It is not a technology issue Tim. It is an economics issue. 1. The FCC's power limits for mobile in 3.65 is 1/10th or so the power of outdoor fixed. 2. The WiMAX Forum, which does all profiles and certifications, is not including 3.65 GHz in its profiles since it is a fixed band. 3. The combination of 1 and 2 means there is no mass opportunity for major vendors, which means no ecosystem development, which means no cards or even any WiMAX Forum-supported interoperability.
The end point is that .16e 3.65 GHz offers you no real tangible, usable benefits (with the possible, but costly exception of diversity), but lots of extra cost to create the same capacity as .16d-based systems. Using E for fixed is something less knowledgeable operators can get sucked in to though because of the hype and it is a way one can qualify the knowledge level of the potential WiMAX operator -- if they are asking for E, we know it is likely a novice in the business. That is fine, but it takes some education to help them from over spending for things they'll never be able to use in 3.65. Here are the three reasons why some ask for E: 1. The other vendor they are talking to hypes it is as best and while saying D is dead. (Plays off ego and fear.) 2. A "consultant" says they need to do E. (And this operator will be the one thinking they can get cards and indoor modems based on advice from the same consultant.) 3. Their investors are demanding it. (Investors having limited knowledge, assume E is hot hot hot! and want to be like the big boys...only the big boys use E in 2.5 GHz where it makes sense and can enable use of self-install modems, dongles, etc.) Patrick Leary Aperto Networks 813.426.4230 mobile -----Original Message----- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Tim Sylvester Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:53 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? What part of the 3650 rules make E "not supportable"? Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] > On Behalf Of Matt Liotta > Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:47 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? > > E is only really useful for mobile and mobile is not supportable with > the current 3650 rules. > -Matt > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Tim Sylvester > <t...@avanzarnetworks.com>wrote: > > > I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at 3.65GHz. Also I > would > > like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in a netbook and a USB > dongle. > > Does > > anyone know if the Intel WiMAX chips support 3.65GHz? > > > > Tim > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- > boun...@wispa.org] On > > > Behalf Of Matt Liotta > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:34 PM > > > To: WISPA General List > > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You? > > > > > > I look forward to seeing everyone at 4G World next week. > > > Personally, I don't care for D or E in a fixed deployment, but if > you > > > nailed > > > me down I would go with D. WiMAX tries to be too many things for > too > > > many > > > people. WiMAX-based proprietary systems are far more useful for > fixed > > > deployments. > > > > > > -Matt > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Patrick Leary > <ple...@apertonet.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The subject question is one Aperto thinks should be asked and > > > > now > is > > > the > > > > time to ask it. The WiMAX Forum has been beating the 802.16e > > > > drum > in > > > a > > > > manner trying to chump 802.16d. The fact is, there are two WiMAX > > > > standards, not one. By the Forum's own words from a 2005 paper > > > > it > put > > > > out in November 2005, penned by Monica Paoli of Seza Fila: > > > > > > > > "The WiMAX Forum is committed to providing optimized solutions > for > > > > fixed, nomadic, > > > > portable and mobile broadband wireless access. Two versions of > WiMAX > > > > address the > > > > demand for these different types of access: > > > > * 802.16-2004 WiMAX. This is based on the 802.16-2004 version of > the > > > > IEEE 802.16 > > > > standard and on ETSI HiperMAN. It uses Orthogonal Frequency > Division > > > > Multiplexing (OFDM) and supports fixed and nomadic access in > > > > Line > of > > > > Sight > > > > (LOS) and Non Line of Sight (NLOS) environments. > > > > * 802.16e WiMAX. Optimized for dynamic mobile radio channels, > this > > > > version is > > > > based on the 802.16e amendment and provides support for handoffs > and > > > > roaming." > > > > > > > > It is time the Forum own up to their own words, so Aperto is > going to > > > > asking the question at 4G World coming up in Chicago next week. > The > > > fact > > > > is, the fixed standard is stable and ideal for what it was > designed > > > to > > > > do: deliver fixed (and limited nomadicity) wireless broadband. > This > > > > version of the standard is better, yes better, than the mobile > > > version > > > > for doing metroscale fixed. It provides 13% more capacity per > > > > MHz > and > > > > 35% or so less latency. It can also be configured for symmetric > or > > > even > > > > higher ratio upstream vs. downstream, which is critical for > networks > > > > doing high capacity upstream like video surveillance. > > > > > > > > For too long, vendors that now only do the mobile standard have > been > > > > trying to squeeze the round peg of the mobile standard into the > > > square > > > > hole of fixed networks. This has been confusing many, and > > > > leading > > > some > > > > to overpay for their networks. Why pay for millions in R&D for > > > features > > > > that you can never use, especially in a 3.65 GHz network where > mobile > > > > can't happen? We have seen "consultants" spec'ing in E for 3.65 > GHz, > > > > thinking they will get interoperability and even PC cards for > their > > > > networks. They also think they can get self-install -- something > this > > > > community knows is not possible in 3.65 GHz due to the power > > > > restrictions placed on indoor modems. Operators and other would- > be > > > WiMAX > > > > deployers are being hoodwinked. > > > > > > > > The E standard does enable use of diversity, but it comes at a > high > > > cost > > > > and is of limited benefit for rural operators. The truth is that > > > > diversity is designed to increase link budgets to support self- > > > install. > > > > > > > > Basically, each standard has its place, E is for people in 2.5 > GHz > > > doing > > > > self-install, like Clearwire, and we all know the low service > > > > (especially low upstream) packages offered in Clearwire's > service. D > > > is > > > > better and cheaper for rural fixed operators, and especially for > > > public > > > > safety video type networks and definitely for voice-centric > users. D > > > is > > > > better for enterprise, where many users sit behind the CPE. E is > > > better > > > > for roaming individual users with modest expectations. > > > > > > > > We'd like to hear your opinions, and if you like to discuss this > with > > > us > > > > while at 4G World, please drop me a note. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Patrick Leary > > > > Aperto Networks > > > > > > > > > > > > Patrick Leary > > > > Aperto Networks > > > > 813.426.4230 mobile > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > - > ---- > > > ----------- > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > - > ---- > > > ----------- > > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > - > ---- > > > --------- > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > - > ---- > > > --------- > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - > ----------- > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - > ----------- > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > --------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > --------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
