| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Dear Apurva, Thanks for your note. I posted it to the 802.16 reflector By following the thread links, you can find the followup discussion. After considering the views expressed, here are my comments: (1) I think that the penultimate paragraph of the draft statement ("We hereby strongly encourage the Indian Government to consider the IEEE 802.22 technology as candidate for the 470 – 698 MHz band in India.") should be deleted, for several reasons: (a) That paragraph arises without any foundation from the IEEE side. Up to that point, the draft statement simply provides information about the 802.22 Working Group. I don't think this substantiates the request. It's not even clear what it means by "the IEEE 802.22 technology." Is it referring to specific functional concepts, or it is referring to the entire draft standard in detail? Or perhaps to something in between? (b) More importantly, that paragraph arises without any foundation from the Indian side. The letter is posed as an "endorsement for the proposal submitted by TICET, IIT Bombay towards the ongoing NFAP revision / review process in India for the 470 – 698 MHz band." However, TICET proposal was proposing NFAP changes to "promote innovative approaches," "reduce entry barriers," "maximize cost-effectiveness," and "ignite research." Nowhere in its paper did TICET discuss identifying a "candidate" for the band. (c) The TICIT proposal is about revising NFAP 2008 towards NFAP 2010. I did a little research and determined that "NFAP" is "National Frequency Allocation Plan." This turns out to be a local version of the ITU Radio Regulations. A "National Frequency Allocation Plan" should not be calling out specific technologies. If anything, we should be congratulating India for keeping technology mandates out of the NFAP. The problematic paragraph seems to be suggesting that the government instead write a technology into the Allocation Plan. Any position like that from the IEEE side would be a mistake. (2) Due to my points in (1), I think that the subject line of the letter ("Use of IEEE 802.22 Technology in the 470 – 698 MHz Band in India") in inappropriate. I think that the subject is "endorsement for the proposal submitted by TICET, IIT Bombay towards the ongoing NFAP revision / review process in India for the 470 – 698 MHz band." (3) The letter should not refer to "IEEE 802.22 Standard" since no such standard exists. (4) The letter should provide references that would document and explain the meaning of the statement that "During the last 5 years, the IEEE 802.22 Working Group has been actively working with the FCC and other regulators to create a standard for world-wide deployment in the TV bands to provide broadband access to the masses." Thanks again for the chance to review the letter. I'd be happy to hear what you think about my comments. Regards, Roger On 2011/02/08, at 11:26 PM, Mody, Apurva (US SSA) wrote:
|