Jump to content

Sprint: 800 MHz rebanding project nearing completion


Rawvega

Recommended Posts

Rebanding is a separate issue than the IBEZ.  Rebanding can complete along the Mexico and Canada borders and the IBEZ will still persist.  This rebanding is affecting American providers in the SMR band, not international providers in the same spectrum.

 

Until Mexican and Canadian providers stop using narrowband transmissions within Sprint's 800 SMR spectrum holdings on the other side of the border, there will be no resolution to the IBEZ problem.  Until Mexico and Canada rebands themselves, the problem will will not go away.  AFAIK, there is no rebanding occurring north or south of the border.

 

Robert

 

All rebanding along the border regions even if it is an American system has to be coordinated with Mexican or Canadian authorities and licensees, so that a system that is getting rebanded new location is not one that's already occupied by a Canadian or Mexican licensee. At the border regions, even when fully rebanded, there has to be spectrum sharing to minimize interference. There are other ways to minimize interference such as coordinating downtilt and coverage patterns that require extensive coordination. The best solution is to have a border operating company which then sells capacity in the border region to carriers on both sides of the border.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So since Seattle won't be getting 800Mhz for the next 5+ years, does that mean that Sprint will be applying 1x Adv. tech upgrades to 1900Mhz?

 

Our only in-building salvation being the 600Mhz auction forcing us to wait 3-5 years for its separate implementation?

 

Why does Sprint have to be so aggravating for us Seattilites?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So since Seattle won't be getting 800Mhz for the next 5+ years, does that mean that Sprint will be applying 1x Adv. tech upgrades to 1900Mhz?

 

Our only in-building salvation being the 600Mhz auction forcing us to wait 3-5 years for its separate implementation?

 

Why does Sprint have to be so aggravating for us Seattilites?

Blame TELUS and Canadian Public Safety for being pains in the collective ass of Sprint, compare to places like St. Louis where B26 deployment is flying along. The whole build there lumbered slow until March, then the accelerator got hit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone provide me some background information? How does the rebranding affect me?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebranding

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of these days a tell all book will be written about this rebanding boondoggle.

 

Shortly after 800 MHz rebanding is finally complete, I could see many agencies wanting to move to the brand new Upper 700 MHz D block + Public Safety network.  It has spectrum for both broadband and narrowband operations.  That could be the boondoggle.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shortly after 800 MHz rebanding is finally complete, I could see many agencies wanting to move to the brand new Upper 700 MHz D block + Public Safety network. It has spectrum for both broadband and narrowband operations. That could be the boondoggle.

 

AJ

It isn't a boondoggle already, AJ? I'd say it's already a boondoggle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't a boondoggle already, AJ? I'd say it's already a boondoggle.

 

It was a solution that made sense at the time.  But it has taken so long to implement that it is already nearing the end of its usefulness.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a solution that made sense at the time. But it has taken so long to implement that it is already nearing the end of its usefulness.

 

AJ

That's precisely why I think it's already a boondoggle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shortly after 800 MHz rebanding is finally complete, I could see many agencies wanting to move to the brand new Upper 700 MHz D block + Public Safety network.  It has spectrum for both broadband and narrowband operations.  That could be the boondoggle.

 

AJ

I think Sprint would love to finance that move...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's precisely why I think it's already a boondoggle.

 

Many of these public/private projects work out that way.  By the protracted time that they can be funded and implemented, their opportune moments have passed.

 

Look at the Charlotte Coliseum.  It had a useful life of only 15 years, lost the NBA team that it was built to secure, then was demolished.  That is a boondoggle.

 

Had Sprint been able to retire iDEN 800 and switch to CDMA1X 800 years earlier, many of the Public Safety interference concerns likely would have gone away.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once rebanding is complete is there any reason why the ibez should remain so large? Wouldn't a 10 or 15 mile ibez suffice?

 

The ibex will always be large -- especially its horns.

 

Capra_ibex_ibex_%E2%80%93_04.jpg

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does this news confirm that North Carolina is free and clear now, or is this only in reference to squatters and not the public service usage?

Last I heard they are still testing to make sure everything is ok. I'm still trying to get completion that they have handed the keys to the kingdom over to Sprint.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This .doc should shed some light onto the NorCal and Nevada issues. Since it has to do with a municipality and not a privately owned spectrum squatter hopefully it will be ok.

 

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-14-866A1.doc

 

Damn San Bernardino County throwing a monkey wrench in Clark County Band 26 progress.  :censored: 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait so in East Texas with one license remaining, with active b26 and bc10, there may be more spectrum available for use after rebanding?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn San Bernardino County throwing a monkey wrench in Clark County Band 26 progress.  :censored: 

 

San Bernardino County, why you so frickin' huge?

 

:P

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

San Bernardino County, why you so frickin' huge?

 

:P

 

AJ

 

I'm guessing that this a play on a pop culture reference, but I'm drawing a total blank.  :blush:

 

At any rate, I'd amend it to read: San Bernardino County, why you so frickin' SLOOOOOOW?  :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 freaking years and they still have not gotten it done. Un-freaking-believable. I will put most of the blame on the FCC which refused to sanction PS when they delayed time after time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that this a play on a pop culture reference, but I'm drawing a total blank.  :blush:

 

I do not think it is a pop culture reference.  It is a geography reference because San Bernardino County is literally frickin' huge.  If you look at where San Bernardino is located and where Las Vegas is located, San Bernardino County should not be a problem for Clark County, since there should be at least one other county in between them.  But there is not.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This .doc should shed some light onto the NorCal and Nevada issues. Since it has to do with a municipality and not a privately owned spectrum squatter hopefully it will be ok.

 

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-14-866A1.doc

 

Damn San Bernardino County throwing a monkey wrench in Clark County Band 26 progress.  :censored: 

 

Looks like the rest of Nor Cal and Nevada can proceed.  Hopefully we be seeing 800LTE within a few months.

Is there still any issues with a shortage of B26 cards that they have to install?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This .doc should shed some light onto the NorCal and Nevada issues. Since it has to do with a municipality and not a privately owned spectrum squatter hopefully it will be ok.

 

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-14-866A1.doc

 

Damn San Bernardino County throwing a monkey wrench in Clark County Band 26 progress.  :censored: 

 

Thanks for sharing that. Blows my mind that a single county can block an entire state, and it's neighbor, from deploying LTE on SMR. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing that. Blows my mind that a single county can block an entire state, and it's neighbor, from deploying LTE on SMR. 

 

Yeah, it's crazy. Inyo, Tulare and Clark Counties (cumulative population: ~2.5 million) currently being excluded from Band 26 deployment due to a whopping three sites owned by San Bernardino County.  :wall: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's crazy. Inyo, Tulare and Clark Counties (cumulative population: ~2.5 million) currently being excluded from Band 26 deployment due to a whopping three sites owned by San Bernardino County.  :wall: 

 

Yeah bu they are boomer sites! Fry your behind if you're too close. Downtilt...what downtilt? I hope their broadband network is not built the same way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's crazy. Inyo, Tulare and Clark Counties (cumulative population: ~2.5 million) currently being excluded from Band 26 deployment due to a whopping three sites owned by San Bernardino County. :wall:

How can Pahrump not be included in that 80 mile range if Clark County is included? I really have to wonder that. And it's surprising that Visalia isn't able to be exempted. Where does San Bernardino County have these towers located?

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5S using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can Pahrump not be included in that 80 mile range if Clark County is included? I really have to wonder that. And it's surprising that Visalia isn't able to be exempted. Where does San Bernardino County have these towers located?

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5S using Tapatalk 2

I'm pretty sure Sprint cannot deploy B26 in Pahrump either.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • My s24 Ultras auto updated to April 1 security patch over night. Not on wi-fi.  Play system remains at March 1. No notice that update occurred on screen.
    • Got the latest update. On my S24 ultra the NR-ARFCN display remains constant (which is inaccurate according to diags) while n41 and 38 toggle back and forth.  I updated then rebooted before testing. Two sims active. My security patch level updated automatically to April 1 before this update. Diags sent while n38 was displaying.
    • Was able to install the March 1 Android security patch. Seems slightly more accurate with 5g ca band id, but can not swear by it. Updated google play system update through the software information screen to March 1. *#73# still works. Froze updates waiting on SCP update beta to fix n41 showing as n38.
    • Just installed it. Thanks for the info.  71 mb mar 1st date.
    • There's a permit for a new 47 story building at 205 Montague St in Downtown Brooklyn. The problem is that  T-Mobile eNB 48352 is on the building next door and this new building will block two out of 3 sectors of the site. For reference, the new building will be roughly as tall as 16 Court St which is right across the street. This site is the primary site covering Cadman Plaza so I wonder what the plan is. Will they just try to change sector placement, move to a different building, or will this just speed up the conversion of the Sprint site at 25 Monroe Place?
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...