[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 08:09:03 -0500
On Mar 4, 2017, at 8:19 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Craig, you're thrashing about looking for some useful application of this 600
MHz in congested areas, and consistently coming up with nonsense. VOD is no
different from any other broadband need, albeit with higher downstream data
rate than most. It's nonsensical to pretend that VOD can get by with lower
spectrum reuse than anything else in broadband. Think it through, but first
turn off that racket in the background that keeps you from thinking.
VOD is very different than most uses of broadband; it involves large amount of
data and long sessions. As more people use mobile devices for VOD it places
significantly increased demands on the entire network.
Perhaps an analogy to issues that have become problematic for fixed broadband
and the relationship between ISPs and the sources of VOD services may help you
understand the problem.
The Internet as we knew it was working reasonably well when most fixed
broadband services were reasonably symmetrical. Peering agreement were simple,
as any ISP expected the sessions to involve short bursts of upstream and
downstream data. THe amounts of downstream data were not a major challenge.
Then we started streaming videos; the result was highly asymmetrical data
sessions. Even this was not a big issue, as the number of such sessions was
small. Enter Netflix and Hulu and the old assumptions were rendered
meaningless. Now the traffic being generated started to cause major problems
for both ISPs and CDNs.
Several solutions emerged:
1. New peering agreements that forced the companies serving up these streams to
start paying for their traffic;
2. The use of collocates servers to take the most popular streams off of the
Internet backbone.
3. The use of dedicated interconnection links between the regional streaming
media servers and large ISPs like Comcast.
Such is the nature of technical evolution. Wireless (cellular) broadband is not
immune to the same forces. Even more important, the telcos are now starting to
compete with cable and DBS to deliver the same bundle of live MVPD channels to
their wireless subscribers.
You have noted the general failure of attempts by broadcasters to deliver their
content to mobile devices. But streaming media services to smartphones are
starting to generate massive amounts of traffic on these cellular networks.
Why is one failing and the other succeeding?
First, its the content stupid! The massive decline in ratings for broadcast
television programming should tell you something Bert. If people are not
watching this stuff on the TVs in their homes, why would they want to watch it
while mobile?
Second, the broadcast versions have required dedicated devices, while the new
streaming services are leveraging the devices that everyone already owns.
Third, the telcos are now offering the ability to access premium content that
the subscriber is already paying for. If you subscribe to DirecTV and AT&T
cellular service you can access the DirecTV content on your mobile device
without paying again (can you say FloTV subscription?). Even better, the bits
are zero rated.
Clearly the 600 MHz spectrum is optimal for the delivery of live broadcast
streams - it offers excellent coverage and good capacity using existing towers
and the radios already deployed in more than a billion mobile devices. If there
is any capacity that is not being used for broadcast services the capacity can
still be used for VOD streams.
Exactly. So in urban areas you co locate on the traditional low height
cell towers, control power levels and masking to cover smaller geographic
areas.
Sorry, Craig, but any idea of using this spectrum for broadcast is out, as
far as I'm concerned, except as I described previously. And the idea of
having different towers on the same frequency channel transmitting different
broadcasts, within the one market, is wasteful. You create large areas of
co-channel interference.
Nope. You can control all of these issues with proper design of the
infrastructure.
Again, you are thrashing. Those who know these things know that 600 MHz in
urban markets is not ideal for wireless Internet broadband. The trade
scribes, as usual, got all confused, when they hyped up the range
"advantages."
It is not ideal for certain classes of service Bert. There is no one size fits
all solution here. We ALREADY have a layered wireless (cellular) system using
different frequency bands and radio services appropriate for those bands. 5G
will add another layer for short range fixed wireless and tiny cells in
congested areas.
But it is not fair to call the entire cellular infrastructure for any
carrier a wireless ISP.
When the telco cell networks are used for Internet access, they are
definitely wireless ISPs. And as of now, that is essentially all that 4G is
doing, and what is being planned for 5G. So, rethink your definitions.
Many voice sessions are now being connected using VOIP techniques. But f you
insist on calling cellular service a wireless ISP service, no problem. The
problem is that the networks are being clogged with streaming media sessions,
and other services that are generating much higher levels of Internet traffic.
The solution is to optimize the infrastructure for the new realities.
You are merely continuing on with your confusion about what wireless ISPs
are, Craig. I already QUOTED what the FCC said, as opposed to your
conjecturing. A quote beats your SWAGs and your not-completely-baked flights
of fancy any day. Read it again:
"This increasing demand poses a major challenge to ensure that America’s
wireless networks have the capacity to support the critical economic, public
safety, health care and other activities that rely on them. To meet this
challenge, the FCC has worked to **free up spectrum for wireless broadband
use**, removed regulatory and other barriers to the use of spectrum, and
enabled more efficient use of spectrum in numerous innovative ways."
I already debunked this in the last post, yet you come back and try again...
Unbelievable!
"removed regulatory barriers to the use of spectrum"
**For broadband use**. Again, your flights of fancy are just that, Craig.
They are carry no more weight than that.
Yup. Imagine that; you can use a broadband service to compete with broadcast
services. You can binge til you drop on Netflix, or access the DirecTV content
you pay through the nose for at home AND on your mobile devices...
Who Knew?
Regards
Craig
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
- » [opendtv] TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- John Shutt
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Ron Economos
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Albert Manfredi
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC OK’s First Unlicensed LTE in 5 GHz - Craig Birkmaier