# Presentation: 925886

## Broadband Wireless

- Dr. John Ryan
- Chief Analyst

## Content and Flow

- State of technology
- Now ... & where it’s going, in functionality
- Business Issues
- Installation ...
- Regulatory
- Business case
- Other
- Settlements

- Issues not covered are just as important ...
- Satellites, stratospheric wireless, etc.
- Spectrum Allocation
- Free Market, Regulated, or Monitored ...
- Standards activities
- Types of Wireless access
- National Coverage and feature transparency across all carriers

- Network Outlook 2003

## Summary

- Broadband wireless technologies may soon mature to a point where they present a compelling case for deployment in a majority of residential and small business circumstances
- End users still want high-speed access, and current speeds are inadequate
- Non-line-of-sight technologies offer improving performance

- But as this happens, the challenges for regulators may become profound, as distinctions between types of services – and service providers – fade or disappear
- The challenges affect more than just wireless regulation

- Network Outlook 2003

## Platforms Suitability

***“******TAC has previously supplied the FCC with analysis of many BB  platforms.  These analyses were updated, more detailed material was supplied, and one additional platform was added.  The key features, advantages, disadvantages and limitations were addressed.”***** **
**This vu from TAC submissions in December 2002.**

| Suitable
--------------
  Available | LMDS | MMDS | Unlicensed Wireless | Portable
Broadband | Space Platforms | 3G |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Voice –
Primary
Line |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Voice –
Secondary
Line |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| High
Speed
Internet |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Multi-
Program
Video |  |  |  |  |  |  |

- 	Suitable includes technical ability to deliver desired services as well as costs to do so.

-  ̃

- –

- –

- –

- –

- –

- —

- —

- —

- —

- —

- —

-  ̃

-  ̃

-  ̃

-  ̃

- –

- –

- —

- –

- –

- –

- –

- —

- Network Outlook 2003

**Notes:**
Nitin: agree with these charts:
Important to emphasize that ALL of these are in play, and likely the MMDS/unlicensed/portable/space are
All COMPLEMENTARY solutions, and all could be used in a single competitive market.

Part of the message: make sure FCC does not hold up commercialization trajectory for ALL
Of these, not to pick winners/losers by anomalous treatment (ie lots of unlicensed and no licensed spectrum
Allocations) etc.

## Background: a trajectory toward unified, high-speed wireless

- AMPS
- “1G”

- Digital, some data capabilities: 2G – GSM takes off

- Narrowband/mobile

- Add IP capabilities: 2.5G

- Reinforce voice capabilities; high-speed data: 3G

**MMDS: Institutional bands ... limited uptake**

- Broadband/fixed or nomadic

**LMDS: High-frequency ... limited uptake**

- Unification of voice and data, mobile and access: 4G

- 802.11 ... rapid adoption post 2000

**802.16 emerging**

**802.20 emerging**

- Network Outlook 2003

## So That ...

- It’s not only trivially true that mobile services are overtaking wireline voice but ...
*Standards – **broadly adopted*
*Digital technology – **Moore’s Law*
*Regulatory models – **enabling forces*
- All played essential roles in shaping this

- Network Outlook 2003

## And ...

- That, as 4G starts to take shape, many of the now-separate domains of regulation for wireless operators and the regulation of wireline operators will merge.
- This already happens in some cases: use of wireless for universal service in rural areas, for example

- Network Outlook 2003

## Of Course: The Hyperbole

- By 2005 at least 750 million mobile phones capable of accessing the Internet
- KPMG and Nokia, quoted at www.the-pitch.com
- Wireless access to the Internet becomes 57% of all use by 2005
- http://www.c-i-a.com/pr032102.htm

- Millions of PDAs in operation worldwide (and the merging of PDA and cellphone) will drive wireless access to data

- Network Outlook 2003

## What End Users Want: Higher Speed, in More Places

**The bottom line: **A realistic image of the near-future – inexpensive, portable devices drawing high-speed data streams from wireless networks in most parts of America

- Network Outlook 2003

## How They’ll Get it:

- No single technology now available offers a plausible or viable combination of high-speed and broad coverage

- So: customer equipment (cpe) will increasingly have more than one wireless “air interface”
- The devices will have enough intelligence to interpret the “best available” connection option
- And the services must be available through multiple wireless interfaces

- Network Outlook 2003

## How They’ll Get it: Bimodal or Trimodal cpe & Services

**1 km**

**10 km**

**100 km**

**0.1 km**

**10 Mbps**

**1 Mbps**

**0.1 Mbps**

**10 kbps**

**802.11b**

**Pagers **

**(Blackberry)**

**CDPD**

**50 Mbps**

**802.11a**

**2.5G**

**3G**

**1 km**

**10 km**

**100 km**

**0.1 km**

**10 Mbps**

**1 Mbps**

**0.1 Mbps**

**10 kbps**

**802.11g**

**Pagers **

**(Blackberry)**

**CDPD**

**50 Mbps**

**802.11a**

**2.5G**

**3G**

**802.16**

**The bottom line: **Silicon and software here find use in allowing higher functionality – multiple bands, sophisticated protocols, innovative applications – at decreasing price points.

- Network Outlook 2003

## New* Standards: 802.11, 802.16, 802.20

**The bottom line: **Technologies are changing rapidly; No current threat that U.S. will “fall behind” rest of world, or pick a path at major variance, but stay vigilant.

|  | Spectrum | Technology Notes | Status/Comment |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 802.11
WLAN: ”WiFi” | ISM unlicensed; 
2.4 GHz, 5.5GHz | Ethernet-like; speeds 10 to 50 Mbps (sustained about 20% of these); 30m typical range now (>1km if switched?)
WiFi alliance | Finding global widespread support: included in many laptops as standard; 2003 (.11g) extension enables 50Mbps at 2.4 GHz |
| 802.15
WPAN | ISM unlicensed; mainly 2.4 GHz | .15.1 technology originated with (and licensed from) Bluetooth; UWB & others for v. high speed (.15.3); 10m range; Wimedia, Zigbee alliances | Portable, personal networks – in home networks for consumer devices, etc. |
| 802.16
FBWA | Licensed (and unlicensed) 2 – 11 GHz; | Speeds: 2 - 155 Mbps; point-point range to ~50km; “token-bus” ISO-2 protocols; 
Wimax alliance (new, 4/03) | Fixed wireless; links core network to customer sites |
| 802.20
MBWA | Licensed spectrum, below 3.5 GHz | 1 Mbps min; Emerging: OFDM, and others offered. Native IP protocol stacks; cell ranges to 15km; aiming for v. high spectral efficiency | Mobility to 250 kph; sustained data rates, low latency (voice, games, other apps) |

***802.11 originated ~10 yrs ago**

- Network Outlook 2003

## Theoretically: Low Costs, Easy Installation: But ... it’s not magic

**“...****nine different buildings spread out over a small area. We're in an area with a lot of thunder storms (near Atlanta), so I've bought a lot of different wireless equipment after old ones were taken out by lightning. **
**“****Even working just from ****one side of the street to the other, 802.11 doesn't work very well****.**** With stock antennae on *****(vendor name)***** boxes, we were seeing >30% packet loss. With 19 dB parabolic antennae, packet loss was <2%. There's no reason you should have to use 19 dB antennae to get from one side of a two-lane street to the other.”**
**self-described IT director for a textile plant, comments on slashdot.org; with minor editing, emphasis added**

- We are used to the idea that our mobile phones self-register
- Example: GSM phones that log on to partner networks throughout the world
-  However, we are some way from achieving the same level of ease-of-use for high-speed data equipment
- 802.11 Base Stations require reasonably careful installation

- Network Outlook 2003

## Environmental Factors Will Always Play a Role

**Environmental Factors Will Always Play a Role**

**MMDS spectrum acquired by FON, WCOM; VZ, BLS have trials going on, but – so far – little has come of these.**
**One argument: current “first-generation” gear is too reliant on line-of-sight transmission, and new, “second-generation” systems using (e.g.) OFDM, create NLOS solutions that might work.**

**This creates a vicious cycle, in which expectation that markets will be modest constrains investment, keeps CPE prices high ... which keeps market modest ...**
**R&D continues in these areas, but progress to adequate resolution is far from inevitable.**

- Network Outlook 2003

## BUT: Advances in Non-Line-of-Sight Approaches Offer Relief

- Non-line-of-sight technologies offer improving performance
- Multiple companies attacking, using innovative approaches
- WCDMA: IP Wireless, Soma
- OFDM: Flarion, Wi-LAN
- Other proprietary solutions: Navini, Cirronet
- Likely to mature in 2+ years

- Network Outlook 2003

## New radio technologies: MIMO, etc.

- Early wireless technologies dedicated “circuits”; then, through CDMA, etc., we learned to share spectrum, enabling far-greater spectrum utilization.
- Intelligent antennae (fast beam-steering) increase density
- Multiple Input/Multiple Output: MIMO – devices with multiple effective antennae have potential to dig signals out of more noisy environments

- MIMO: significant advance over SISO, MISO
- Spatial characteristics of link act as additional CDMA codes – allow code reuse for increased spectral efficiency; NLOS operation – wireline availability; up to 20x coverage; boosts system capacity without increasing interference or power)
- Lucent’s BLAST

**The bottom line: **Technologies are changing rapidly – leveraging silicon technology – esp. DSP – to extract more effective capacity from spectrum; lowering costs of throughput; increasing SNR

- Network Outlook 2003

## Business Issues: How Viable a Challenge?

- Broadband wireless has potential to offer least-cost path to high-speed drops, in many cases
- 802.11: grass-roots and hotspots – but will a large-scale implementation be possible?
- MMDS: a case study in the problems that arise absent a global-standard
- Constraints on licensed spectrum continue to vex service providers and vendors
- Settlement issues will increase in complexity; rights-of-way issues are local issues – but can have national import

- Network Outlook 2003

## Broadband Wireless Access: Building the Business Model

- Broadband Wireless ... can eliminate many of the costs associated with creating high-speed infrastructures
- Costs/household for attractive bandwidths may yet make this the most compelling access solution.

- Analysis of service to top MSAs from one vendor (admittedly partisan) indicates
- Broadband wireless solutions range from $10 - $50/ addressable household
**Low end: assumes hh already has 802.11 cpe**
**High end: figure includes cpe for subscribers**
- Far lower than typical wireline solutions

- Network Outlook 2003

## Cost Estimate: WiFi Deployment Covering Top 98 MSAs

***All information on this vu: Source: Vivato***

- **2001 Dartmouth Campus WLAN study, Kotz & Essien

- * Approx. 61% of US households

**Cost Estimate: WiFi Deployment Covering Top 98 MSAs**

- 62,856,600 covered households*
- 52,425 square miles of coverage
- Wi-Fi switches – 28,330
- Cell sites – 7,083
- Landline backhaul locations – 355
- Sufficient throughput capacity to deliver service to >200M subscribers at today’s usage levels
- Average busy hour usage/sub: 3.3kbps**
- Average busy hour download/sub: 1.5Mbps**

|  | Switched WiFi | Fixed Wireless | Conventional Wi-Fi Access Point |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| NetworkDeployment Cost | $0.59B | $3.34B*** | $2.75B |
| Equipment | 28,330 Switches | 64,080 Radios,
10,680 Base Stations | 476,988APs |
| Cell sites | 7,083 | 10,680 | 476,988 |

- *** Includes cost of CPE for 5 million subscribers

- Network Outlook 2003

## Broadband Wireless: Enabling new business cases

**“****I run a wireless "hotspot" in Baltimore which serves a two-block area. Were I to bump to a T1, I would need ~50 subscribers to make a small profit. To do this I need to expand my range, which means additional access points. But where the access points need to be is not line-of-site to my base station so I would need a wired connection to each point, or have a series of repeaters. This isn't practical or cost effective.****“If I could set up an 802.16 base pushing bandwidth to five or six 802.11b access points then I could run them all off of one T1 line and put them in locations where they need to be.”**
- Anonymous commentary on Slashdot; slightly edited

- To date ... 802.11 works in office LANs, isolated hotspots, ... urban access nodes, rural settings ...
- Potential is there for it to evolve to support broader applications yet
- But ... how to build a business on unowned territory?

**The bottom line: **802.11 is now fuelling anarchic and “mom-and-pop” wireless ISPs – the future may follow the path of original Internet growth – consolidation as the boom continues.

- Network Outlook 2003

## Broadband Wireless in Rural Areas

- M33 Access, in rural northeastern Michigan, uses 802.11, provides Internet access to “thousands of square miles” (line of sight from towers) – and next will add its own fiber backbone, then add voice-over-IP
***“******IP phone service will be available only to broadband customers, at least at first ... Customers will get a modem with two ports, one for Internet and one for telephone”***

**http://www.m33access.com/default.asp?MyView=Herald**

- Network Outlook 2003

## 802.11: Challenges and Opportunities from use of unlicensed spectrum

**Challenges: **
**Unconstrained interference from multiple sources – create basis for “tragedy of commons”**
**Other users of 802.11b**
**Neighbors or commercial users**
**Other users of same spectrum**
**Microwave ovens**
**High-end cordless phones**
**Bluetooth**
**Baby monitors, security systems**
**Uncertain business models when SP lacks “title”**
**Applications now largely apply where a landlord has control over relevant real estate**
**Unclear how to generalize to access networks on a larger scale**
**Security**

**Opportunities: **
**Use of unlicensed spectrum has liberated creativity**
**Home networking, without wires, without truck rolls**
**Rural data networks**
**Hotspots in cafes, airports, hotels **
**Streetside 802.11 nodes**
**London, other European cities**
**Use of unlicensed spectrum has fostered new generations of low-cost devices**
**802.11 support in all 2003 laptops, starting in mid-year**
**Showing up in PDAs, **
**Prototypes of in-home use of 802.11 for video distribution, etc.**

- Network Outlook 2003

## Lessons and Challenges from 802.11

- Unlicensed spectrum (combined with uniform global standard AND intersection with consumer needs) creates fertile ground for innovation; seemingly validates libertarian approach, rather than spectrum auctions  but ...
- Also: creates prospect of “tragedy of commons” ... with competing uses of same spectrum ...
- ... while not enabling some compelling applications
- (Q: Why don’t we have 802.11 drops from lamp posts? A: because there’s no way to build a business case.)
- Alternative regulatory approaches?
- “First-come/first-served” (followed by use-it-or-lose-it?) ... requires arbiter of data base
- Carve out slices of spectrum for “utility” access model?

- Network Outlook 2003

## MMDS faltering as basis for video – can Internet services succeed?

- Nucentrix/Heartland:
- “In March 2002, as part of our long-term plan to focus on use of our spectrum for broadband Internet and other advanced wireless services, we announced signing agreements with DIRECTV, Pegasus and Time Warner Cable to convert our wireless cable subscribers to programming provided by these entities”

**MMDS – a multiservice platform originally created for video – has not achieved hoped-for status as competition for wireline cable TV: success of DBS further diminishes prospects for MMDS for TV**
**Few active deployments: total service revenues from MMDS less than $50M in 2002**
**Spectrum now finding use for Internet access**
**Ownership concentrated with FON (deployed in 20 out of 80 licensed markets, 30Mhh addressable), Worldcom (5 out of 150, 45Mhh)**
**Serious limitations include costly CPE (no global market alignment on use of this spectrum), line-of-sight implementations; some spectrum reassigned for 3G**

- Network Outlook 2003

## Deployment Issues for Operations in Licensed Spectrum

- Spectrum availability
- “Underutilized LMDS” spectrum means high-frequency area, useful for point-point backhaul is often locked up
- Some available bands so close to military/gov’t bands that permissions and coordination make deployment infeasible

- Consequently ...
- Perhaps 5% of U.S. cellsites now use microwave backhaul
- In Europe, this figure is closer to 75%
- U.S. systems vendors report that nearly all of their opportunity is outside the U.S.

**The bottom line: **Technologies are changing rapidly; No current threat that U.S. will “fall behind” rest of world, or pick a path at major variance, but stay attuned.

- Network Outlook 2003

## Interconnection & Settlement Challenges

**For years, Sprint PCS accepted AT&T traffic on its wireless network, representing millions of calls: the two carriers had a compensation contract in place. **
**In 2000, AT&T halted termination payments to Sprint, saying bill-and-keep rules should be the norm. **
**In other words, wireless carriers should recover network costs from end users. “AT&T wasn’t paying Sprint,” (billing vendor) says. “AT&T got a huge bill from Sprint, and didn’t pay it.” **

- _[http://www.billingworld.com/archive-detail.cfm?archiveId=5663&hl](http://www.billingworld.com/archive-detail.cfm?archiveId=5663&hl)_**=**
- _[http://www.setonresourcecenter.com/register/2002/Jul/30/49240A.pdf](http://www.setonresourcecenter.com/register/2002/Jul/30/49240A.pdf)_** **

- Declaratory finding: Sprint PCS not prohibited from charging access charges, but AT&T not required to pay, absent contractual obligation to do so.

**The bottom line: **Settlement models will come under increasing strain as bandwidths rise, and new forms of services (and service providers) emerge.

- Network Outlook 2003

## Other Settlement Issues

- IP Sender keep all (SKA), and free peering
- Bill and keep
- Revenue splits (like IXC, ILEC)
- Reciprocal compensation
- ITU Settlements
- FCC Docket 01-316 to allow wireless carriers to charge IXCs for completing calls

- Landline voice and mobile settlements now have different structures
- Internet – no settlement structure at all
- Fuelling the SP business model challenges
- What happens when these collide?

- Network Outlook 2003

## Installation, Construction, Rights of Way

- Rights of way, antenna siting, community concerns about possible health impacts from increased radiation levels, and visual pollution all may factor in determining how broadly wireless broadband may evolve.
- Of course, these issues have not been in the FCC’s orbit – but rather those of local communities but ...
- Rights of way, community concerns, offer prospect of a means for those who might oppose broadband wireless to subvert its use.
- As wireless becomes more widely used, will a cumulative effect of radio have detrimental effects?

- Network Outlook 2003

## Zoning Laws & Local Ordinances

- U.K. Proposes Plan to Promote Wireless Broadband
- The U.K. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is proposing to **relax rules governing the kind, number and placement of dishes and antennae that can be installed outside of a home, apartment or commercial building**.  The move to relax the rules is designed to promote adoption of broadband services.
- Source: ZDNet U.K. Apr ‘03

- _[http://www.btrd.ab.ca/wainelem/kosovo/page10.html](http://www.btrd.ab.ca/wainelem/kosovo/page10.html)__; _

- Network Outlook 2003

## Summary

- By 2005-2006, new broadband wireless technologies mature, creating compelling case for long-term use in perhaps a majority of residential and small business circumstances
**Costs well below $100/hh**
- MMDS, LMDS have faded but 802.11g seems likely to spark strong interest in untethered high-speed access; 3G will dovetail ... 4G will combine
- Business models may evolve, but challenges remain for large-scale deployment

- As this picture evolves, challenges for regulators become profound
- as distinctions between types of services – and service providers – fade or disappear
- Spectrum will come under renewed pressure, interference issues will be important as different protocols co-exist

**The bottom line: **Wireless may become the hoped-for “third path” for high-speed access; this could emerge in the next three to five years and radically reshape competition at the network’s edge.

- Network Outlook 2003

## Regulatory Challenges Go Far Beyond Wireless: When 802.11g or 802.16 broadband access encapsulates voice-over-IP then ...

- What is a regulated voice service?
- Do we expect E-911 and CALEA?
- Are these eligible for universal service fund uses?

- Are they information services?
- Why is it ok to have unlicensed-spectrum and (auctioned) licensed-spectrum versions of the same services?

**The Bottom Line: **This is not about some remote, distant future: remember M33 – a wireless ISP using 802.11 –offering VoIP service this year

- Network Outlook 2003

## Thank You!

- Thanks also to:
*Kwame Boakye, Harris Corp.*
*Stuart Little, Stratex Inc.*
*Andy Kelm, Nokia*