stds-802-16: 802.18 discussions on FCC study of WCA MDS/ITFS paper
I am sure that many of you are aware of the FCC's request for
comments (with a 14 November deadline):
(<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-2732A1.pdf>
of the paper "A Proposal for Revising the MDS and ITFS Regulatory
Regime," submitted by the Wireless Communications Association et al.
on 7 October. According to the request for comments, "The proposal
states that further rule changes are needed to facilitate provision
of two-way fixed and mobile services, while allowing others to
continue to provide one-way video services."
Carl Stevenson, Chair of the IEEE 802.18 Radio Regulatory TAG, has
just raised this issue with 802.18 and with the WiFi Alliance
(formerly "WECA"; Carl calls it "WFA" below).
Carl has done some legwork here, and the issue may come up in front
of 802.18, depending, of course, of the efforts and contributions of
the members.
If you have an interest in this area, I encourage you to play a role.
Any contributions to 802.18 would be strengthened if they had the
endorsement of 802.16. Therefore, I encourage you to bring any
contributions on this topic to the 802.16 Opening Plenary for review.
Let me know if you'd like agenda time.
Roger
>All,
>
>I spoke today with Mr. Oliver of the FCC WTB, regarding a possible
>extension of the comment deadline in this proceeding, explaining the
>meeting cycles and approval processes of both the WFA and 802/802.18
>...
>
>His response was that it would not be necessary to seek an extension
>of time, as this item is more or less simply seeking comments on the
>"White Paper" submitted by WCA/NIA/CTN, with an eye towards
>eventually drafting an NPRM.
>
>I told him that I *personally* thought that we (WFA and 802/802.18,
>respectively), as well as individual companies, *might* wish to
>submit comments, but that due to the volume of material presented at
>a late date and our meeting cycles and approval processes it would
>be impossible to meet the Nov. 14 comment deadline.
>
>Again, he assured me that any comments submitted would be considered
>in the crafting of an NPRM, and pointed out that at this point the
>Ex Parte rules don't apply.
>
>In light of this feedback, I will not bother to file a request for
>an extension of the comment period, either on behalf of Agere
>Systems or 802.18 (as I had indicated last night I might do) ...
>however, I think that both the WFA committee and 802.18 should
>consider potential responses to the request for comment embodied in
>the Public Notice and in Mr. Oliver's e-mail inquiry to the WFA.
>
>Regards,
>
>Carl R. Stevenson
>Senior Manager, Standards and Regulatory Affairs, Agere Systems
>Chair, IEEE 802.18 Radio Regulatory Technical Advisory Group
>610-965-8799 (home office)
>610-712-3217 (fax mailbox)
>610-570-6168 (mobile)
>Short Message Service: 6105706168@voicestream.net