An alternative "anti-competitive" solution is proposed to address the problems of spectrum and format fragmentation in the wireless industry. Drawing parallels to the centralized planning of electric power grids, the proposal suggests governments standardize cellular frequencies and formats in each country to create a single, coordinated national wireless network. This could maximize coverage, performance and reduce costs by avoiding duplication of infrastructure, in a similar manner to how centralized electric utilities operate more efficiently through economies of scale. However, such an approach may be opposed on grounds of reducing competition. The role of some regulatory planning is discussed as the wireless sector matures from a luxury to an essential service.

2. “Anti-Competitive” Measures to Improve the Wireless Industry Moray RumneyLead TechnologistJohn HarmonWireless Business Development Copyright Agilent technologies 2011

4. The current industry approach

8. The Duplex spacing varies from 30 MHz to 799 MHz

9. The gap between downlink and uplink varies from 10 MHz to 680 MHz

10. Narrow duplex spacing and gaps make it hard to design filters to prevent the transmitter spectral regrowth leaking into the receiver (self-blocking)

11. Bands 13, 14, 20 and 24 are reversed from normal by having the uplink higher in frequency than the downlink

13. As such, the challenge of separating transmit from receive does not require a duplex filter for the frequency domain but a switch for the time domainFrequency

15. Band 23 2000/2020 + 2180/2200 - S band additional terrestrial component (ATC) of the mobile satellite systems (MSS)

16. Band 25 1850/1915 + 1930/1995 - Extended 1900 band – has issues with GPS co-existence

17. Band 26 814/849 MHz + 859/894 – Extended 850 upper band

18. Band 27 806/824 + 851/869 – Extended 850 lower band

19. Other possibilities identified by the ITU:

20. 3.6-4.2 GHz

21. 450−470 MHz

22. 698−862 MHz

23. 790−862 MHz band (European digital dividend)

25. The industry solution – do it all? VoIP LTE Multi-band (13?) HSPA+ TD-SCDMA High batteryefficiency High spectralefficiency LTE-Advanced MIMO 1xEV-DO(B) Low cost Interferencecancellation 802.16m Operator’s Radio equirements Wants: Everything When: Now! Greenwireless Bluetooth Multi-Carrier TD-LTE EDGE-Evolution 802.16e Dongle or phone Wi-FI A-GPS MBMS Multi-RAT

26. All options available for no extra cost size or weight! Why we don’t have multi-format motor cars today Weight and padding for sound-proofing and ride User-switchable left/right hand drive for roaming Petrol engine for range Diesel engine for economy Light-weight for fuel economy Solar panels for ecology Electric engine for ecology Supercharger for power 4WD for grip

28. Software Defined Radio is a noble goal – especially for narrow band base stations with sufficient design and cost margins

29. For user devices it is not so simple

30. Has anyone seen a software-defined PA or antenna? What we do have is SDB - software defined baseband.

31. Tuneable antennas are being worked on but are no panacea

32. Multiplex filter design is also a struggle – can’t violate physics

34. Industries that rely on such precious resources - like water and power - need to be carefully planned

35. Consider the history of power in the UK

36. Back in the 1920’s strong “competition” meant great choice:

37. DC or a variety of AC frequencies

38. A variety of voltages

39. A variety of independent unconnected generating companies

41. This required standardization of frequency and voltage: 240V at 50 Hz was chosen.

42. The industry fought back strongly on anti-competitive grounds but were over ruled

43. In the 1950s the government nationalized the generating companies creating the Central Electricity Generating Board

44. This was again strongly opposed but it created huge scale resulting in lower costs and better coordination of generation capability for continuity of supply

47. The history of regional regulation and competition have led to today’s often highly fragmented market which has many inherent inefficiencies

50. Compare this with what happened with 2G in the US – a fragmented competitive mess of five systems which eventually led to just two systems with no interoperability.

51. There was a quote on the White House web site some time ago praising the FCC. It went something like this: “Why can’t all our agencies emulate the FCC and generate money rather than just spend it”.The wireless lifecycle is long, requires heavy capital investment and benefits from mobility. All this requires careful planning. In recent times regulators have taken an increasingly soft touch – this is now backfiring. Competition is needed - once the direction is set.

53. The most ambitious example is Yota in Russia who have formed a consortium with competitors MegaFon, MTS, Rostelecom and VimpelCom to build a single shared LTE network.

54. From an engineering perspective it should be evident that if each country’s wireless assets were pooled the potential scale and benefits could look similar to the impact of the national grid

55. A single regulated operating company could maximize coverage and performance while reducing format and band fragmentation

56. The rest of us could get on with designing optimal hardware and applications just like we do with the national grid!“But they’re communists!”

60. An example of chaotic evolution 1G 3G 5G 2G 4G Heathrow! Page 21

63. Apply a gentle-but-deliberate hand to move things toward some more organized situation