Future 600 MHz band & OTHER discussion thread (was "Sprint + 600 MHz?")

[rf40928]

 @ Fraydog

 

 

 

 Clearwires TD is nice.. and another thing that makes it nice is its already in some cities. Its fairly cost effective to deploy and unlike what you see now .. bandwidth can be moved by the equipment itself at individual towers during peak times. TD Speeds aren't bad either.. around 100  download.. usually avg around 50 to 70 download.. Honestly no one needs that speed on a smartphone.  I have 50 Mb down and 5 Mb up at home on my cable.  None of our smart devices or online gaming ever stutters.  The one thing about the small screen on a smartphone is HD takes up a lot less bandwidth... so high speeds are more about bragging then usage.  On a smartphone you can easily stream an HD movie with a steady 3-4 Mb down connection..

 

Yes FDD is nice because it has lower latency on longer range, but the way Sprint would implement TD 2500 MHz ( in dense city areas ) this advantage wouldn't matter - because the distances would be shorter with those towers being there in areas where there are a lot of towers and those towers would also be Sprint tri-band - so lots of spectrum would already be there with the 800 Mhz and 1900 Mhz - with just even more to cover busy times.. So latency wouldn't be an issue because there would be none worth noting at short distances..

 

Back to what I said above in the 1st paragraph: Ive seen in some cities now where Verizon/ATT where download is 8 and upload is 9... In cases like this where the upload is faster then the download its because the tower is overloaded.. The download goes down, but the upload stays good because people use much less of it.   With TD if the tower is running (at say rush hour traffic)  and downloads ( would normally ) slow alot. ... it'll move some of the upload speed and make it available to the download.. upload speed typically is less important overall.. so it can be moved during busy times..

 

When 2500Mhz  combines with 800Mhz and 1900 MHZ LTE it should be very smooth..  With Sprints new budget things will change much faster.  SPrints old budget called for around a $5 Billion dollar budget for immediate NV upgrades and another 10 Billion over 7 years.  Well.... that was before Softbank said "We're going to infuse $16 Billion into Sprint in the 1st two years - most of which will be used for upgrading the network" ... Softbank ( Sprint new majority owner ) has clearly said he wants Sprint to be a real competitor to the big players ( ATT/ Verizon )... The major factor in that happening in the past was the lack of money.. Suddenly there's a lot more money..

 

Qualcomm usually wins those battles with the FCC. See past history as a guide.

I can only hope that Sprint's Plan B is the T-Mobile FDD plan. Of all the plans I would prefer that over Sprint's.

[rf40928]

@ Fraydog ( or anyone interested )

 

More on reading.. this article points to why TDD is a better choice over FDD.. for those interested in how Sprint's newly acquired Clearwire 2500 Mhz TDD 4G LTE will help Sprint..

http://electronicdesign.com/communications/what-s-difference-between-fdd-and-tdd

 

As different spectrums become re-purposed and available TDD looks like a better choice.  Sprints tri-band will help a lot.. and if they aquire 600 Mhz it'll be even better..

[maximus1987/lou99]

@ Fraydog ( or anyone interested )

 

More on reading.. this article points to why TDD is a better choice over FDD.. for those interested in how Sprint's newly acquired Clearwire 2500 Mhz TDD 4G LTE will help Sprint..

http://electronicdesign.com/communications/what-s-difference-between-fdd-and-tdd

 

As different spectrums become re-purposed and available TDD looks like a better choice. Sprints tri-band will help a lot.. and if they aquire 600 Mhz it'll be even better..

This article explains why Qualcomm says TDD is a bad idea for 600 MHz.

 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view;jsessionid=M6fmRR0Bv3tbMt62yPSWwnr2jLNc2fCkwvhg0yN7dDMvz6vgKk5p!-1272756975!1291806534?id=7520926650

Edited July 19, 2013 by asdf190

[rf40928]

This article explains why Qualcomm says TDD is a bad idea for 600 MHz.

 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view;jsessionid=M6fmRR0Bv3tbMt62yPSWwnr2jLNc2fCkwvhg0yN7dDMvz6vgKk5p!-1272756975!1291806534?id=7520926650

Thank you....I'll read it, but you gotta keep in mind even if Sprint buys 600 Mhz spectrum it doesn't mean they'll have it in areas ( or implement it ) in areas where they plan on using the current Tri-band ( 800, 1900, 2500 Mhz ) spectrum.. 

 

600 Mhz could be used in areas where they don't or won't use other spectrums due to unfavorable conditions.. 600 Mhz LTE could be used in areas heavily populated by office buildings where 2500 MHz will never be used because it can't penetrate well enough to be used..

[maximus1987/lou99]

Thank you....I'll read it, but you gotta keep in mind even if Sprint buys 600 Mhz spectrum it doesn't mean they'll have it in areas ( or implement it ) in areas where they plan on using the current Tri-band ( 800, 1900, 2500 Mhz ) spectrum..

 

600 Mhz could be used in areas where they don't or won't use other spectrums due to unfavorable conditions.. 600 Mhz LTE could be used in areas heavily populated by office buildings where 2500 MHz will never be used because it can't penetrate well enough to be used..

That has nothing to do with TDD vs FDD. Edited July 19, 2013 by asdf190

[rf40928]

This article explains why Qualcomm says TDD is a bad idea for 600 MHz.

 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view;jsessionid=M6fmRR0Bv3tbMt62yPSWwnr2jLNc2fCkwvhg0yN7dDMvz6vgKk5p!-1272756975!1291806534?id=7520926650

 Well after reading the article Im seeing while TDD maybe bad for 600 Mhz it doesn't at all mean that Sprint can't use 600 Mhz and still use TDD 2500 Mhz in close areas..and TDD on 2500 doesn't necessarily mean TDD on any other band... in this case it can't because Clearwire 2500 uses 20x20 pipes.. much bigger then what Sprint uses for 1900 and 800 Mhz !!  

 

The one thing I gathered that was nice about the new Sprint NV tower sites was that other bands could be added easily.  This means select areas could get 600 Mhz ... I don't know enough to know how Sprint will integrate 2500 Mhz into the whole NV upgrade, but they are going to do it because they are about to release the first TRi-band devices on the Sprint website in a month or so they will be on sale and that means Sprint stores will have them.. These devices always come before the phones so that people who already have mobile hotspot plans or are considering it will have options.  The fact that these devices will be available soon also means to me that Sprint has some 800 Mhz sites readying to be turned on by the end of the year !

[rf40928]

That has nothing to do with TDD vs FDD.

 

 

 

 I know this is slightly off the 600 MHZ Original Poster's topic.. but Im considering how 600 Mhz might be integrated into the current tri-band if Sprint likely buys some 600 Mhz spectrum..

 

I thought Clearwire was strictly TDD, but Youtube has Clearwire FDD speedtest videos..

 

[maximus1987/lou99]

Tri-band is not a rule that Sprint is gonna follow. They're gonna deploy all 4 bands.

 

A mod thinks Sprint will, long term, shift all data traffic to 600 MHz LTE and use 800 for 1xAdvanced. Then, when VoLTE reaches equal robustness as 1xA, VoLTE will be deployed on 800. 1900 will be "main" band in the sense that it'll get deployed on every tower and 2500 will go where there's capacity constraints.

 

But 600 MHz won't come into the equation for 3 years at least which is why "triband" is thrown around so much.

 

Clearwire IS strictly TDD. WiMAX is TDD.

Edited July 19, 2013 by asdf190

[rf40928]

..

Tri-band is not a rule that Sprint is gonna follow. They're gonna deploy all 4 bands.

 

A mod thinks Sprint will, long term, shift all data traffic to 600 MHz and use 800 for 1xAdvanced. 1900 will be "main" band in the sense that it'll get deployed on every tower and 2500 will go where there's capacity constraints.

 

But 600 MHz won't come into the equation for 3 years at least which is why "triband" is thrown around so much.

That theory makes sense & I don't see why Sprint won't buy what it can of 600 Mhz, but the question is how much can it get and that leads to "what-ifs". 

 

It'll add to capacity which will need to go up not down with more subscribers... If they can't get enough 600 Mhz they may not be able to move ALL data there: As people are talking less& less  and using data more & more..In three more years Im sure fliphones will be dead.. right now 3 or 4 outta 10 still have them.. It might make more sense to use both bands for data..  from a quality point of view there is very little difference between 600 and 800 Mhz it'll add to capacity in areas where there isn't enough 800 Mhz ... 600 Mhz could help fill holes in major cities like NYC, Chicago, LA....where business class accounts must have the highest quality present..

 

While its possible - I'd think you'd be wasting bandwidth if you used 800 strictly for 1xAdvanced..we don't need all of the 800 Mhz spectrum for HD Voice because people talking less every year

[jefbal99]

Clearwire IS strictly TDD. WiMAX is TDD.

Clearwire and WiMAX are not TDD, the spectrum they control, BRS/EBS, is setup by the FCC as TDD.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

[WiWavelength]

Clearwire and WiMAX are not TDD, the spectrum they control, BRS/EBS, is setup by the FCC as TDD.

 

Actually, mobile WiMAX is all TDD.

 

AJ

[Nickel]

Actually, mobile WiMAX is all TDD.

 

AJ

Which is probably a big reason why it's had so little success, right? I'm guessing most countries do like the FCC does and gives out blocks of spectrum with uplink and downlink. 

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Which is probably a big reason why it's had so little success, right? I'm guessing most countries do like the FCC does and gives out blocks of spectrum with uplink and downlink.

I could be wrong, as I'm still learning all of this. But, isn't most of the world utilizing Time Division as opposed to Frequency Division architecture? I thought the US was one of the only countries to mainly use FDD?

 

As for WiMax never really taking off, I believe that has more to do with the fact that LTE has more potential in its ability to handle traffic and features higher theoretical speeds. If I'm wrong, please correct me as I'm a total newbie.

 

 

Sent from my Sprint iPhone 5, not the old one (using Tapatalk 2).

[mozamcrew]

I could be wrong, as I'm still learning all of this. But, isn't most of the world utilizing Time Division as opposed to Frequency Division architecture? I thought the US was one of the only countries to mainly use FDD?

 

Sent from my Sprint iPhone 5, not the old one (using Tapatalk 2)

I assume most countries have some of both? Here's a good question. Will the WCS spectrum get a TDD or FDD band plan? Or does it already have a band plan that I don't know about?

[maximus1987/lou99]

I assume most countries have some of both? Here's a good question. Will the WCS spectrum get a TDD or FDD band plan? Or does it already have a band plan that I don't know about?

FDD.

[Nickel]

I could be wrong, as I'm still learning all of this. But, isn't most of the world utilizing Time Division as opposed to Frequency Division architecture? I thought the US was one of the only countries to mainly use FDD?

 

As for WiMax never really taking off, I believe that has more to do with the fact that LTE has more potential in its ability to handle traffic and features higher theoretical speeds. If I'm wrong, please correct me as I'm a total newbie.

 

 

Sent from my Sprint iPhone 5, not the old one (using Tapatalk 2).

As far as your first point, no because for something to be TDD it needs it's own separate band, so bands 1 and 3, which are very common, are FDD. You could be thinking of China, which seems to favor TDD. Also, outside of the 600 MHz mess I've never heard of TDD below 2 GHz, so it may not do very well in those common frequencies.

 

As far as your second point, I think it has more to do with easily integrating existing 3G, as to why LTE won.

 

I assume most countries have some of both? Here's a good question. Will the WCS spectrum get a TDD or FDD band plan? Or does it already have a band plan that I don't know about?

I'm pretty sure it's FDD, since 1. it's going to be band 30 and 2. the FCC has already divided it up into blocks.

[WiWavelength]

I'm pretty sure it's FDD, since 1. it's going to be band 30 and 2. the FCC has already divided it up into blocks.

 

The WCS 2300 MHz band plan has existed for more than 15 years and includes both FDD and TDD.  But for band 30 LTE, only the FDD blocks will be utilized.

 

AJ

[Txmtx]

@ Fraydog ( or anyone interested )

 

More on reading.. this article points to why TDD is a better choice over FDD.. for those interested in how Sprint's newly acquired Clearwire 2500 Mhz TDD 4G LTE will help Sprint..

http://electronicdesign.com/communications/what-s-difference-between-fdd-and-tdd

 

As different spectrums become re-purposed and available TDD looks like a better choice. Sprints tri-band will help a lot.. and if they aquire 600 Mhz it'll be even better..

That article must have been written by a first-year RF engineering student, or perhaps even not an engineer at all. The Qualcomm one is much more correct.

 

It says a TDD implementation requires half the spectrum even before considering guard bands. Silly. Presuming the same modulation method and ignoring basically all the little things which can be ignored in this discussion, you can transmit exactly the same amount of data for a given size channel. As in, the gross bit rate is the same.

 

Consider 64QAM, with a channel width of 10MHz for the sake of argument. 64QAM yields 6 bits per symbol. 10MHz of course is the baud rate (symbols per second) allowing for 60Mb/s gross bitrate.

 

If you are using 2x10 for FDD, that is a capacity of 20 MHz, and would require a channel of 20 MHz to accomplish the same thing with TDD, using 64QAM.

 

The point of being able to dynamically alter the asymmetry of the link is a true benefit of TDD, as opposed to FDD, at least in theory. As is the increased ease of beamforming (also in theory).

 

And, TDD is not immune from waste, as it requires a guard band around itself just the same -- though perhaps less than to keep uplink-downlink separate for FDD. It also employs "guard timeslots" which must be considered as wasted spectrum. Lower carrier frequencies propagate further and therefore require longer guard timeslots relative to transmitted power. 600MHz would definitely be the poorest choice of any spectrum we are discussing on this forum, for TDD, even ignoring any harmonic interference with 2.4GHz.

 

Even relative motion creates greater issues in TDD systems greater than in FDD systems. Consider the warbling in some Bluetooth audio transmissions -- Link a phone to a stationary receiver and play music, and wave the phone around. Nope, no TDD for me, not for mobiles at these frequencies.

 

The truest statement that can be made is that spectrum swaths should be kept as wide as possible while permitting competition, because the width of the guard band does not necessarily scale linearly with the channel width. A bunch of 10MHz channels and guard bands all over is a waste, to be sure.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Txmtx

[ericdabbs]

I think at the end of the day the FCC should mandate that the 600 MHz be broken up into FDD blocks. TDD should be kept at frequencies greater than2 GHz.

[WiWavelength]

I think at the end of the day the FCC should mandate that the 600 MHz be broken up into FDD blocks. TDD should be kept at frequencies greater than2 GHz.

In that case, would you be satisfied if the reverse auction were to produce so little FDD spectrum that VZW and AT&T again dominate the auction or even that 600 MHz does not happen?

 

AJ

[maximus1987/lou99]

In that case, would you be satisfied if the reverse auction were to produce so little FDD spectrum that VZW and AT&T again dominate the auction or even that 600 MHz does not happen?

 

AJ

How is your response related to the quote?

[ericdabbs]

In that case, would you be satisfied if the reverse auction were to produce so little FDD spectrum that VZW and AT&T again dominate the auction or even that 600 MHz does not happen?

 

AJ

I am just assuming that the reverse auction is successful. I think the FCC shouldn't ask TV operators to give up their 600 MHz spectrum unless they received commitments for a decent amount of channels from all TV operators in each market to give up their 6 MHz spectrum. If they can only free up 12 MHz on average for example in the entire 600 MHz band they shouldn't even have a 600 MHz auction.

 

To be honest I think the best way to decide between FDD and TDD is to wait until the results of the reverse auction are completed first so we know the total amount of 600 MHz spectrum available for auction in each market and then decide. But if we have say 84 MHz total to auction, I like tmobiles plan for FDD to split into seven 5x5 blocks.

 

Sent from my HP Touchpad using Tapatalk 2

[WiWavelength]

How is your response related to the quote?

I think that you have some research to do...

 

AJ

[Txmtx]

In that case, would you be satisfied if the reverse auction were to produce so little FDD spectrum that VZW and AT&T again dominate the auction or even that 600 MHz does not happen?

 

AJ

Can't speak for him. As for me, I'm pretty libertarian so I'm not a huge fan of mandates at anything, in large part because the FCC is as corruptible and bribe-able, or simply as easily-influenced by larger companies, as any other government organization. Idk how it would work in an anarcho-capitalist environment... I'm sure there would be issues with that too.

 

But in any case, so long as we are in our style of government and economy, I'd like to see the FCC open it to basically the highest bidder but require they demonstrate the plans and funds to properly use it, and them use it and maintain use in a scale as to be expected with increases in tech as the years pass, or face penalties. If they can't develop it they would sell it to someone who can.

 

Anyway. It'd be cool of Sprint got it of course. But since there isn't a drastically huge difference in prop characteristics between 600, 700, and 800, I'd like to see those just each have a presence among carriers for macrocells and in low sub density areas.

 

And I'd really like to see there be some sort of really well-designed system to incentivize easier roaming, maybe through tax credits, based on just how well it impacts access ubiquity in places. That's another topic however

[linhpham2]

There was a House of Reps hearing on the 600mhz incentive auctions on 7/23: http://energycommerce.house.gov/hearing/oversight-incentive-auction-implementation

PR releases from Sprint

http://forums.androidcentral.com/sprint/291874-official-sprint-tri-band-lte-phone-discussion-thread.html

http://forums.androidcentral.com/sprint/291874-official-sprint-tri-band-lte-phone-discussion-thread.html