[opendtv] FCC Opens TV Spectrum for Broadband Use
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 17:36:41 -0600
Sounds like Commissioner Baker is the only one to have mentioned changing the
ATSC standard to "MPEG-4," as she calls it, OFDM, and to look into "a cellular
infrastructure."
On the last bit, does she mean cellular, or does she mean SFN? Does she intend
to support regional broadcasting, or are we still on the localism mantra? The
answers to those questions are needed to see whether these wants are meaningful
or pointless (as spectrum savings measures).
Since H.264, what some call "MPEG-4," is "so last week," I would instead opt to
"leapfrog" (another pundit buzzword) to something akin to a DVB-T3 and HEVC
compression. Where DVB-T3 would go to turbo codes, rather than LDPC, and would
further address the PAPR issue, for better packing of the broadcast channels.
Bert
-------------------------
http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/110120
FCC Opens TV Spectrum for Broadband Use
12.01.2010.
WASHINGTON: The Federal Communications Commission yesterday took the first step
to open television broadcast spectrum for broadband use. The commissioners
unanimously approved a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to add new allocations for
fixed and land mobile services in the TV spectrum that would be co-primary with
broadcasting. The additional designation would make television spectrum equally
available at auction for broadcasting and wireless broadband.
The notice also proposes a framework of rules to allow two or more TV stations
to operate on a single 6 MHz channel--the current allocation for one full-power
TV station license. Channel-sharing stations would retain must-carry rights,
the FCC's Alan Stillwell said. Channel-sharing would not increase or decrease
carriage rights on any type of multichannel system. The docket will be open for
comment on the technical feasibility of channel sharing.
The third major proposal in the NRPM involves "increasing utility of VHF bands
for TV services," Stillwell said. Reception of digital TV at very high
frequency channels--2-13--is not nearly what it was for analog broadcasting.
Digital VHF has proven notoriously poor, as observed by transmission expert
Doug Lung more than six years ago. (See "Low-band VHF DTV Revisited," from TV
Technology, May 5, 2004.)
The FCC's notice proposes to increase the allowable maximum power for
broadcasters in VHF channels--with considerations for interference--and to
establish minimum performance standards of indoor antennas.
A VHF reception solution will be a tall order, Commissioner Michael Copps
allowed. He recounted the difficulties of resolving the flood of VHF reception
complaints following the June 2009 digital transition.
"Real remedies were few and far between," he said.
Commissioner Meredith Attwell Baker wasn't at the agency for the DTV
transition, but noted that it was only "a year and five months" since
broadcasters did the deed. She was the only one of the five commissioners who
said current transmission and compression schemes ought to be reconsidered.
"In the future, there needs to be a discussion of the sharing of broadcast and
broadband in the TV bands," including a migration from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4
compression, and from ATSC to OFDM transmission. She also suggested exploring a
cellular infrastructure for broadcasting.
Baker said the FCC also needed support from Congress to carry out its
intentions, particularly with regard to incentive auctions. The concept behind
incentive auctions is to give broadcasters who voluntarily relinquish spectrum
licenses a piece of the resulting auction proceeds. The FCC has no legislative
mechanism to conduct such a procedure.
Commissioner Robert McDowell approved the item but questioned it as the most
efficient route to achieve nationwide wireless broadband--the commission's
stated goal. Broadcasters are already allowed to offer alternative services,
including data services he said.
"How would this work in the context of wireless broadband?" he asked
rhetorically. "Would this approach be a faster means of getting wireless
broadband into the market as opposed to channel sharing?"
McDowell was around for the DTV transition and recalled the VHF issues as well.
"Industry and FCC engineers scrambled to overcome reception and interference
issues in the VHF channels," he said. "Before the FCC moves broadcasters back
into those channels, I want to understand the ramifications."
Copps said the procedure to open broadcast spectrum for wireless broadband
should be approached with "cautious optimism." He voiced support for the
broadcast industry, while chiding it for not doing more in the name of public
interest. In that regard, he said much of the broadcast spectrum goes
"underutilized."
"Public interest multicasting remains all too much a concept, but not a
reality," he said.
The people affected by spectrum policy don't think about it, he said. They just
want their phones and TVs to work. And auctioning off massive amounts of
spectrum to incumbent wireless providers isn't going to result in cheaper
service, he said. -- Deborah D. McAdams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
