LTE-U/LAA and 5GHz - potential impact to WiFi users

[sfx2000]

Couple of interesting perspectives...

Pro

http://www.lteuforum.org/uploads/3/5/6/8/3568127/lte-u_forum_lte-u_technical_report_v1.0.pdf

Against

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-iq0rxkyMLyVUxkNWtoUzItZDA/view?pli=1

This is something all will want to keep an eye on...

 

[azazel1024]

I am cautiously pessimistic about it. Despite the built in productions from running roughshod over Wifi and the low penetration and range of 5GHz...it just gets me back to, what is the use case? Where I can see it being used is indoors deployed like traditional wifi to cover the dead zones in places like malls and airports.

My fear is that they'll use it places like outdoors deployments and we will see higher power and higher gain installations, especially in urban areas, to get pseudo "5G" cellular at some point, which will (despite supposed protections) run roughshod over 5GHz wifi.

 

[avtella]

Even Google is against the current attempt at LTE-U on 5Ghz and is trying to get it on 3.5 Ghz in conjunction with Nokia. That might actually be better, longer range and without the WiFi interference issues.

http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/nokia-teaming-google-lte-u-35-ghz-spectrum/2015-09-14

 

[htismaqe]

In the stuff I've seen so far, the assertion is that LTE-U is a better "neighbor" to an existing wifi deployment than another wifi AP.

That seems to be re-iterated in the first article SFX posted.

And field trials of 3.5Ghz deployments are already well underway.

 

[sfx2000]

Like the book of faces, the relationships here are complicated to say the least...

At a very high level - it's unlicensed spectrum, and due to Part 15, WiFi and LTE-U/LAA are secondary users of that spectrum...

Both are allowed to use it, as long as they stay within the limits...

WiFi - lot of people have stake in this, esp considering the crowding of the ISM band (and getting more crowded every day with the IoT rollout), vs. WiFi making major use as a result...

It's a policy issue, as many of the benefactors of LTE-U are also Licensed holders of large swaths of "private" spectrum that they have exclusive use of, and want even more by jumping into the 5GHz unlicensed space as well...

But the interests here go beyond use "Joe Six-Packs" both general users and enthusiasts...

Big Cable has a lot at stake as well, as they've been aggressively using unlicensed spectrum to offer their services inside the home/business on the WLAN front in both 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz as part of "cable WiFi"... so for Big Cable, there is a business interest...

FCC is kind of hands off here - as long as it doesn't interfere with the primary users, there isn't much they can say, so it's down to Big Cable vs. Big Telco vs. the commons of unlicensed spectrum...

If the FCC takes on a Laissez-faire approach, then all is lost, and your personally owned and operated WiFi will be competing against a fairly powerful (and useful) technology with LTE, along with other big business interests deploying carrier grade WIFi commercializing the community commons...

 

[sfx2000]

And this turns around the community use of the public commons...

It's public space, and a tremendous value to the country and to individuals - if one looks at the contribution to the overall economy by the development of WiFi, in many ways, the ISM/UNII bands are huge - and if we put a price on those swaths of spectrum, the return of investment by the regulatory folks cannot be compared to licensed spectrum...

So maybe two approaches...

1) If you're a licensed spectrum holder - stay in your sandbox...

or

2) If you want to graze in the community commons, give something back - free up the white spaces for all to use, or take the other approach and license them based on number of AP's deployed in that space..

 

[azazel1024]

I can kind of appreciate your two suggestions. I now the broad details of LTE-U. It might be a better neighbor than another wifi hotspot, but that doesn't make it a non-existent neighbor. More crowding is more crowding, whether they are polite or rude. I'd prefer less crowding.

I'd also prefer them look at the 3.5GHz space (which requires only open licensing).

Of course I am also firmly against what the cable companies have been doing with their wifi deployments.

 

[stevech]

History says the FCC will yield to whatever entity has the best lobbyists and best prospects for more licensed spectrum auction revenue to the FCC.