The Feds Vacate Airwaves

dada21 writes to tell us UPI is reporting that the government is getting ready to spend $936 million to move its radio communication to an obscure segment of the spectrum to make room for next-generation mobile tech. From the article: "'With 90 megahertz of additional spectrum, today's cellular carriers will be tomorrow's next-generation broadband providers,' Michael D. Gallagher, assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information, said in a statement."

Comments

value

[User 956]

the government is getting ready to spend $936 million to move its radio communication to an obscure segment of the spectrum to make room for next-generation mobile tech.

Yeah, but how many billions is their currently-used chunk of spectrum worth on the open market?

Re:value

[dada21]

I believe TFA says about US$2 billion, with some of it already sold. They also talk about selling more radio stations off, as well.

Why Sell It?

[Bellum Aeternus]

Why does our government feel the need to auction off the spectrum? Why can't they just increase the amount of availble spectrum ear marked for general purpose use? The now famous WiFi uses public spectrum and is easily the most famous radio - except perhaps radio itself.

Selling the spectrum will only accomplish two things: 1) Make some rich companies richer. 2) reduce innovation because only said companies can use the newly availble spectrum.

Re:Why Sell It?

[dada21]

I agree with you. I blogged about it today, before I submitted the article to slashdot. I'd love to see a bigger experiment from the FCC on privatizing and anarchizing (sp?) airwaves to see how it works.

You'll likely see some responses here from people on how their neighbor's microwave screws with their WiFi, but I run and maintain 25 WiFi networks for friends and family and we don't have a problem with a single network. I even offer my WiFi connection free to all my neighbors and they don't even call with tech support questions.

Re:Why Sell It?

[Chris Burke]

Why does our government feel the need to auction off the spectrum?

Selling the spectrum will only accomplish two things: 1) Make some rich companies richer. 2) reduce innovation because only said companies can use the newly availble spectrum.


Question, meet Answer.

Re:Why Sell It?

[kbielefe]

WiFi does not use "public spectrum." It falls under part 15 rules and therefore uses spectrum that is allocated to licensed users, at extremely low power, with the understanding that it must not cause interference and must accept any interference. In other words, your WiFi router has no more right to transmit on that channel than your neighbor's microwave oven has.

As a licensed user of several of the WiFi channels I can transmit at 1500 watts over an entire city, if necessary to establish communication, and can interfere with any unlicensed WiFi routers on my channel with impunity. Not only that, if any of those routers are interfering with my signal, they are legally required to shut down or at least change channel.

Think that's unfair? The designers of WiFi were aware of those requirements when they first selected the frequencies. Luckily for all you unlicensed users of WiFi, most of us hams are nice guys who like WiFi for our own networks, and are excited about the availability of cheap hardware for using that part of the spectrum.

Re:It's a good start.

[User 956]

Now if only they would vacate the country...

they're working on that one. Unfortunately, it will probably be after they've spent all the money.

Re:It's a good start.

[dada21]

This is true -- and why I've moved entirely to a personal gold standard for currency.

In the past 15 years, they had numerous ways to spend -- direct taxes, indirect taxes, fake social security lockboxes and the worst -- currency inflation. Now that China, Russia and the Middle East are losing faith in the US dollar, they won't be able to inflate as much, right? Wrong. In March 2006, our government has decided to stop reporting the M3 Money Supply figures -- the figures that tell the world how much counterfeit money the central bank prints.

And they think this will make the dollar more stable?

9/11 radio problems not solved?

[asadodetira]

This move might be another step in the wrong direction. If i'm not mistaken in a NPR radio show an expert said that some current commercial frequencies would be extremely useful for emergency responders since they can reach deeper inside buildings. They attributed the misuse of airwaves to lobby of big media groups. Apparently a lot of the rescue radio communication problems detected after 9/11 have not been solved, changes can be quickly made when there's a commercial reason.

Re:9/11 radio problems not solved?

[LWATCDR]

I read that Sprint/NexTel is selling the IDEN network that Nextel uses to the government. The PPT "walkie talkie" system plus the nation wide network should work pretty well for "first" responders. How well does it work in buildings? I have no idea. I do know that Sprint got a nice chunk of spectrum in WiMax range in exchange for the IDEN network.

Re:9/11 radio problems not solved?

[josecanuc]

The problem of emergency responder and public safety radio system (non)interoperability grows out of the history of growth of the systems.

In the beginning, each agency had one or a few dedicated frequencies for communcation. The fire department might have 3 channels labeled "Primary", "Secondary", and "Tactical". Each of those would correspond to a pair of frequencies known as a "repeater pair". One frequency is the "input" to the repeater, and the other, the "output". In "idle", each radio is listening to the "output" frequency. When a fireman transmits on the radio, it transmits on the "input". The repeater listens to the input constantly. When it senses someone transmitting on the input frequency, it fires up it's transmitter on the output frequency and passes the audio from the input receiver to the output transmitter.

(Not much has changed since then)

Each agency (police, fire, waste, roads & bridges, etc.) of a city, plus county(parish), state, and federal agengies was in direct administrative control over their frequencies (an therefore channels). The fire department would apply with the FCC for a license for 3 repeater pairs, and the FCC would say, you can use pairs X, Y, and Z at no more than P Watts of power. The FCC determined this by ensuring that pairs X, Y, and Z were not used elsewhere in a geographical proximity that would likely be breached by a transmitter at the fire department's location based on RF propogation models at the given frequencies and terrain.

Now, in a bigger sense, the FCC also defined the allocation of the RF spectrum for the entire radio electromagnetic radation spectrum. Not on an individual basis, but on a functional basis. Like, 150MHz - 158MHz is allocated for public safety use, and therefore frequency pairs in that "band" would be available for individual licensing to any public safety agency (police, fire, EMS, etc.) Great amounts of spectrum are currently allocated for "federal" use. Note that not all RF use is for voice communication. Some is set aside for radioastronomy: no licenses are given to allow transmitting there, so radioastronomers can be certain that if they listen in that band, there will be less human interference than if they just picked any arbitrary frequency band to monitor.

As the technology improved and became cheaper, it became possible to utilize higher and higher frequencies. As such, whenever a band seemed "crowded", and the FCC opened up a higher band for the same purpose, it opened up a wider band. Wider bands means the same number of available channelized frequencies in the pool could be wider, and therefore carry better sound quality. Alternatively, the same quality could result with a higher count of "channels" in a band.

Public safety and city maintenance radio systems used to operate around 30MHz and 50MHz (about 10meter and 6meter wavelenths). Those gave good range -- the radio energy from the repeater and mobile radios was not attenuated by the atmosphere too much. As the frequency increases, though, the attenuation (lessening) of the signal strength by the various components of the air increases. At the same time, there is less "other" RF energy floating around from such things as the sun and lightning in storms, so the end result was to have slightly increased power requirements on transmitters and vastly increased voice quality and vastly increased equipment maintainability. Much of RF engineering has to do with the real wavelength, so as you go shorter in wavelenth, some of your filtering hardware can get smaller and more compact.

Eventually, every little city had a dozen or so frequencies allocated to various agencies within. It was a very inefficient use of the scarce resource of RF spectrum. If the fire department of Podunk, WV had 3 frequencies allocated to it, no other agency within, say, 100 miles could be allocated those frequencies. And you have to realize also that an FM-modulated voice signal has a real "bandwidth", and so you had to space out the "channels" of available frequenc

Not with their greed

[Generic Guy]

today's cellular carriers will be tomorrow's next-generation broadband providers

No they won't. With the greed and unwillingness to give customers what they really want the cell carriers shown already that they'll overprice, meter, and "extra-cost" everything. No thanks.

Re:It's a good start.

[m50d]

And they think this will make the dollar more stable?

Yes. This will mean noone knows that they're stepping up production to keep the US on top because the value of the dollar is basically collapsing. As long as noone notices it's about to collapse, it doesn't collapse. That's how finance works.

Non-standard uplink frequency! Grr!

[O]

FTFA: They're going to auction off the 1710-1755 MHz spectrum in addition to the already planned 2110-2155 MHz spectrum.

UMTS: "The specific frequency bands originally defined by the UMTS standard are 1885-2025 MHz for uplink and 2110-2200 MHz for downlink."

Once again, we can't use the frequencies that the rest of the world uses, so we have to get "Americas" phones with different bands or wait for Nokia et al to release "6-band" (800, 900, 1800, 1900, Euro/Japan UMTS, Americas UMTS) phones. Goddammit!

Does this mean...

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this mean that tinfoil will no longer be effective?

Karma whore; pretty chart

[michaelmalak]

U.S. Frequency Allocation Chart

The frequencies discussed in the article, 1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz, can be found on the right side of the fifth bar.

Re:about bloody time the feds gave something back

[rabtech]

the government controls 99% of the spectrum, useable and experimental, and this is the first time they have ever given back a single kilocycle of allocation. in the past, it has always been nonprofit, public safety, and commercial use that has been tagged for reallocations.

congratulations for finally stepping up to the plate, and many more for uncle selfish.

Actually that isn't true... check the chart at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf

The vast majority of the spectrum is non-government exclusive or shared government/non-government. Only the sections with RED under them are government-exclusive allocations.