UWB technology usage sparks opposition from Canada interests

Industry Canada could find itself in a difficult situation deciding on the technical rules governing the introduction of devices using ultra wideband (UWB) technology to the Canadian market. A consultation on the potential use of UWB communications devices in Canada has sparked considerable opposition from a number of Canadian and international interests. They say that Canada needs to proceed slowly and make sure it implements the right rules or it risks opening up existing licensed services in a number of different spectrum bands to significant interference. A number of parties to the consultation (SMSE-002-05) note that the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) got it wrong in setting interference limits. Despite the tendency to harmonize spectrum our rules with those of our neighbour south of the border, Industry Canada should proceed cautiously to make sure that existing licensees aren’t adversely affected by interference from unlicensed UWB devices. The Canadian Satellite and Space Industry Forum (CSSIF) supports the department’s proposal that UWB devices should be introduced to the Canadian market, but urges the department to carefully examine potential interference levels from these devices to make sure that they don’t adversely affect existing networks. The CSSIF believes that the FCC based its decisions regarding UWB on incorrect technical assumptions. "The CSSIF believes that the conclusions of the FCC are based on a fundamental misunderstanding - that allocated services, including satellite services, carry excess margin, and that this excess margin is available to be sacrificed to UWB interference without significantly impacting service performance and availability. Such excess margin would not be financially viable in satellite services and does not exist. Hence, FCC mandated limits on UWB devices are insufficient to protect the allocated satellite services," reads the group’s comments to Industry Canada. Telesat Canada agrees with the CSSIF assessment, noting that an appropriate balance between UWB devices and existing radio services was not achieved by the FCC. "It would be unfair and shortsighted to allow permanent interference from licence-exempt devices at the levels adopted by the FCC at the expense of licensed radiocommunication service operations in Canada," Telesat writes to the department. Satellite stakeholders are particularly concerned with the potential introduction of UWB devices because the spectrum they use to operate is located in the heart of proposed UWB bandwidth – the 3 GHz to 10 GHz range. Many satellite operators use spectrum in the 5 GHz band, which they say would be adversely affected by the aggregate interference generated from a multitude of UWB devices. But satellite carriers aren’t the only ones worried their licensed networks could suffer negative impacts from UWB device introduction. Bell Mobility, writing on behalf of a number of other mobility operators including SaskTel Mobility and Aliant Telecom, says there could be a significant interference impact on subscriber terminals in a number of bands. "Due to the potential close proximity of the UWB device to subscriber terminals in the PCS (1850-1990 MHz), wireless communications services (WCS) (2300 MHz) and the fixed wireless access (FWA) (3500 MHz), the BWA foresees that the main impact of UWB will be the degradation of the performance of the subscriber terminal, in the above bands, to receive signals from the base station," the company writes. Bell conducted its own tests to verify potential inference with PCS handsets. Using an Ev-DO equipped handset located two kilometres away from a simulated UWB device, the handset was able to download a 5 Mbyte file at 674 kbps. However, when the UWB device and Ev-DO handset were placed 30 centimetres apart, the handset was virtually unuseable. Separating the two devices by one metre allowed the handset to receive signals from the base station but at a 20% reduced throughput rate. The company notes that it continues to undertake similar testing with PCS systems and its other licensed bandwidth in the 2300 MHz and 3500 MHz bands, and it cautions the department to conduct more studies to fully understand the potential interference impact. American interests are, of course, recommending that Industry Canada move to adopt rules that are in line with those adopted by the FCC, so as to ensure Canadians can benefit from readily accessible UWB products. The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) notes that the United States is the only administration with rules in place for UWB and it is therefore logical that Canada do the same. "As a result, manufacturers are developing technology based on these regulations, which have facilitated the development of this nascent technology while addressing concerns over potential interference. Conversely, the addition of new or different regulations than those adopted by the FCC may stall development of UWB products for the Canadian market and likely result in delays in their delivery to its consumers," writes the ITI. Intel, arguably one of the most influential technology developers in the world, is categorical in its assessment of potential interference from UWB devices on existing licensed networks. The American chip-maker believes that for the most part "UWB devices authorized at the FCC limit will not interfere with any other services." Writes the company: "Intel believes that while in a very limited number of cases, technical studies suggest that there could be potential interference to some services, nonetheless in the overwhelming number of cases the concerns expressed in relation to potential interference in unlikely to be significant in practice or can be mitigated with relatively simply mechanisms." Other parties noted in their comments that the 3 GHz to 10 GHz range could be sub-divided to accommodate the lack of available spectrum below 6 GHz. The Radio Advisory Board of Canada, Nortel Networks Corp. and Nokia suggest that this could be solved by limiting UWB device use in the bands below 6 GHz. Nokia goes one step further, though. "We believe that there is a duty to protect incumbent radio services and that the long-term benefits of UWB are increased by restricting its use to bands above 6 GHZ where other mobile services are not envisaged," writes the company.

UWB technology usage sparks opposition from Canada interests

News | 06/16/2005 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us