,” NPSTC said. If that’s the case “it is imperative that 6 GHz licensees have a viable mechanism to report and expeditiously resolve any 6 GHz harmful interference to critical microwave links that occurs.” The Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) said studies show that unlicensed wideband VLP devices can operate at 14 dBm with a power spectral density of 1 dBm/MHz “without causing harmful interference into incumbent services, and that narrowband VLP devices will provide even greater margin.” The SIG has made a push for Bluetooth devices to be allowed to use 6 GHz spectrum (see [Ref2310270027]). “Bluetooth is an essential unlicensed technology that requires additional spectrum to support the volume growth of existing product categories and to support the technological expansion of important Bluetooth products,” the SIG said. The Wireless Innovation Forum told the FCC it’s “eager” to “support the development of geofencing systems,” one of the FCC’s proposals for protecting 6 GHz incumbents. The group said it could develop “specifications for data systems including any needed enhancements” and work on “propagation models to accommodate possible VLP mobility” and addressing “mobility in spectrum availability determinations.”

CTIA is hopeful a legislative vehicle will be found soon that will restore general FCC auction authority, more than a year after it lapsed, CTIA Senior Vice President-Spectrum Umair Javed said Wednesday during a Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy webcast. “It sort of feels like there’s a lot of smoke, and maybe not fire yet,” Javed said. He hopes a bill floated by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, will provide the needed “spark.”

The 5G Fund order that FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel circulated last week (see 2403200071) is expected to have several gaps that will need addressing with a Further NPRM on a tribal reserve but also through auction public notices, industry officials said. One question that needs answering is how to define open radio access networks, slated to get up to 10% of the $9 billion to be awarded.

Non-terrestrial networks (NTNs) will expand the reach of cellular networks, which is increasingly important when 95% of the U.S. population has abandoned landline phones, David Witkowski, co-chair of the Deployment Working Group at IEEE Future Networks, said during an RCR Wireless webinar Tuesday. Last month, FCC commissioners approved a supplemental coverage from space framework, facilitating carriers working with satellite operators on converged networks (see 2403150045).

Carriers are pushing automation in their radio access networks but “need to be smart” about how they deploy it, Adam Loddeke, AT&T assistant vice president-RAN technology, said Monday during an all-day IEEE virtual workshop. Speakers also discussed how AI can supercharge automation.

Policymakers shouldn’t forget the potential of very high frequency spectrum, the mmWave Coalition said last week in response to the National Science Foundation’s request for information (RFI) on the national spectrum research and development plan, which is part of the national spectrum strategy. The comments have yet to be posted by NSF. Most 5G and 6G discussions so far are focused on lower frequencies, the coalition said. “A key reason for this is that it is hard to justify a business case for sub-THZ mobile spectrum use at present as there are now basic technical questions, technological hurdles, and cost issues, yet these are fertile and active areas of research which may eventually lead to compelling opportunities for mobile use in this spectrum,” the group said. The coalition cited a growing need for wireless backhaul, “especially in rural, underserved areas often where fixed wireless access is vital for rural households, and often backhaul requirements cannot always be implemented in fiber technology, due to installation urgency requirements, local terrain features that delay or block installation, cost, or short term requirements that make fiber optic installation uneconomical.” The Dynamic Spectrum Alliance said the RFI is on target in the areas it suggests for research. “Efficiency, dynamic spectrum access and management, automated interference mitigation, and coexistence modeling are all areas in which the DSA and our members have keen interest and extensive experience,” the alliance said: “We also fully support efforts to study the economic-, market-, social-, and human-centric aspects of increasing spectrum access.” DSA called on the NSF to take into account innovative licensing frameworks that are already working, including the citizens broadband radio service band and 6 GHz. “Given the historical success of the variety of spectrum sharing techniques in different bands designed to protect different incumbents … there is no one size fits all solution to spectrum sharing,” DSA said. AT&T urged the administration to more clearly define the term dynamic spectrum sharing. The definition should include an “examination of full-power licensed use” and “development of a basis for predictable times and/or geographies in which dynamically shared spectrum can be used,” AT&T said. The carrier urged more work on interference mitigation techniques and not restricting research to “mere ‘on/off’ spectrum access controls.” The definition should seek “to define co-channel and adjacent channel interference environments to incorporate into network design and operation.”

Generative and predictive AI have experienced a “huge surge” in interest and discussion, but telecom carriers are mostly taking a cautious approach, recognizing the need for “guardrails” and a phased transition, Ruth Brown, Heavy Reading principal analyst-mobile networks and 5G, said during an Informa Tech webinar Thursday. For example, some carrier executives question whether machines can replace humans in making key decisions, she said. AI-assisted analytics will help providers “pinpoint and rectify faults and security” and assist in “scaling resources” to meet demand, she said. “Understanding this transition is going to be really important … along with ethics around using AI,” she said. For Terje Jensen, senior vice president-network and cloud technology strategy at Norway-based provider Telenor, whether providers will use AI is no longer a debate. Instead, the question is how they will “master” it in a way that’s responsible. Carriers offer “critical infrastructure” and must protect the data and privacy of their customers, he said: “We have to take care on that part.” Providers need to “address the competency and understanding” of staff responsible for AI, he said. For years, Telenor automated many of its operations and is "gradually introducing more AI,” bringing operations “to the next level,” he said. This is a “rather fundamental shift” in how carriers operate, he said. Jensen also said Telenor recognizes the importance of industry standards and collaboration with customers and suppliers. As networks become increasingly complex, operators must manage them with the same staff size, which is “becoming more and more difficult,” said David Allabaugh, Fujitsu software solutions architect. “Full autonomy is a fairly aggressive goal -- we see this as a journey and not a near-term destination,” he said.