2013年csmac会议和经验教训记录

+++++ MEETING TheCommittee met at the U.S.Department ofCommerce,Herbert C.Hoover Building,Room 4830,1401ConstitutionAvenue,N.W.,Washington,D.C.,at 1:00 p.m.,BrianFontes and Gregory Rosston,Co-Chairs,presiding. PRESENT: BRIANFONTES,Co-ChairGREGORYROSSTON,Co-ChairLARRYALDER,MemberMICHAELCALABRESE,MemberMARKE.CROSBY,MemberTHOMASS.DOMBROWSKY,JR.,MemberDAVIDL.DONOVAN,MemberHAROLDFURCHTGOTT-ROTH,MemberH.MARK GIBSON,MemberDALEN.HATFIELD,MemberKEVINC.KAHN,Member(by phone)MARKA.McHENRY,MemberJANICEOBUCHOWSKI,MemberROBERTPEPPER,Member(by phone) Page 2PRESENT:(cont’d)CARLPOVELITES,MemberRICHARD(RICK)REASER,JR.,Member(by phone)DENNISA.ROBERSON,MemberBRYANN.TRAMONT,ESQ.,MemberJENNIFERWARREN,MemberALSOPRESENT:LAWRENCEE.STRICKLING,Assistant SecretaryofCommerce for Communications andInformationKARLB.NEBBIAJIMSNYDER(by phone)PETERTENHULA Page 7rulemaking.Theworking group--one,folkswhosupportedourCSMACeffortsarecontinuingsome outside discussions led bySteveSharkey and Ivan Navarro,continuingtheirperfecting of the arrangements in termsofwhat kind of monitoring might be done,experimentationmightbedone,testinginadvance,and so on.Sothose discussions arecontinuing. Onthe1755-1850portion,ofcourse,you know we submitted our letter totheCommission a few weeks ago indicating oursupportfor the DoD proposed path forward,whichincluded access to the 2025-2110 bandasa way to provide them greater flexibilityasthey yielded up most of the access to the1755-1780. Thereare still going to be someoperations,the satellite operations,EW typeofwork,and possibly a couple other thingsthatwould still be operating in there.But,nonetheless,we put forward our support for Page 8thatapproach.Weprovided the Commission adraftallocation footnote proposal for the2025band,and we forwarded the reports fromtheCSMAC on to them with our support forthem,and we also had a document that weattachedrelated to some NASA feedback onindustrycomments that had already gone intotheprocess on the 29--well,actually,thewhole2025-2110analysis,butofcourseindustryhadspecificallycitedtheupperportionof the band.Sothey were the thingsthatwe provided to the Commission. Imust say,in all my years ofworkingin the government,I don’t think I’veevergotten anything with such a positiveresponseaswereceivedaboutthisarrangementbeing worked out.SoI thinkeverybodyinvolved was very happy with it,andwe’re excited to move it forward.Theagenciesnow are working diligently on theirtransitionplans,preparingthosefortheJanuarytimeframe.Alot of work to be done, particularlyon the DoD side,but they aremovingforward on that area.3.5gigahertz,of course,that wehadput on the table somewhat earlier,thenextsteps with that,as far as I know overatthe Commission,is they are going to holdaworkshop on January 14th to talk about thevariousapproaches that are being suggestedthere,andcertainlytheideaofthisspectrumaccess system concept--in thatcase,it’s a multi-tiered arrangement,and soon.Butthere’s a lot of discussions goingonrelated to how the government informationwouldbe covered in there,so it links verycloselywith what we’re discussing here inCSMAC. Oneof the other things that cameoutof the road map or path forward on 1755wasa conclusion within DoD that they wouldnotpursue the 5150-5250 band for additionalairborneactivities--itwasprimarilytelemetryactivities--which opens up the band.Sothat really opens up,I think in amuchbroader way,100 megahertz of,you know,fullyaccessible spectrum.Now,we’re continuing on with theworkin 5350-5470.Theanalytical work isstillgoing back and forth within the ITU-Rprepactivities.That’swherethatdiscussionis actually taking place.Iknowthere’sbeen a lot of work,like we did hereinCSMAC,talkingabouthowyoumodeldensitiesof equipment and how the radars,andso on,in that band would respond tothosethings.Sowehavesomerealchallengesthere.Wehaveairborneandsatellite-bornesystemsinthatbandthatwe’venotdealtwithbeforeintheDFSarrangementsat five gigahertz,so we’ve gotsomeadditional challenges.ButI think the work is still 5850-5925,thediscussionsrelatedto that band are for the most part,ifnot in total,going on within an IEEEgroup,where both of those activities arerepresented.Andwe’re seeing some dialoguebetweenthe two sides related to how thosetechnologiesmight work together as opposedtojust being two opposing or interferingsignalsintheair,buthowtheymightactuallytrytotakeadvantageofthestructureof the signals on each side andsolvesome problems there. Sowe’re seeing a lot of workgoingforward and progress toward the goalsthatwe’re,you know,reaching for.SoIthinkpeople are doing good work,and we’re Page 12excitedabout the outcome.That’sit.CO-CHAIRROSSTON:Aretherequestionsfor Karl on his report?CO-CHAIRFONTES:Forthose onthecall,weshouldrecognizethatLarryStricklinghas joined us in the meeting here.MEMBERGIBSON:Ihave a quickquestion.OnIEEE,if you’re working itthroughthe 5850-5925--MR.NEBBIA:Icould get you thespecificname or designator for it,but it’sIthink primarily the one that was set up--setup by th