Wireless Internet over TV frequencies a possibility
A coalition of large tech companies is pushing the FCC to allow use of certain frequencies that are no longer used by analog TV. Given the success of Wi-Fi using unlicensed spectrum, many believe that freeing up more frequencies for unlicensed use will push even more innovation. The “White Spaces Coalition” comprised of some big hitters, including Dell, Google, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Microsoft, and Philips, are pushing for use of unused parts of the television analog bands, namely 54MHz to 698MHz, for supporting license-free wireless connections to the Internet. These “white space” frequencies are where TV stations are not operating.
The beauty of this band is that it’s lower in frequency as compared to Wi-Fi, WiMAX and cellular, which affords greater range. This keeps node density low, which of course equates to lower cost infrastructure. The bandwidth potential in the TV band is also relatively wide, which can possibly support higher performance.
Several legislators, including Senator John Kerry, are pushing the FCC to move forward with opening up the unused TV channels for wireless computer connectivity. The FCC has already approved the operation of fixed unlicensed devices in the white spaces starting February 19, 2009, which is the day after analog TV broadcasting will end. The FCC is currently seeking comments on mobile equipment. U.S. Representative Inslee has recently introduced a bill instructing the FCC to finish the approval process of mobile devices and allow operation of mobile devices in white spaces no later than February 18, 2009 and to establish technical requirements that protect incumbent licenses from harmful interference.
This is a technology worth watching. Maybe the use of these unused TV channels could provide the basis for a new wireless standard?
- – - – -
Related posts:
Loading ...
Great to see future spectrum bands getting coverage.
Of course greater range has pros and cons in wireless network design: you can detect the system from further away providing greater coverage, but this also means that you have the potential to interfere with systems further away. The sweet spot frequency for any system is where the requirement for site density due to capacity constraint is about the same as that due to coverage constraints. The greater the coverage, the further from the transmitter interference can be received, the more potentially challenging an unlicensed/licence-exempt deployment.
Personally this spectrum seems more appropriate for rural wireless and low traffic density deployments than metropolitan applications seeking to provide broadband class services, though for a low traffic/bandwidth deployment it could be interesting option. Even for rural deployments the model of spectrum management and public/private deployment is an interesting area of discussion.
While seems great news in the US, the UK is also looking at broadcast TV spectrum for other uses. The full horror of co-ordinated lobbying from the wireless mic community, and the results of broadcasters implying to the public that using the spectrum for anything other than TV will mean “no HD in the UK” can be seen at the Ofcom website for anybody who has the stomach to wade through several hundred responses. For details of the consultation and responses see http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/ddr/ . While this is just the UK it shows a potential disadvantage to the band, that there is risk that the band may not become broadly globally harmonised in the same way as the 2.4GHz or 5GHz bands.