执法小组委员会陈述2017年11月

Enforcement 1.What options do you see for making enforcement more robust, including by increasing automation toprevent interference, and to identify and respond to interference when it does occur in the near orlonger term? 2.What are the principal technical and operational options for enabling automated enforcement, atboth the network and device levels, and how would you address cybersecurity and privacyrequirements? Please consider, among others, options related to: station IDs; data cloud/fogarchitectures; and crowd-sourcing.3.What options for automated enforcement are unique to the development and deployment of 5Gtechnologies/applications?4.What steps do you recommend the Federal Government, specifically NTIA, take to implementautomated enforcement processes? What steps will the private sector need to take? Please considersteps relating to technical, process and policy issues, including potential operator-to-operatorcoordination approaches? Subcommittee Members Mary BrownMark CrosbyDale HatfieldPaul KolodzyMark McHenryJanice ObuchowskiRick ReaserDennis RobersonAndrew RoyMariam SorondBryan TramontJennifer WarrenBob Weller NTIA AdvisorsBruce JacobsDavid ReedYang Weng Findings Most companies hire consultants to locate and identify interferenceWhen considering automated enforcement, there are three types ofinterference – Intra-system, Proximate and WidespreadAutomated systems today are relatively primitiveNext generation wireless systems - 5G - are providing challengesModern spectrum use trends are such that many services utilize a number ofseparate bands Recommendation 1 Automation with regard to enforcement is not a panacea.Manual investigations will continue to be needed for theforeseeable future. NTIA should continue to establish and encourage capabilities andprocesses in order to someday more fully enable automatedenforcement systems. Recommendation 2 NTIA should develop a standard for interference detection,classification, logging, and report generation software capabilities thatcould be mandated, when practical, for insertion within radios thatshare spectrum with federal systems. This should include the development of a machine-readable reportstandard for interference detection results, classification results andlogging. Recommendation 3 NTIA should investigate the establishment of an information sharingprogram/database of experiences of discovering and identifyinginterference. This would help enable automated identification ofinterference sources. NTIA should investigate who would pay for and who would operate the5G enforcement activity. Recommendation 4 NTIA should analyze the different enforcement process stages todetermine the automation approaches and the costs/benefits ofautomation at each stage. Subsequently, NTIA should develop an automated enforcementarchitecture for shared spectral bands. Recommendation 5 NTIA may wish to further study some fundamental questions that would need to beaddressed if automated enforcement were to be broadly deployed … How is interference/harmful interference defined?How are externally-generated forms of interference detected and handled?How does handling externally-generated interference differ from unintentional interference?How are externally-generated unintentional forms of interference detected and handled?For formal interference actions, what evidence should be collected and how are “chain ofcustody” issues associated with that evidence maintained?The extent to which SASs or the system technology that they have developed may be utilizedin the future to participate in automated enforcement activities will require defining theirparticipatory role and responsibilities. Questions and Comments?