3GPP approves LTE band 66 for Dish Spectrum

[bigsnake49]

From the Dish press release:

 

Band 66 pairs 70 MHz of uplink spectrum with 90 MHz of downlink spectrum including AWS-1 (1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz), the recently auctioned AWS-3 paired spectrum (1755-1780 MHz and 2155-2180 MHz), and DISH’s upper AWS-4 spectrum (2180-2200 MHz) approved for use as downlink.

In addition to the adoption of Band 66, 3GPP approved the completion of a feasibility study and the initiation of a Work Item for a new band, which includes DISH’s remaining AWS-4 spectrum and its H Block. The new band pairs 15 MHz of AWS-3 uplink (1695-1710 MHz) and 25 MHz of downlink comprised of DISH’s lower AWS-4 spectrum (2000-2020 MHz) and H Block (1995-2000 MHz). The FCC has granted DISH the flexibility to convert the lower portion of AWS-4 to downlink from its legacy uplink designation.

“Similar to Band 66, the proposed band includes a greater proportion of downlink spectrum relative to uplink,” added Cullen. “By pairing the AWS-3 uplink spectrum with valuable downlink spectrum on an asymmetrical basis, the overall utility of the spectrum will be enhanced to the benefit of consumers as the growth of applications like mobile video continue to require more downlink capacity.

 

Is the H-block uplink orphaned in the new band?

Edited December 11, 2015 by bigsnake49

[WiWavelength]

Is the H-block uplink orphaned in the new band?

 

If the new band gets standardized, yes, it appears that the PCS/AWS-2 H block uplink will be left fallow.  And the PCS A block licensees may prefer it that way.  The PCS duplex gap started as only 20 MHz:  1910-1930 MHz.  With the addition of the PCS G block, that cut the duplex gap down to 15 MHz.  The PCS/AWS-2 H block would cut the duplex gap down to only 10 MHz.  In other words, the PCS/AWS-2 H block uplink would be only 10 MHz removed from the PCS A block downlink, and that could cause some interference.

 

AJ

[RAvirani]

If the new band gets standardized, yes, it appears that the PCS/AWS-2 H block uplink will be left fallow. And the PCS A block licensees may prefer it that way. The PCS duplex gap started as only 20 MHz: 1910-1930 MHz. With the addition of the PCS G block, that cut the duplex gap down to 15 MHz. The PCS/AWS-2 H block would cut the duplex gap down to only 10 MHz. In other words, the PCS/AWS-2 H block uplink would be only 10 MHz removed from the PCS A block downlink, and that could cause some interference.

 

AJ

Isn't 10mhz still a pretty big space? I don't see how there can be interference with that much gap...

[WiWavelength]

Isn't 10mhz still a pretty big space? I don't see how there can be interference with that much gap...

 

Nope, not that significant a guard band when juxtaposing uplink and downlink.  Hypothetically, a PCS/AWS-2 H block mobile could be transmitting at 20 dBm on the uplink while just a few feet away a PCS A block mobile could be receiving at -110 dBm on the downlink.  That is a difference of 130 dB, such that a 10 MHz duplex gap may not provide sufficient protection for the PCS A block downlink.

 

AJ

[RAvirani]

Nope, not that significant a guard band when juxtaposing uplink and downlink. Hypothetically, a PCS/AWS-2 H block mobile could be transmitting at 20 dBm on the uplink while just a few feet away a PCS A block mobile could be receiving at -110 dBm on the downlink. That is a difference of 130 dB, such that a 10 MHz duplex gap may not provide sufficient protection for the PCS A block downlink.

 

AJ

Ohhh that makes sense.

[bigsnake49]

Either Verizon or T-Mobile might be interested in Band 66. Will Sprint be interested in hosting the new band?

[WiWavelength]

Either Verizon or T-Mobile might be interested in Band 66. Will Sprint be interested in hosting the new band?

 

Any AWS-3 licensee will have to use band 66.  So, yes, that will include both VZW and T-Mobile.  Band 4 likely will live on in MFBI form.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

But would anybody be interested in the new band? The one that includes AWS4 and H-Block downlink?

[WiWavelength]

But would anybody be interested in the new band? The one that includes AWS4 and H-Block downlink?

 

If I were Sprint -- and even though it would be only a spectrum hosting deal -- I would not touch Dish's proposed band.  Sprint already has enough boutique type bands on its hands.

 

The band 66 spectrum, on the other hand, could be more interesting.  It would get Sprint back into the AWS-1/3 ecosystem that it left when it pulled out of SpectrumCo.  AWS-1 was not much at that time, just boutique spectrum that probably saved T-Mobile from disaster.  But it has since become arguably the primary LTE band in the US.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

If I were Sprint -- and even though it would be only a spectrum hosting deal -- I would not touch Dish's proposed band.  Sprint already has enough boutique type bands on its hands.

 

The band 66 spectrum, on the other hand, could be more interesting.  It would get Sprint back into the AWS-1/3 ecosystem that it left when it pulled out of SpectrumCo.  AWS-1 was not much at that time, just boutique spectrum that probably saved T-Mobile from disaster.  But it has since become arguably the primary LTE band in the US.

 

AJ

Yes, I am with you about boutique bands for Sprint. All three of their bands are boutique. I wonder whether at some point or another the FCC might not want to reconfigure band 26 + a guard band into 3 10x10 allocations.with Sprint paying the Cellular A and B side holders.

[Trip]

Yes, I am with you about boutique bands for Sprint. All three of their bands are boutique. I wonder whether at some point or another the FCC might not want to reconfigure band 26 + a guard band into 3 10x10 allocations.with Sprint paying the Cellular A and B side holders.

 

Funny you should say that, because I was thinking something similar and mentioned it internally.  My idea, though, was to turn the Cellular band into 5 different 5x5 blocks.  Give the A and B block licenses two of the 5x5 blocks by default, and then sell the leftover block at auction, with a portion of the proceeds (or a bidding credit) going to the existing A and B block holders.  That would accomplish the same thing without pre-ordaining the result.

 

Not sure anyone liked the idea, but I have mentioned it at work before.

 

- Trip

[WiWavelength]

Yes, I am with you about boutique bands for Sprint. All three of their bands are boutique. I wonder whether at some point or another the FCC might not want to reconfigure band 26 + a guard band into 3 10x10 allocations.with Sprint paying the Cellular A and B side holders.

 

Even though rebanded SMR 800 MHz and Cellular 850 MHz are contiguous, I doubt that the FCC would bridge the two with a band plan reconfiguration.  SMR 800 MHz falls under Part 90, while Cellular 850 MHz is under Part 22 -- basically, the regulations between the two are significantly different.  If Sprint were to wrap up rebanding, untangle the IBEZ nonsense, and acquire every single rebanded SMR 800 MHz license, then maybe Sprint and the FCC mutually could agree to reclassify the rebanded SMR 800 MHz under Part 22 and roll it into Cellular 850 MHz for band plan reconfiguration.  But as long as a few other licensees remain in rebanded SMR 800 MHz, their uses may better fit Part 90, since it allows up to 100 W on the uplink.

 

Instead of combining rebanded SMR 800 MHz and Cellular 850 MHz, Neal Gompa and I several years ago came up with a few reconfigured band plans for Cellular 850 MHz.  Due to band plan expansion some 25 years ago, Cellular 850 MHz is awkwardly fragmented -- Cellular A Low block 1 MHz FDD, Cellular A block 10 MHz FDD, Cellular B block 10 MHz FDD, Cellular A High block 1.5 MHz FDD, Cellular B High block 2.5 MHz FDD.  As the primary Cellular 850 MHz license holders, VZW and AT&T would fight this tooth and nail if they were to give up any spectrum.  But with band plan reconfiguration, the Cellular A and B blocks would be shifted yet remain 10 MHz FDD.  Then, a Cellular C block 5 MHz FDD license could be created and auctioned.  It would make practical sense, as the present fragments worked for narrowband airlinks -- but are increasingly useless in a broadband LTE world.

 

AJ

[bigsnake49]

That would also be an excellent way in putting those segments in use. I hope Sprint would bid.

[Tengen31]

Any AWS-3 licensee will have to use band 66.  So, yes, that will include both VZW and T-Mobile.  Band 4 likely will live on in MFBI form.

 

AJ

Is AWS-3 band 66 the same ones that att,vzw and, Tmobile also bought this year?

[RAvirani]

Is AWS-3 band 66 the same ones that att,vzw and, Tmobile also bought this year?

 

yes

[Tengen31]

Will be interesting to see what Dish does with all their Spectrum.

 

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

[4GHoward]

What is the latest news on where these 2 partnerships will be headed?

 

http://about.dish.com/press-release/dish-delivers-high-speed-lte-internet-service-corpus-christi

http://about.dish.com/press-release/dish-and-ntelos-wireless-offer-fixed-internet-service-customers-virginia

[red_dog007]

What is the latest news on where these 2 partnerships will be headed?

 

http://about.dish.com/press-release/dish-delivers-high-speed-lte-internet-service-corpus-christi

http://about.dish.com/press-release/dish-and-ntelos-wireless-offer-fixed-internet-service-customers-virginia

There are two articles on FW right now about ATT doing wireless broadband testing as well as another small provider in VA.

 

I don't really get why they have to test. No like there isn't a huge WISP community that uses all kinds of spectrum to deliver WiFi, WiMax, and LTE wireless broadband. Shoot, TMo bought a wireless broadband provider in MI that used 700A over LTE.

 

If you gonna do it, freaking do it dangit!