The RF Spectrum and Dynamics. Paul J Kolodzy, PhD Kolodzy Consulting, LLC

The RF Spectrum and Dynamics Paul J Kolodzy, PhD Kolodzy Consulting, LLC

The Spectrum of Uses for the Spectrum

Telecommunications Policy Nominates Commissioners Executive Branch Non -Federal Use of the Spectrum Federal Use of the Spectrum

Joint Jurisdiction Over Spectrum Federal Communications Commission Non-federal users Commercial, private, state and local public safety National Telecommunications and Information Administration (Dept. of Commerce) Federal government users Memorandum of Understanding governs formal agency coordination through the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC)

US Spectrum Allocations (Government, Non-Government, Shared) 22% 42% 35% Spectrum from 322-3,100 MHz: NTIA regulates 22% FCC regulates 35% Shared NTIA/FCC regulates 42% Frequency Agility and Wideband and Ultra-Wideband Devices, creates Challenges at the Interfaces between the Different Allocations

FCC Statutory Mandate for New Technology 47 USC 157. New technologies and services (a) It shall be the policy of the United States to encourage the provision of new technologies and services to the public. Any person or party (other than the Commission) who opposes a new technology or service proposed to be permitted under this chapter shall have the burden to demonstrate that such proposal is inconsistent with the public interest. (b) The Commission shall determine whether any new technology or service proposed in a petition or application is in the public interest within one year after such petition or application is filed. f If the Commission initiates its own proceeding for a new technology or service, such proceeding shall be completed within 12 months after it is initiated.

Policy Process Public Comments (~60-120days) & Reply Comments (~30 days) Public NOI NPRM FNPRM R&O Petition For Recon MO&O D *I D *I D *I D *I D *I D *I National Telecommunications IRAC Agency Other Components D Draft Govt *If spectrum is: I - Input Entities Excl Non-Govt Input suggestions only Shared NTIA Co-regulator FCC Output requires NTIA Coordination Excl Govt FCC Output requires NTIA Coordination

IRAC BBG

Oh, FCC May I >700 Lawyers <150 Engineers Increase My Power? Have Some Spectrum? Have Some Spectrum? Change the Service?

Studies of the RF Spectrum DoD Defense Science Board, Army Science Board US Gov t FCC (SPTF), WH/DoC, NTIA Non-Gov t CSIS, Toffler, CSTB, NRC Common Theme: Technology continues to increase both the uses of the RF Spectrum as well as the capacity to more intensively use the RF Spectrum Coordination/Cooperation both administratively and technically is needed to improve capacity Technology is challenging current spectrum management and spectrum policy paradigms

Multi-Disciplinary Not just in Words transaction highest and costs best use OOBE auctions Structure Programming Computer Scientists Policy Makers LNA db child processes Intermods dynamic range Provability Ontologies Electrical Engineers, Computer Scientists, Communications Engineers, Lawyers, Policy Makers, Economists, Physicists, Material Scientists, Pontificators Electical Engineers Economists

Spectrum Access Regimes Command And Control Authoritative Entity Selects LICENSES Auctions Market Forces Dominates Lottery Authoritative Determines Eligibility, Random Drawing Secondary Markets Market Forces With Negotiations THIRD PARTY Band Managers Spectrum Access and Coordination using Market Forces Opportunistic Device Certification Highly Complex Sensing Capability Unlimited Potential DEVICE CENTRIC Unlicensed Device Certification Limited Emission Levels

Promoting Access to Spectrum The New Model Licensee 2 nd -ary User 2 nd -ary User Not-to-Interfere Basis Easement User Below the Acceptable Interference Temperature Data Services Public Safety CMRS Data Services 1% 10% 100% 10% 1% Public Safety CMRS Duty Cycle 100% 10% 1%

Chronology of Opportunistic Spectrum 1999-2000 (United States): Localized set of measurements conducted by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) indicated that spectrum use was not very high. 2002 (United States): DARPA initiates the XG (next Generation) project to investigate the potential for the military to share spectrum spatially and temporally with multiple devices. 2002 (United States): The Federal Communications Commission Spectrum Policy Task Force (SPTF) concludes that spectrum access is more significant problem that spectrum scarcity. The SPTF recommends that new rules be developed to allow more intensive access to the spectrum including opportunistic spectrum. 2003 (European Union): Information Society Technology includes dynamic spectrum access technologies as part of the 6 th Framework Programme of R&D. 2003 (United States): National Science Foundation initiates research projects in spectrum measurements and dynamic spectrum access. 2004 (United States): Federal Communications Commission issues a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Facilitating Opportunities for Flexible, Efficient, and Reliable Spectrum Use Employing Cognitive Radio Technologies. 2004 European Union: End-to-End Reconfigurability (E2R) Project initiated in Information Society Technology. 2005 United States: DARPA XG and NSF projects complete series of spectrum occupancy measurements indicating less than 10% occupancy in time-space under 3 GHz.

2005 International Regulatory Activities on Cognitive Radio A A Snapshot United States: ofcc: Report and Order, ET Docket No. 00-47 - Authorization and Use of Software Defined Radios; Vanu Corporation gets First Approved SDR in 2004; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ET Docket No. 03-108 - Facilitating Opportunities for Flexible, Efficient, and Reliable Spectrum Use Employing Cognitive Radio Technologies; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ET Docket No. 04-186 - Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast Bands and Additional Spectrum for Unlicensed Devices Below 900 MHz and in the 3 GHz Band; Strategic Plan 2006-11 Encouraging the development of new technologies, such as cognitive radio and dynamic frequency selection; Japan: oministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (formally MPHPT): promoting R&D of technologies for efficient spectrum inclusive of cognitive radio systems to search for unused spectrum; New Zealand: oministry of Economic Development: 2005 Review of Radio Spectrum Policy in New Zealand the role of spectrum band managers may be reduced through the use of Software Defined Radios, New Zealand s physical isolation provides for an ideal position to be a test bed for new wireless technologies, cognitive or smart radios will eventually have the capacity to locate and utilize any unoccupied spectrum, and none of New Zealand s current licensing types is well suited for managing SDRs and CRs. Australia oaustralian Communications and Media Authority (formally ACA and ABA): Vision 20/20 report on future communications realizing the future of ubiquitous communications with wireless expected to have an increasingly central role with increased spectrum sharing and cognitive radio technologies. Canada: ocanadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission oindustry Canada: Spectrum Policy Framework for Canada Implementation of new technologies and new spectrum management concepts using recent innovations in wireless technology such as cognitive radio and software-defined radio. The department solicited for comments in determining to what extent these technologies might increase the use and access of the RF spectrum in the future.

2005 International Regulatory Activities on Cognitive Radio A A Snapshot International Telecommunications Union (ITU): oglobal Standards Collaboration (GSC): GSC-10 (Radiocommunication Items) in 2005 issued a resolution (GSC-10/6) on Global Radio Standards Collaboration on Wireless Access Systems to encourages collaboration on measurement techniques and certification requirements for cognitive capabilities including DFS; GSC-10 also called for accelerated standards development for SDR and Cognitive Radio; GSC-10 also resolves to study better ways to manage interference using adaptive frequency agility, listen before transmit, etc; oetsi : Considering the impact of SDR of the Radio And Telecommunications Terminal Equipment (R&TTE) Directive with respect to electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), radio characteristics, non-conforming software, security, and integrity issues due to potential failures of the software download process oitu-r WP8A and WP8F: Developing definitions and application areas for SDR and Cognitive Radio technology. The draft reports indicates that many of the communications administrators around the globe have begun to investigate the use of these new technologies. India: otelecom Regulatory Authority of India : consultation paper on Issues Relating to Private Terrestrial TV Broadcasting Service addresses alternative technologies. Comments received look that rural communications could use cognitive radio technologies to find, in situ, better bands for foliage penetration. United Kingdom oofcom: Technology R&D programme initiated in 2005 studies into flexible, multi-protocol, multi-band cognitive radio systems. Near-term investigations into band sharing technologies. European Union oproject Team 8 (PT8): (Postal and Telecommunications Administration, Electronic Communications Committee Working Group) Tasked with developing a report on the regulatory structure needed to enable the introduction of new radio technologies. A particular focus will be increased opportunities to share spectrum. oeu Commission: Published A Forward-looking radio spectrum policy for the European Union Second Annual Report with key initiatives including the implementation of flexible spectrum usage through the development of smart or cognitive radios. Such efforts will be funded under the EU RTD Framework Programme.

Cross-Synergies

Technology Update Software Defined Radios next Generation Communications (XG) Cognitive Radios Policy Radios XG / Dynamic Spectrum Access Technology has been demonstrated for both military and commercial applications MANET Networking has been demonstrated successfully with smaller (<50 node) networks Extensions to High Density Networks on-going at DARPA Power Amplifier / Filter Technology has lagged Multiple Programs at DARPA and other DoD Laboratories Optical Networking for Tactical Backhaul TRL-6 Project at DARPA

XG Hardware Prime Contractor - SSC

Dynamic Spectrum Challenge

XG Results Spring 2007 No Surprises XG Achieved > 60% Spectrum Occupancy for Networks of 6 Nodes: 85% Access Confidence at 83% Occupancy

Layer-3 3 Interoperability DARPA - NCRS

Commercial Technology Enablers Smart Antennas Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA) time frequency Adaptive Modulation 256 QAM 64 QAM 16 QAM QPSK BPSK Technology Enablers Smart Antennas Increases Wireless Performance Adaptive Modulation Exploits Stronger Signals for Increased Capacity OFDMA More Efficient Resource Utilization

The New Challenge FDD (Commercial) TDD (DoD( DoD) Uplink Downlink ~30 to 300 MHz Block 1 Block 2 Block 1 Block 2 Uplink/ Downlink AWS-3-43 dbw -43 dbw -43 dbw Base Base Interference FDD Downlink TDD Uplink Mobile Mobile Interference FDD Downlink TDD Uplink Mismatch between Commercial Technology (commonly FDD) and DoD Technology (commonly TDD) requires better technology development to make more compatible

The Computer Science View of Interference Avoidance QPSK Interference Spectrum Shaped QPSK @ 128 kbps 0-10 Tx Spectrum Power Spectrum Magnitude (db) -20-30 -40-50 -60-70 -80-90 -100 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Frequency (Hz) x 10 6 Rcv Spectrum Power Spectrum Magnitude (db) -20-40 -60-80 -100-120 -140 2.5 2 1.5 1 Frequency (Hz) x 10 6 0.5 0 1 Normal 3 Survive 2 Survive Transmission Number Power Spectrum Magnitude (db) 0-20 -40-60 -80-100 2.5 2 1.5 1 Frequency (Hz) x 10 6 0.5 0 1 Normal 3 Survive 2 Survive Transmission Number

Regulatory Rules Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Out-of-Band Emissions (OOBE) OOBE Intermodulation Distortion (IMD) f 1 f 2 2f 2- f 1 Interference Level Dependent Upon Emitted signal levels Frequency separation between signals Transmit and receive filtering Desired signal level at victim receiver Near-Far Scenario

The Radio Engineering View of Interference Cumulative Energy in Receiver Filter Increases Noise Floor, Reducing Detection Distance Combination of multi-band operation and high spectrum use can create significant challenges High dynamic range vs. low-power consumption Current technology is challenged to allow sensitive reception in the presence of strong signals and densely occupied spectrum Signal Environment ~20 dbm Increase in Noise Floor Receiver Output ~88% Reduction in Spectrum Availability DARPA Tuner Utilization Study, PR #8587, Shared Spectrum Company Results Shown for Ultra High Quality LNA 10dB Gain, IIP3 = 50dBm, 10W consumption

Open Spectrum/Channel Use Intermodulation Distortion (IMD) Signal Power = -70dBm, Gain 10 db, Amplifiers IP3 = -7 dbm Input Power Level per 1.25 MHz OFDM= -40dBm -90 IIP3=-7 dbm -100-40 dbm -90 Total Input Receiver Output without Total Output Base Output Additional Signal Present -100-31 dbm Signal Power = -70dBm, Gain 10 db, Amplifiers IP3 = -7 dbm Input Power Level per 1.25 MHz OFDM= -31dBm Total Input Total Output Base Output Interference -110-70 dbm IMD -110 Power (dbm) per Hz -120-130 Degradation Power (dbm) per Hz -120-130 -140-140 -150-150 -160 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Frequency (MHz) AWS Signal 1 New Signal AWS Signal 2-160 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Frequency (MHz) AWS Signal 1 New Signal AWS Signal 2 Insertion of Signal May Create Out of Band Interference Appears proper when viewed as white space Actual result is a reduction in SNR, resulting in potentially harmful interference This is why Carrier Colocate Transmitters!

DSA for Interference Avoidance?! Radio that Can Estimate the Interference Environment, Can Search for Spectral Regions that Do Not Create Interference for the Radio Interference-Free Zones? Dynamic Interference Avoidance Radio Systems combine the understanding of both the RF environment and the Radio RF characteristics

Dynamic Interference Avoidance Signal Power = -50dBm, Gain 10 db, Amplifiers IP3 = -7 dbm Input Power Level per 1.25 MHz OFDM= -31dBm Signal Power = -50dBm, Gain 10 db, Amplifiers IP3 = -7 dbm Input Power Level per 1.25 MHz OFDM= -31dBm Total Input Total Output Base Output Total Input Total Output Base Output -80-80 -90-90 Power (dbm) per Hz -100 Power (dbm) per Hz -100-110 -110-120 -120-130 -130 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 Frequency (MHz) Frequency (MHz) Signal Power = -50dBm, Gain 10 db, Amplifiers IP3 = -7 dbm Signal Power = -50dBm, Gain 10 db, Amplifiers IP3 = -7 dbm Input Power Level per 1.25 MHz OFDM= -31dBm Input Power Level per 1.25 MHz OFDM= -31dBm Total Input Total Input Total Output Total Output Base Output Base Output -80-80 -90-90 Power (dbm) per Hz -100 Power (dbm) per Hz -100-110 -110-120 -120-130 -130 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 Frequency (MHz) Frequency (MHz) NG Radios that are Aware of Interference Effects Can Adapt to Mitigate Effects

Where s the Action? circa 2007 TV Whitespaces Upper 700 MHz BRS UNII 3.5 GHz

Spectral Utilization High Peak-to-Average Ratio utilization in some bands provide impetus for new thinking in RF Spectrum sharing Technology to provide insight into utilization is prevalent

RF Spectrum Sharing Time-Frequency Frequency-Space-Angle-etcetc Demonstrations of Directionality Orthogonality for RF Spectrum Sharing have been Successful (Northpoint)

Where are we Headed with Dynamic Spectrum Access in the User Community? DARPA Transitioning XG, Extending Dynamic Spectrum Beyond Spectrum Utilization (aka WNAN) Looking for the next generation of ideas Services Satellite Programs using DSA technology DoD Leadership NTIA - Highly Supportive User Community Ready for Transition Microsoft, Phillips Developed White Space Devices (WSD) Need more development too rigid

The Future? The Rapid Change In Technology and the Ingenious Use of Spectrum Is Hastening Technology Creates Regulatory Challenges Command and Control Schemes are Too Slow Policy needs to be made Less Reactive Regulatory Agencies are Staffed Primarily by non-technical Personnel Regulations should be Technology Agnostic not Technology Ignorant The Regulators want to understand in terms that they can Understand and Use To Provide Preeminence for US Technology and Businesses, The 21st Century will see the move from Command and Control methods of Regulation to More Agile and Flexible methods Technologist must play an Active Role to Insure Policy does not Limit Technology