Tuesday, May 17, 2011

On ice skating and open bands !


Unlicensed bands are like skating rinks

If you have never seen or heard about a public skating rink, you could think the whole idea was crazy - toddlers, grandparents, teenagers, speed maniacs, all without helmets or knee-pads skating in a common area with no lanes, minimal rules and no guarantees that you won't get hurt! But the fact is, it does work and the reason it works is precisely the absence of specific rules.

Open wireless bands such as the 2.4 GHz ISM bands too have a large common spectrum-area, different kinds of participants - high bandwidth WiFi, narrow band but hopping natured Bluetooth, etc. It has a few transmission rules and most importantly just like the skating rink, no guarantees about interference from other users. You can and probably will collide but overall the system seems to work fairly well.

The idea of spontaneous order

Daniel B. Klein speaks about the same skating rink analogy with respect to society and economy. He argues that "intuition leads us to think that complex problems require complex, deliberate solutions. In a roller rink, the social good depends on getting the patterns to mesh. But no one is minding that good..... but in promoting my interest in avoiding collision with you, I also promote your interest in avoiding collision with me." And that is probably the key: coincidence of interest

Imagine a "rink master" in the rink who sits at the center and communicates instructions to individual skaters - 'Move right in 2 seconds', 'Increase your speed by 5mph' or 'Shift lane in 5 seconds'. Such a system could only work if the rink master precisely knows the capabilities and desires of each participant, not to mention the unwieldy task of calculating the optimum decisions for hundreds of people and communicating it to them in time.

This idea directly ties with the centralized vs distributed decision debate in wireless communications. And from the skating rink analogy, we can see that if we want to accommodate a large number of devices with widely varying access capabilities and data rate or delay requirements, an open free-for-all approach can work well with even very limited guidance. The coincidence of interest in avoiding collisions and the statistical multiplexing of available data help create spontaneous order in the wireless domain.

What's essential for co-existence

There are two important things that minimizes accidents in the skating rink:

  1. A basic set of rules: 'No pushing or sudden stopping', 'No loose articles of clothing', 'Fixed direction of movement', etc.
  2. Visibility: More than anything, the reason why we don't see constant collisions is that everyone can see what others are doing and decide what's the best action to take in response.
In unlicensed band operation, we have an analogous set of rules that each device has to adhere to but sometimes the visibility of what others are doing is very limited. In particular what I think would really help promote co-existence is a basic sense of the wireless environment - more than what the device can see itself like what is the channel occupancy on other channels, what kinds of devices are operating nearby, how much of the channel are they occupying etc. Listen before talk and other MAC schemes on those lines, essentially make use of the local visibility and delay their transmissions based on what they see on the channel. However the end-result is far from optimum. Bianchi's analysis, for example, shows that there is a specific transmission probability at which the optimum value of the system throughput is achieved. And this transmission probability is a function of the number of participants in the interference range of a device, which is an unknown from the point of view of each device.

The final point

The key point that I want to convey here is that even though decentralized, distributed decisions seem to be the best solution for unlicensed operation, there could be great gains by providing each network/device a certain sense of the wireless neighborhood through external means (a control channel ?). Without an improved co-existence mechanism between secondary devices in the TV White Space, the whole ecosystem of this new unlicensed band could be in trouble.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Startups in the TV White Space domain

While a host of big companies are already involved in various aspects of TV White Space (see a recent survey on TV White Space Cognitive Radio Patent portfolio); a stream of startups are emerging with an eye on the TVWS applications. Brief info on some of them:

1. Spectrum Bridge: Formed in 2007, is leading the field trials for TVWS deployment and is one of the Database Admins assigned by FCC. Focus: database, application software, value added services, and full network deployment

2. Adaptrum: Small Silicon Valley Startup, formed in 2004 with ties with UC Berkeley. Built one of the 1st White Space hardware for FCC approval along with the big players - Microsoft, Philips and Motorola. Focus seems to be hardware implementation but they also mention real-time resource monitoring, automated resource management, and self forming and optimizing networking capability in their company profile.

3. Neul: UK based startup founded in 2010. Aims to use the TV White Space for machine-to-machine communication like smart-grid, asset tracking, vehicular systems, remote health monitoring etc. Team looks impressive, not much impact as yet.

4. Key Bridge Global: A 2001 company which joined the TVWS bandwagon as a database administrator, though the revenue model is unclear for all the database providers. Have created a subsidiary called dsa, with some generic details about TVWS on the website for now.

A long list of interested parties can be obtained from the current members list of Wireless Innovation

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Links to links

List of blogs, literature reviews on similar topics:
  • Blog from Cognitive Radio Technologies, James Neel and Jeff Reed - Very informative, lots of relevant links, updated regularly.
  • Blog from Gonzalo Vazquez Vilar, Researcher from Spain
  • Blog from Michael Marcus, popular name in the wireless/spectrum related domains
  • Blog from Spectrum Bridge, leading the initial deployments and database handling
  • Blog from Amit Jain, VP, Product Management, Femtocells at Airvana

Sunday, November 28, 2010

TV White Space Applications ?

While the wireless industry has unanimously welcomed the FCC's decision on freeing up the TV white spaces, there doesn't seem to be a clear consensus on the applications that will come up in that band. Some links on the proposed applications:


  • Cambridge Consultants list three major applications: Rural broadband, Municipal Wireless Network and In-home media distribution.
  • Microsoft seems to be focusing on the second one above - a corporate/municipal wireless network that can cover a substantially larger area than WiFi. They are currently leading the development and deployment of experimental TV band networks. Full publication list and detailed project description at their site
  • There is a municipal wireless network being deployed in Wilmington, NC in partnership with Spectrum Bridge where the applications mentioned are: traffic cameras, Wi-Fi access in city parks, remotely monitor and manage wetland areas. Future applications promised are expanded Internet connectivity for local schools, medical monitoring, and other environmental monitoring
  • Section 5 of this paper mentions the following applications: Wireless home networks, Smart metering, Femtocells, Mobile broadband (related paper) and Vehicular communications for intelligent transport


Home networks applications seem to be interesting more from the demand side rather than it being a fit application for white space. The fundamentally better range will actually cause more interference but a good power control scheme can probably solve this problem. A detailed paper from a UK perspective is this

  • A detailed feasibility study on using the TV white space for backhaul Internet access is described in this recent paper. (Full paper not yet available). A search on those lines lead to other proposals as well. A consortium of companies including Sprint Nextel have requested licensed backhaul services in the white space
  • A lot of interesting slides from the industry is archived here. Provides insights to the problems that these companies are foreseeing in the deployment. In particular this slide deck from Spectrum Bridge points out many application scenarios and also emphasizes that the main market will be tier 3 towns/rural areas because of the non-availability of TV white space in the metro areas. This means different sets of applications in the metro areas and the rural areas.
  • Found another paper detailing the potential applications, and the under-development standard for home-networking type applications using the TV band by the Cognitive Network Alliance (CogNeA). The standard is called Ecma-392. More details here
  • Supporting the already well developed WiFi standard in the TV White Space might be the 1st and possibly the most economical application because that would entail the least investment from device manufacturers. A protocol called 802.11af is already under way. A somewhat pessimistic (or call it realistic) view of the TV band devices is mentioned here.
  • List of top 5 White Space applications from a tech blog:
1. Wide area coverage in rural areas (e.g. IEEE 802.22)
2. Hotspot/low-power broadband (e.g. IEEE 802.11af)
3. Backhaul for WiFi in hotels, campuses, businesses
4. Connectivity for security cameras
5. Remote monitoring (power plants, patients, metering, …)