1. No category

REFARMING 2G BANDS
Policy Considerations from the Asia Pacific Perspectives
Joe Guan, Spectrum Policy Manager, Asia Pacific
11 APRIL 2013
18 March 2015, Vientiane
© GSMA 2013
WHO WE ARE
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
Key Policy
Considerations
Technology
Neutrality
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
Spectrum
Harmonisation
TECHNOLOGY NEUTRALITY




Many of the original mobile licences were issued for a specific technology (e.g. GSM or
CDMA) which stops the band being ‘refarmed’ to a more efficient technology (e.g. LTE)
We support a licensing approach that allows any compatible, noninterfering technology
to be used in mobile frequency bands
Technology neutral licences encourage innovation and promote competition, allowing
markets to determine which technologies succeed, to the benefit of consumers
Spectrum identifications for IMT are technology-neutral. IMT technologies including
GPRS, EDGE, UMTS, HSPA, and LTE are standardised for technical coexistence
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
SPECTRUM HARMONISATION
Brings down the cost of mobile
devices
CHOICE
ROAMING
competition
harmonised
bands
Enables people to roam
MOBILE
SPECTRUM
Reduces interference issues
along borders
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
AFFORDABILITY
SCALE
economies
of scale
billions of
subscribers
IDENTIFIED SPECTRUM BANDS FOR MOBILE
Asia Pacific Region
Coverage Bands (<1GHz)
703
824
748
758
Capacity Bands (>1GHz)
803
1710
1785
20
MHz
The 700 band: 2x45 MHz
The1800 band: 2x75 MHz
849
869
894
1920
1980
20
MHz
915
1880
2110
2170
30
MHz
The 850 band: 2x25 MHz
880
1805
10
MHz
925
The 2100 band: 2x60 MHz
960
2300
2400
10
MHz
The 900 band: 2x35 MHz
The 2300 band: 100 MHz
2500
2570
2620
TDD
The 2600 band: 2x70 MHz with 50 MHz unpaired TDD
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
2690
SPECTRUM HARMONISATION
A Tale of Two Digital Dividends
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
APT700 (698806MHz)
CEPT800
(791-862MHz)
Region 3’s first Digital
Dividend
Region 1’s first Digital
Dividend
Widely adopted
across APAC and
Latin America
Mostly used in
Europe, 500 million
population market
An economy of scale
of more than 2.5
billion population
committed
The second Digital
Dividend is likely to
be aligned with
APT700
SPECTRUM HARMONISATION

Adopting harmonised, regional/international band plans for mobile broadband ensures
that interference between services can be managed, and consumers could enjoy a
wider selection of affordable handsets

In the future, more capacity in the extended 850MHz band may be realized through the
development of new harmonized bands, such as band 26 (814MHz – 894MHz) or band
27 (807MHz – 869MHz). These bands are starting to be used in Asia Pacific
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
PLANNING FOR SUB-1GHz
Asia Pacific Region
Coverage Bands (<1GHz)
Band 26
703
748
758
803
814
824
835
859
869
880
915 925
960
915 925
960
Band 27
703
748
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
758
803 807
824
835
852
869
880
THANK YOU
[email protected]
© GSMA 2014
EXTRA SLIDES
Supporting Slides
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
TECHNICAL STUDIES
 UMTS900/1800 networks can co-exist with other UMTS900/1800 networks
with a carrier separation of 5 MHz;
 UMTS900/1800 networks can co-exist with other GSM900/1800 networks
with a carrier separation of 2.8 MHz;
Source: ECC Report 82
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
TECHNICAL STUDIES
 Protection of GSM microcell/picocell from UMTS by separating them with the
GSM macrocell frequency block in between;
 Operator to deploys both UMTS & GSM in the same band is suggested to
use the so-called “Sandwich” frequency arrangement.
Source: ECC Report 82
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
TECHNICAL STUDIES
 LTE900/1800 & GSM900/1800 networks
 in uncoordinated operation are recommended to have 200kHz or more
separation between their nearest carrier channel edges;
 in coordinated operation (co-located sites) don’t require frequency
separation at nearest carrier channel edges.
 LTE900/1800 & UMTS900/1800 networks don’t require frequency separation
at neighbouring channel edges;
 No frequency separation is required between neighbouring LTE900/1800
networks.
Source: CEPT Report 40, 3GPP TR36.942
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
TECHNICAL STUDIES
 Border Coordination – maximum carrier mean field strength value before
coordination is required at borders
All other cases refers to:
- UMTS vs. UMTS when using preferential codes
- UMTS vs. UMTS when center frequencies are not aligned
- LTE vs. LTE
- WiMAX vs. WiMAX
- LTE vs. GSM (and GSM vs LTE)
- LTE vs. WiMAX (and WiMAX vs LTE)
- LTE vs. UMTS (and UMTS vs. LTE)
- UMTS vs. GSM (and GSM vs. UMTS)
- UMTS vs. WiMAX (and WiMAX vs UMTS)
- WiMAX vs. GSM (and GSM vs WiMAX).
SPECTRUM FOR MOBILE
© GSMA 2014
Source: ECC RECOMMENDATION (08)02