600 MHz auction results posted and transition schedule

[mozamcrew]

My question would be "how hard is it to actually retune the gear?"  I'm assuming the 850 MHz gear will need to be replaced when 2G/3G is sunset in that band anyway, but is most of the 700 MHz gear the type that could theoretically get a software update and then be easily shifted by a few MHz?

 

And I'm wondering if with some creative shifting in 700 MHz, you couldn't squeeze a 5x5 out of it.  Recall that Verizon is sitting on 11 MHz wide channels as well, and there's D and E block each on 6 MHz.  That means you've got a total of 10 MHz sitting there with nothing going on, just scattered throughout 700 MHz.

 

- Trip

Antennas are antennas, you can broadcast or recieve any technology through them. They would still be supporting the same range of spectrum, it would just be divided up differently. It would be the basestations that would have to be updated. 

[IamMrFamous07]

How much of difference will 600mhz be compared to 800? I know lower the frequency means better the coverage and indoor penetration but will it be noticeable?

[Trip]

Antennas are antennas, you can broadcast or recieve any technology through them. They would still be supporting the same range of spectrum, it would just be divided up differently. It would be the basestations that would have to be updated. 

 

 

I know that much; I thought it was obvious.  I was referring specifically to the base station equipment.  Is the hardware in general deployment software upgradable or configurable such that it could be shifted by a few MHz one way or the other?

 

 

How much of difference will 600mhz be compared to 800? I know lower the frequency means better the coverage and indoor penetration but will it be noticeable?

 

Probably not very noticeable.  Part of the problem is going to be that the antennas in the phones are going to start being electrically short in the smaller devices so you lose the benefit to some degree.  I suspect it won't appear too terribly different from 800.

 

- Trip

[WiWavelength]

How much of difference will 600mhz be compared to 800?

 

About 200 MHz.

 

AJ

[Conan Kudo]

I'm not against redoing 700Mhz, but between the two, there is much more to gain from reworking the 850Mhz licenses (5x5) than from 700Mhz (3x3). Also, you can use the relicensing of 850Mhz to address markets where one provider holds both sides of the license. Incumbent providers of the A or B license would each recieve neighboring 5x5 blocks (10x10) in the new arrangement, leaving a new 5x5 block to be auctioned off. In markets where the incumbent holds both sides of the license, they would be given a third block, so they would have 15x15, thus freeing up two 5x5 blocks for other carriers. Also, no company would be allowed to acquire more than 30Mhz of cell 850 spectrum from this point forward.

 

We just got 700Mhz deployed. Let's wait until VoLTE is mature and then we can go back and create this 3x3 channel in 700Mhz.

Actually, 700MHz realignment (if we follow US 700 band plan) could eliminate DTV 51 issues.

 

The APT 700MHz band plan has a guard built in at 698-703 MHz (5MHz) which we know is suitable for DTV/Cellular service protection. By rebanding US Lower 700MHz paired blocks to 5MHz FDD each, we can create a 3MHz guard against DTV 51. That would permit 3MHz LTE carriers in A block during the period in which DTV 51 is still in operation (implicitly expanding the guard to 5MHz on uplink by not using the lower 2MHz of the A block). A 3MHz FDD carrier is better than no carrier at all.

 

If we wanted to be really radical to maximize spectral efficiency and open up more usable blocks on 700MHz for use and auction, we could reband to the APT band plan. That would be difficult and require a broad range of supporters in the industry, though.

[ericdabbs]

With the way current things are running, I don't trust the FCC to do the right thing and seriously consider 700 MHz realignment.

[Rawvega]

Those interested can have their voice heard in regards to the incentive auction.

 

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db1211/DOC-330994A1.pdf

[BlackBerryRulez]

Cool, thanks for the info.

[stuckinohio1]

So any ideas or theories on how much spectrum sprint will try for in the auctions?  im hoping for at least 25MHz so they can do 1xA on 2x 1.5 carriers and a 2x 5x5MHz LTE carriers ( 1 10x10 would be nice to)

[travismheim]

So any ideas or theories on how much spectrum sprint will try for in the auctions?  im hoping for at least 25MHz so they can do 1xA on 2x 1.5 carriers and a 2x 5x5MHz LTE carriers ( 1 10x10 would be nice to)

Why would they go and deploy more cdma carriers on new spectrum?

[tybo31316]

So any ideas or theories on how much spectrum sprint will try for in the auctions? im hoping for at least 25MHz so they can do 1xA on 2x 1.5 carriers and a 2x 5x5MHz LTE carriers ( 1 10x10 would be nice to)

I'd imagine that they would try to acquire nationwide 5x5mhz and it would be used for LTE only being that voLTE is starting to become mainstream. Also the 600mhz spectrum is going to be really expensive so I don't see Sprint buying much when they have loads of 2.5ghz spectrum.

[WiWavelength]

So any ideas or theories on how much spectrum sprint will try for in the auctions?  im hoping for at least 25MHz so they can do 1xA on 2x 1.5 carriers and a 2x 5x5MHz LTE carriers ( 1 10x10 would be nice to)

Why would they go and deploy more cdma carriers on new spectrum?

 

No new CDMA2000 bands will be standardized -- 3GPP2 is shutting down.  Any 600 MHz spectrum will be LTE or bust.

 

AJ

[stuckinohio1]

No new CDMA2000 bands will be standardized -- 3GPP2 is shutting down.  Any 600 MHz spectrum will be LTE or bust.

 

AJ

so then why are they doing 1x on 800MHz? why not just use it for a wider LTE channel and do VoLTE?

[WiWavelength]

so then why are they doing 1x on 800MHz? why not just use it for a wider LTE channel and do VoLTE?

 

How could Sprint do a "wider LTE channel" within its licensed SMR 800 MHz spectrum?  If you answer that question, then you have answered your question.

 

AJ

[stuckinohio1]

How could Sprint do a "wider LTE channel" within its licensed SMR 800 MHz spectrum?  If you answer that question, then you have answered your question.

 

AJ

I dunno i thought they had enough to deploy a 5x5 carrier and then i thought i read a 1.5x1.5 1x carrier. are you telling me they cant do 6.5x6.5 Lte carriers? like software and antennas cant handle the extra 1.5MHz on each channel?

[WiWavelength]

I dunno i thought they had enough to deploy a 5x5 carrier and then i thought i read a 1.5x1.5 1x carrier. are you telling me they cant do 6.5x6.5 Lte carriers? like software and antennas cant handle the extra 1.5MHz on each channel?

 

A 6.5 MHz FDD LTE carrier does not exist.  So, take your pick:  1.4 MHz FDD, 3 MHz FDD, or 5 MHz FDD.  The next step up is 10 MHz FDD -- not possible in Sprint's SMR 800 MHz allocation.

 

You can propose carrier aggregation.  But no one wants to waste 2x carrier aggregation on just 1.4 MHz FDD and 5 MHz FDD.

 

In the end, the band class 10 CDMA1X 800 carrier is like a gift.  It takes advantage of the odds and ends that would otherwise go fallow.

 

AJ

[stuckinohio1]

A 6.5 MHz FDD LTE carrier does not exist.  So, take your pick:  1.4 MHz FDD, 3 MHz FDD, or 5 MHz FDD.  The next step up is 10 MHz FDD -- not possible in Sprint's SMR 800 MHz allocation.

 

You can propose carrier aggregation.  But no one wants to waste 2x carrier aggregation on just 1.4 MHz FDD and 5 MHz FDD.

 

In the end, the band class 10 CDMA1X 800 carrier is like a gift.  It takes advantage of the odds and ends that would otherwise go fallow.

 

AJ

no heay im not saying its a bad idea at all i just dont get why carriers halfto be 5x or 10x. i mean seriously if sprint has the spectrum why couldn't the software or panels support such a thing?

[travismheim]

no heay im not saying its a bad idea at all i just dont get why carriers halfto be 5x or 10x. i mean seriously if sprint has the spectrum why couldn't the software or panels support such a thing?

That's what was standardized by 3gpp.

 

Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk

[stuckinohio1]

That's what was standardized by 3gpp.

 

Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk

This was all i needed to know thx 

[lou99/maximus1987]

The broadcasters also want the FCC to set a target of getting at least 126 MHz of spectrum from broadcasters for the auction

 

 

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/cbs-open-selling-spectrum-600-mhz-incentive-auction-might-fetch-2b/2015-02-13?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Editor&utm_campaign=SocialMedia

 

Notice how the broadcasters WAAANNNNTTT

[stuckinohio1]

600MHz to 700MHz does not = 100MHz? how does it come out to 126MHz? does it go up higher in the frequency band or lower down into the 500s?

 

 

so confused.....

[jroepcke51]

600MHz to 700MHz does not = 100MHz? how does it come out to 126MHz? does it go up higher in the frequency band or lower down into the 500s?

 

 

so confused.....

There is no amount right now as broadcasters have to give it up, but if they want 124 it will have to extend into the 500 range.

[lou99/maximus1987]

600MHz to 700MHz does not = 100MHz? how does it come out to 126MHz? does it go up higher in the frequency band or lower down into the 500s?

 

 

so confused.....

http://assets.fiercemarkets.net/public/mdano/amis/fcc-auction-presentation.pdf

[Rawvega]

AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile and broadcasters warn FCC about interference issues in 600 MHz auction

 

March 17, 2015 | By Phil Goldstein

 

 

The FCC's incentive auction of 600 MHz broadcast TV spectrum is scheduled to start in a little under year from now, and many technical rules need to be resolved between now and then. However, wireless carriers and broadcasters seem to be unified on one key issue: They want the FCC to change its plans for dealing with "impaired" spectrum, or spectrum that will have too much interference to be used.

 

Specifically, carriers, CTIA and broadcasters alike are taking issue with the FCC's proposal to impair up to 20 percent of the spectrum that carriers will bid on. The FCC will impair the spectrum on an aggregated, weighted and nationwide basis.

 

"There is a striking consensus, cutting across all stakeholders, that the placement of TV stations in the 600 MHz LTE band will spread impairment throughout the national band plan, with impairments especially likely (and especially extensive) in the largest markets that are key to the success of the auction," AT&T noted in its comments. "The commenters broadly recognize that such impairments will reduce the quality, usefulness, and quantity of the auctioned spectrum."

 

 

Story continues: http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/att-verizon-sprint-t-mobile-and-broadcasters-warn-fcc-about-interference-is/2015-03-17

[S4GRU]

AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile and broadcasters warn FCC about interference issues in 600 MHz auction

 

 

Story continues: http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/att-verizon-sprint-t-mobile-and-broadcasters-warn-fcc-about-interference-is/2015-03-17

 

This has always been one of the biggest problems.  That the places where the spectrum is most desired from providers, like Top 50 markets, will have significant impairments from legacy TV licensees who do not move.  Making everyone to bid for only one or two slots not near encumbered broadcast spectrum in each market.

 

It will still be good under the current rules in places like the rural West and Alaska.  But I even wonder with all the TV translator stations in the rural West if there is a problem even there.

 

It just feels like 600MHz gets farther and farther down the road.  Delay after delay.  Maybe I should get a job at the FCC working on the 600MHz plan?  Because at least there will be long term job security.