Roger,
Thank you for the clarifications.
I approve.
Jerry Upton
In a message dated 1/5/2005 2:12:45 PM Central Standard Time, r.b.marks@ieee.org writes:
>Roger,
>I confused by the answer below.
>It is my understanding that the 2500-2690 MHz band is allocated to
>IMTS2000. What is the relationship to space services? I do realize
>that there is a proposed position to allow individual authorities to
>waive this allocation and use the band for other purposes.
Jerry,
No, this band is not allocated to IMT-2000. It
has been identified for IMT-2000 applications,
but this doesn't preclude other applications. The
allocations in the ITU Radio Regulations, of
course, are not to standards like IMT-2000 but to
Radiocommunication Services, such as the mobile
service, the fixed service, the mobile satellite
service, etc.
>However, I am not aware of any space services sharing with terrestrial
>services proposals. I will appreciate any update on my understanding.
There are currently many service allocations in
the band. The details have been compiled by Joint
Task Group 6/8/9 in Document 6-8-9/6-E. If you
check there, you will find many space as well as
terrestrial services. That's a key reason that
JTG 6-8-9 was created. JTG 6-8-9 is "tasked to
conduct studies of the technical, operational and
regulatory provisions applicable to the use of
the band 2 500-2 690 MHz by space services in
order to facilitate sharing with current and
future terrestrial services..."
>I also suggest an editorial change on the third paragraph of the
>"Introduction." The statement in the second sentence "....this
>standard will be a significant part of future broadband wireless
>services...." is conjecture. It does seem necessary nor appropriate
>for one standards body to send another standards body conjecture.
> I request that the complete sentence be deleted.
I prefer not to delete that sentence. First of
all, it includes specific content on the types of
user devices supported by the standard. Also,
while I agree that the statement is conjectural,
I disagree that we are writing to a standards
body. We are writing to a body preparing an
analysis of future scenarios, and that analysis
needs to be based on assumptions of about those
scenarios. I think that it is appropriate to 802
to take the position that 802.16 will be a
"significant part of future broadband wireless
services." If we didn't believe that, we may as
well close down our work. But I am convinced that
the 266 people already preregistered for our
interim in China next month do believe it.
> Finally were the 802.16e estimates included in
>the tables approved by the Task Group members?
The entire document was reviewed by the 802.16
WG. The WG unanimously passed this motion on 18
November: "To task the ITU-R Liaison Official,
José Costa, working with the ad hoc ITU-R liaison
group active at Session #34, to draft a
contribution to ITU-R JTG 6-8-9 on the topic
described in IEEE L802.1604/14. The WG Chair is
authorized to submit the document to the IEEE 802
Executive Committee for approval by email ballot,
with the intent to submit to ITU-R as an IEEE
contribution." Although I was authorized to
submit the ad hoc's output for EC approval, I
first posted it to the 802.16 reflector for
comments. Comments were accepted and resolved.
The revised version was again posted to the
reflector for comment, but no further comments
were received.
> I vote disapprove pending answers to my questions and editorial request.
> Regards,
> Jerry Upton
Regards,
Roger
>In a message dated 1/3/2005 2:46:03 PM Central
>Standard Time, r.b.marks@IEEE.ORG writes:
>
>Mike Takefman wrote and asked me "What is it you are trying to
>achieve with the submission?"
>
>Good question. Since this is not obvious, I'll copy the EC.
>
>The submittal is intended for ITU-R Joint Task Group 6-8-9, whose
>purpose is to prepare a draft addressing WRC-07 Agenda Item 1.9: "to
>review the technical, operational and regulatory provisions
>applicable to the use of the band 2500-2690 MHz by space services in
>order to facilitate sharing with current and future terrestrial
>services..."
>
>In other words, they are studying issues related to the sharing of
>this band between satellite and terrestrial services. One of the
>specific topics includes "Characteristics of terrestrial systems". We
>provided some initial information for their previous meeting, and
>they they are looking for additional detail. That's what's in the
>document.
>
>You can find more background information in:
> http://ieee802.org/16/liaison/docs/L80216-04_11.pdf
>
>Roger
>
>
>Roger B. Marks wrote:
>>Paul,
>>
>>I would like to put the following motion before the EC:
>>
>>"Motion: To approve IEEE L802.16-04/42r2, with the intent to submit
>>to ITU-R as an IEEE contribution, subject to editorial revision."
>>
>>The document is available at:
>> http://ieee802.org/16/liaison/docs/L80216-04_42r2.pdf
>>
>>Notes:
>>
>>*802.18 Chair Mike Lynch would like to second the motion.
>>
>>*I am requesting that the EC ballot close on January 13 in order to
>>make a submission deadline.
>>
>>*This is a followup to a "placeholder" contribution submitted to ITU
>>by IEEE (via 802.18 and 802) in March 2004:
>> http://ieee802.org/16/liaison/docs/L80216-04_11.pdf
>>
>>I appreciate the EC's indulgence in reviewing this document, given
>>the other ballots currently underway.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
> >Roger
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
|