A snapshot of LTE 800 in Europe

Transcription

1 A snapshot of LTE 800 in Europe Legal framework and interference cases (public version) Michel Gascoin, NRK, Norway Updated

2 FREQUENCY ISSUES with an impact on DTT Launch of LTE services in the 800 MHz band Future clearance of the 700 MHz band UHF band in the long run We must protect today's viewers from tomorrow's interference

3 Political arguments for releasing spectrum Generate revenue for governments Face an increasing need for mobile broadband Reduce the digital divide within a country New source of income for Mobile Network Operators (MNO) Prerequisite: Existing digital TV (DTT) services must be safeguarded

4 Countries with LTE800 in Europe (as of spring 2015) Austria Belgium Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greenland Iceland Italy Lithuania Macedonia Moldova Monaco Netherlands Norway Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Ireland (Spain) (Poland) Time for evaluation! In operation Planned in 2015 No info

5 Process for the release of the 800 MHz band Co-primary assignment of MHz Co-existence studies, recommendations Commission decision 2010/267/EU National spectrum licensing (LTE)

6 Survey about national licensing conditions What legal framework/licensing conditions were chosen by each administration? Are there best practices? Any lessons to learn for future spectrum release? Is DTT below 790 MHz safe?

7 10 participating countries

8 An extensive questionnaire 1. What 800 MHz spectrum is currently licensed and used in your country? 2. What are the protection requirements for LTE-DTT coexistence? 3. How interference cases are dealt with? 4. Economical aspects (who pays for what)? 5. What is the current situation concerning LTE800 interferences?

9 1. WHAT SPECTRUM IS LICENSED AND USED FOR LTE800?

10 Use of spectrum: findings Few license requirements to use all the released spectrum Some priority coverage areas are defined, but are limited in extent and in offered bandwidth Current deployment mainly in populated areas, densely in cities in some countries Efficient use of spectrum? Real intention to bridge the digital divide? LTE800 used for capacity? Coverage? As a replacement for Wifi?

11 2. WHAT ARE THE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR LTE-DTT CO- EXISTENCE?

12 Protection requirements: findings Administrations expressed a clear intention to protect DTT In practice: Not all TV installations and households are entitled to protection MNO are free to roll out without conformity check Only two countries have systematic procedures for checking the deployed mobile network MNOs roll out plans are not made public in most cases MNOs have the sole responsibility to avoid or solve/mitigate interference problems

13 3. HOW ARE INTERFERENCE CASES DEALT WITH?

14 Mitigating interference: findings Mitigation organisations/call centers exist in 7 out of 10 countries Filters is a preferred means of mitigation However: To check if LTE is the cause of interference is difficult for a call centre or the public, even for professionals! Unclear mechanisms to make sure that adequate filters are actually sent and fitted properly Who could/would DTT users call when TV reception is bad? How feasible and economically rational is it to check: if LTE is the cause? if a filter actually solved the problem?

15 4. WHO PAYS FOR MITIGATION?

16 Economical aspects: findings MNOs are expected to cover the costs for: Mitigation org. /call center (6 countries out of 10) Filters (7 countries out of 10) Filter installation (4 countries) New antenna installation (2 countries) In 4 countries, it is unclear how costs are covered Could one expect the viewer to find out a solution by himself and install it by himself properly? What if a filter does not solve the problem? What would could a viewer do?

17 5. WHAT IS THE CURRENT SITUATION CONCERNING LTE800 INTERFERENCES?

18 Publications No available information in the majority of countries Very few publications and official statements Rumours, rumours, rumours Reported cases Germany 20 cases (11/2014) 2012 Period covered Norway 1332 cases (4/2015) (1 year) UK 6710 cases (6/2015) 2013 France cases (5/2015) ( to households) Other countries No data 2012

19 The situation in France as in CEPT report SE7(14)110* (oktober 2014) Mainly overloading and receiver blocking *Information consistent with the announcement from ANFR about cases (Spectre & innovation, 27th November 2014)

20 Update in France (May 2015) 9287 base stations in operation complains received, of which: (+70%*) from individual houses (+56%*) collective houses Estimated total amount interfered households: between and (14, respectively 21 household per base station) *compared with last detailed update in October 2014

21 Interference: findings Many cases of antenna amplifier overloading A majority of identified LTE problems are solved with a filter, if fitted properly (before the amplifier) Still: Very little information available Very large discrepancy: Germany vs. France Few interference cases? Unidentified cases? Hidden figures/deliberate opacity? Or just no feedback from DTT users etc.?

22 Is DTT below 790 MHz safe? YES! Very few reported interference cases Filters seem to solve most problems MAYBE NOT FDD 1 not in use on a large scale yet Real technical challenge to assess LTE problems in practice Uncertainty that problems are reported by DTT users Opacity regarding real disturbance We might face a silent migration from DTT to other platforms

23 BEST PRACTICE WHEN RELEASING SPECTRUM TO LTE

24 Success factors to protect TV viewers A skilled mitigation organisation Requirement that DTT stakeholders and MNOs cooperate Right choice of filters Ways to assess possible LTE issues Low threshold to send and install filters Other mitigation methods (at the user or the base station) Clarification on economical aspects (costs to be borne) It the regulator really mean to protect DTT, then all such aspects shall be mentioned in the license requirements prior to auctioning the spectrum!

25 CONCLUSIONS Simple messages your regulator need to be aware of Yes, LTE is causing interference Filters are helping, overload is manageable Little transparency with regard to interference Cooperation between MNOs and broadcasters give more opportunity to avoid interference in the future DTT can only be safeguarded if sufficient requirements are specified on the license conditions by the regulator

26 LOOKING INTO FUTURE SPECTRUM RELEASE (700 MHZ)

27 Issues to be considered By your regulator Problems in 800 MHz will still be relevant in 700 MHz Mainly antenna amplifier overloading and receiver blocking Adjacent channel interference now caused by mobile terminals (difficult to assess and reproduce) Sufficient time to allow cross-country coordination to avoid cross-border interference from DTT to LTE Why neighbouring countries can t use the same spectrum for different purposes (flexible allocation)

28 Flexibility is not an option (this has happened!) Until 31 st March 2015, Spanish DTT at 800 MHz created interference into 4G base stations in Portugal (and South West France) Coverage with Rec % Coverage with Rec % Level (dbuv/m) I/N (db) Distance % Distance % 19, ,3-6 to ,1-6; X-polarity ,1 0;X-polarity Interference level (from ITU 2337) Maximum distance (km) inside Portugal

29 Simulations show why LTE700 launch requires careful cross-border coordination and enough time Norwegian DTT at 700 MHz will have an impact on 4G uplink into mobile base stations in Sweden and Denmark for many years 240 kilometers Interference level (from ITU 2337) for 1% of time

30 LTE Don t plug and pray!

31 Where can I find updated information about interference? The UK 4G/TV Co-existence Oversight Board has meeting reports made publically available

32 DigiTAG Members