Tech Companies Want Exclusion for Low-Power Indoor Devices Used in 6 GHz Band
The Wi-Fi Alliance and several major tech companies, including Apple and Microsoft, are pressing the FCC to create a special class of indoor-only devices that can be safely used in the 6 GHz band, with an NPRM expected later this year. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said after the August FCC meeting the NPRM will likely get a vote in one of the four remaining 2018 meetings, though he wasn't more specific.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
“What I’ve seen in the most recent series of filings is a pretty solid convergence around a large number of areas,” Chris Szymanski, Broadcom director-product marketing and government affairs, told us Friday. “Areas of disagreement have narrowed significantly. I think that’s pretty huge given that we’re still in the [notice of inquiry] stage and we’re just moving to an NPRM.”
The rules should be specific to the incumbents in a specific band “rather than carrying over a bunch of rules that were designed around protecting another set of incumbents,” Szymanski said. “You should be cognizant of the reason for the rule structure.” The FCC should start with the rules for the 5.725-5.825 GHz U-NII-3 band, he said. “It’s the right framework to start with,” he said. “This will enable those economies of scale, and radios that are designed to work in the U-NII-3 band could also be used in what we’re calling the proposed U-NII-5 band.”
Recent filings by the Wi-Fi Alliance (see 1808020058) and a combined filing by Apple, Broadcom, Cisco, Facebook, Google, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Intel, Marvell, Microsoft, Qualcomm and Ruckus Networks make a similar argument that low-power devices shouldn’t require frequency coordination. The companies want automated-frequency coordination for higher power devices.
The tech companies' filing lists the types of low-power devices used in the “quickly growing augmented reality and virtual reality segment,” for home video distribution at 4K/8K levels, real-time multiplayer gaming and ultra-high fidelity audio, and in the IoT as the class of those that shouldn’t require frequency coordination. “Rules should be limited to those necessary to protect incumbents and should not include unnecessary rules that suppress investment and broadband deployment,” said the filing in docket 17-183. The companies note fixed satellite service links operate outdoors at high power and face little risk from low-power devices only used indoors.
The Wi-Fi Alliance proposed that low-power, indoor-only access points be allowed to operate with 250 milliwatts of conducted power, provided that the maximum antenna gain does not exceed 6 dBi. “Since these devices operate at low-power levels with their signals further attenuated by structure shielding they present minimal potential for interference,” the alliance said.
Szymanski said he was encouraged by comments by Pai and Commissioners Mike O’Rielly and Jessica Rosenworcel on the importance of the 6 GHz band. “Speed is of the essence,” he said. “I cannot recall at any point where we’ve seen the level of standards activity going on in major SDOs [standards developing organizations] before a band has been allocated for use by that SDO’s technology.” The FCC and the Satellite Industry Association didn't comment.
Michael Calabrese, director of the Wireless Future Program at New America, agreed with the tech companies. "“The vast majority of Wi-Fi use is indoors, especially for high-bandwidth apps," Calabrese told us. "At a sufficiently low power, the FCC should be able to move ahead immediately to authorize indoor-only devices. The path loss in buildings would inherently protect path-to-path links. The FCC already permits indoor-only unlicensed use in the 90 GHz band, based on a plug-in power requirement to certify the transmitting device. It can do this far quicker than the parallel path to authorizing Wi-Fi for outdoor use. For indoor use, there is no reason to burden consumers with delays or more expensive devices that require database coordination or sensing to protect incumbent uses.”