Roger,
All the best in the New Year.
Still a bit strange that the 5A and 5D chairs, if unchanged, are no longer listed as SG5 vice-chairs. If anyone from 802 goes to the 5D meeting in Beijing they can update us.
And I agree with you regarding TG5/1.
BR,
Mike
Sent from my Windows 8.1 Phone
Mike,
The Chairmanship of those Working Parties (5C excepted) is not changing. You can bank on that. WP Chairs are not necessarily SG 5 Vice Chairs.
Anyway, I don’t think those personnel issues are crucial to IEEE. What does matter to us is TG 5/1, the trend toward the identification of high-frequency bands specifically for IMT, and the trend toward IMT expanding to additional applications.
Those are factors that we may need to address.
Happy New Year!
Roger
Roger,
Maybe I’ll be fortunate this time. I started to respond this earlier but when I said to save the message to “drafts” it simply disappeared.
Yes indeed, Study Group 5 and the four Working Parties, are alive and well. But having spoken to the WP5A chair for the study cycle that ended with this WRC he clearly
stated that he wouldn’t be chairing the Working Party in the new session. Likewise for the person that chaired WP5D. The NTIA person who chaired WP5C told me that he was moving over to SG6, Broadcast Services. What is odd is that on the SG5 webpage the list
under “List of Study Group Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen” includes names only of government representatives. The norm is that the WP chairs would be listed as SG vice chairs. The list of WP Chairs and Vice Chairs has not been updated. Maybe that will occur prior
to the scheduled meeting of WP5D in Beijing which begins on February 23rd.
The CPM Report in Chapter 5, Table 1, includes frequencies in the 24.25 – 52.6 GHz range for IMT and notes that there are several overlaps with proposals for other services.
It will be up to the different SGs to try and work out agreements, or proposals, in the form of a report for the next CPM meeting where hopefully many of the issues can be resolved. The CPM Report which will be produced by that meeting (six months prior to
WRC-19 whose date is still not confirmed) will serve as the basis for decisions to be made by WRC-19. That report can indicate that some issues have been resolved or that there are several possible solutions to other issues. It also should be noted that WRC-19
is not bound to accept the recommendations in the CPM Report. No WRC (and I started in that process with WRC-95) has “thrown out” the report, which they could do, but they have not accepted all of the suggestions. A WRC is considered “sovereign”, just as any
Member State is, and cannot be told what it must do.
The reference to “above 6 GHz” in my memory began at the CPM for WRC-97. While it wasn’t formally introduced at that time it certainly was promoted by at least one Asian
Administration and publicized using informal documents made available in the conference center. That term has reappeared at times since then. The context then was that what is now IMT needed an additional 1 GHz of contiguous spectrum to grow in.
You are correct, the term IMT has a defined meaning in the ITU-R. This evening, as I am waiting for the sounds of reindeer on the roof, I’ll go through the Provisional
Acts and see if I can identify where they came up with the term “mobile broadband”. The purpose of having Provisional Acts is to give the Radiocommunication Bureau time to go through all of the various meeting minutes. The time that can take has ranged from
a few months to more than a year. However at the end of the WRC the Member States either sign the treaty agreement or, as in the case of the US, bring the text back for review which may call for submissions to be made to the Radio Regulations Board for clarification,
after which it would be passed to the Senate for approval. At some point in time the Treaty must be ratified (as in the US case) or non-conforming Administrations are penalized.
Have a good holiday!
Best regards,
Mike
Thanks for the post. I’d like to add some alternative views that I think are relevant to 802’s future activities:
The Radiocommunication Assembly (RA) report is available. It’s called the Book of Resolutions < http://www.itu.int/pub/R-VADM-RES-2015>. I don’t believe
that the Radiocommunication Assembly (RA) restructured SG 5. It did appoint the chair and vice chairs, including a new chair to fill a vacancy, and it assigned questions to the SGs. This information is in the Book of Resolutions.
Following the RA, it’s my understanding that SG 5 leadership decided to maintain the current structure of Working Parties (WPs). Also, I believe that the chairs of the WPs will be unchanged, at least with respect to the WPs that 802 has been mostly engaged
with. I don’t anticipate any rotation from private sector to government leadership of the SG 5 WPs.
There will be one change to the SG 5 structure, driven by the Conference Preparatory Meeting for WRC-19 (CPM19-1). CPM decided < http://www.itu.int/md/R00-CA-CIR-0226/en>
“on an exceptional basis” to “invite” SG 5 to create a new Task Group 5/1 (TG 5/1) to conduct preparatory studies on WRC-19 agenda item 1.13, with the TG 5/1 chair to be determined by SG 5. This new TG 5/1 will be relevant to 802, as it deals with IMT in some
specific bands between 24.25 and 86 GHz. The WRC press release talks about “bands above 6 GHz,” but I’m not sure if it includes anything below 24.25 GHz. Note that “the organization of the work of TG 5/1 should be carried
out making maximum use of modern means of communication, including remote participation to the extent practicable.”
Also, I have some different views about the WRC results. While the press release refers to “mobile broadband,” that term is not typically used by WRC. Instead, the WRC identifies bands for “IMT”, which narrowly refers to a particular set of ITU standards, not
to general mobile broadband technologies. Also, while historically IMT would probably be considered “mobile broadband,” is appears that the WRC believes it may grow beyond that application. In particular, the resolution underlying the work of TG 5/1 considers
“that IMT systems are now being evolved to provide diverse usage scenarios and applications such as enhanced mobile broadband, massive machine-type communications and ultra- reliable and low-latency communications.”
I think that a number of these issues are worth considering within 802.
Roger
I have just uploaded to 802.18’s Mentor web site the Provisional Final Acts of WRC-15 (18-15-0073-00-0000) and the Final Press Release (18-15-0074-00-0000) describing the results of the conference.
I expect that the Final Press Release will be useful as it highlights what the ITU-R viewed as significant spectrum related developments of the WRC. The Provisional Final Acts themselves are more than 450 pages.
Among topics that the WRC addressed was the identification of the 3.4 – 3.6 GHz band, and portions of other frequency bands, for mobile broadband services. Also identified for mobile broadband
was the use of the 694 – 790 MHz frequency band in ITU Region 1 (Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Africa). As with any action taken by a WRC it will be up to individual Administrations to develop the rules for the use of those and other bands identified
by the WRC. Spectrum for IMT above 6 GHz will be considered at WRC-19.
Thus far there has not been a report of the outcome of the Radiocommunication Assembly which occurred the week prior to the WRC. One significant change that is known was the restructuring of
Study Group 5 (Terrestrial Services). While previously there had been Private Sector chairs for some Working Parties in SG5 those positions are now filled by Member States. The exact break down of who is chairing Working Party, e.g. WP5D which deals with IMT,
has not appeared on the ITU-R web site.
---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
|