*Pages 1--14 from Microsoft Word - 18941.doc* Federal Communications Commission FCC 00- 103 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D. C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Inquiry Regarding Software Defined Radios ) ET Docket No. 00- 47 ) ) NOTICE OF INQUIRY Adopted: March 17, 2000 Released: March 21, 2000 By the Commission: Commissioner Ness issuing separate statement. Comment date: [75 days from publication in Federal Register] Reply comment date: [105 days from publication in Federal Register] INTRODUCTION 1. The Commission is initiating this inquiry to obtain comments from the public on a variety of issues related to software defined radios. Software defined radios could offer tremendous advantages to consumers over currently available wireless equipment. These benefits include lower cost, a greater variety of features, and the ability to adapt to multiple communication standards. They could also offer advantages to manufacturers, such as increased economies of scale in production, increased worldwide market opportunities, and a decrease in the number of devices that must be maintained in inventory. Software defined radios could expand access to broadband communications for all persons and increase competition among telecommunication service providers. Through this inquiry, we seek input to help us evaluate the current state of software defined radio technology, and to determine whether changes to the Commission’s rules are necessary to facilitate the deployment of this technology. Upon review of the responses to this inquiry, we will determine whether to propose any changes to the rules. BACKGROUND 2. The Commission has noted developments in the area of software defined radio with interest because this technology could have far reaching implications for the way the Commission allocates and licenses spectrum and authorized radio equipment. Software defined radios have the potential to vastly improve the efficiency of spectrum usage at a time when the demand for wireless communications services is rapidly increasing. They also have the potential to overcome some of the incompatibilities that exist between various communications services both domestically and worldwide. 1 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00- 103 2 3. In a software defined radio, functions that were formerly carried out solely in hardware, such as the generation of the transmitted radio signal and the tuning and detection of the received radio signal, are performed by software residing in high- speed digital signal processors. The fact that these functions are carried out in software means that the radio can be programmed to transmit and receive over a wide range of frequencies and to emulate virtually any different desired transmission format. The operating parameters of such a radio can be readily altered in the field by a simple software change. For example, a software defined radio could have the ability to transmit and receive in the various cellular and PCS frequency bands and transmission standards used in the United States and around the world. 4. Software defined radio technology was originally developed for the United States military. The “SPEAKeasy” project was undertaken by the Department of Defense with the goal of developing a multi- band, multi- mode software programmable radio that could allow different branches of the military to communicate in times of war. The first demonstration of a SPEAKeasy software programmable radio came in 1995, and a smaller and more reliable version was developed for evaluation by the armed forces in 1997. 1 The successful demonstration of the SPEAKeasy radio led a group of more than 50 domestic and foreign companies to form the Modular Multifunction Information Transfer System (MMITS) Forum, later renamed the Software Defined Radio (SDR) Forum. 2 The goals of the SDR Forum are to accelerate the development, deployment and use of software defined radios, and to work toward the adoption of an open architecture for the equipment. This open architecture would allow different manufacturers to make software for radio equipment, just as different manufacturers make software for personal computers. 5. The FCC Technological Advisory Council (TAC) has also been studying issues related to software defined radio. The Commission established the TAC in 1998 to provide technical advice and to make recommendations on the issues and questions presented to it by the Commission. 3 In May 1999, the TAC was requested to assess and report to the Commission the current state of the art for software defined radios, cognitive radios, and similar devices and, to the extent possible, predict future developments for these technologies. 4 The TAC was also requested to suggest ways that the availability of such devices might affect the Commission’s traditional approaches to spectrum management, as well as ways the agency could facilitate experimentation and commercial deployment of such devices. 5 1 See ‘SPEAKeasy’ Reduces Equipment / Logistics Requirements – Increases Interoperability, available at http:// www. afrl. af. mil/ successstories/ emerg_ tech/. 2 The SDR Forum’s Internet address is www. sdrforum. org. 3 See Public Notice, FCC Requests Nominations for Membership on the Technological Advisory Council, released December 1, 1998, available at www. fcc. gov/ Bureaus/ Engineering_ Technology/ Public_ Notices/ 1998/ pnet8024. html. The TAC consists of 25 individuals from industry and academia, plus a designated Federal Officer. 4 See Official Requests from the Federal Communications Commission to the Technological Advisory Council, dated May 26, 1999, available at www. fcc. gov/ oet/ tac/ requests. pdf. 5 See www. fcc. gov/ oet/ tac/ focusgroups. html for further information about the work of the TAC on software defined radio, including links to papers and presentations submitted to the TAC. 2 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00- 103 6 frequencies. These capabilities could open up new possibilities in the area of spectrum allocation and licensing. For example, instead of relying upon a user to find an open frequency in a congested area of spectrum before transmitting, a radio could monitor a wide range of spectrum and find a “hole” with sufficient bandwidth where the user could operate. 15. The use of software defined radios may also enable new types of spectrum sharing that are currently precluded by today's conventional equipment. For example, our PCS rules permit wide flexibility in terms of the services offered and technology employed in the PCS spectrum. 13 In the event that a PCS licensee has spectrum available in excess of its immediate needs, it could lease that spectrum on a short- term basis to a third party. Software defined radio could facilitate such sharing. A third party could, for example, acquire from a manufacturer software defined radio equipment capable of being configured to offer different services in the various frequency ranges. Having negotiated for spectrum use, it would be in a position to rent a package of equipment and "airtime" to end users needing communications capacity on a short-term basis. 14 It would load the appropriate software to properly configure the equipment at the time the end user enters into the rental agreement. Another alternative would be for the end user to contract directly with the licensee for the necessary spectrum and then rent the properly configured software defined radio equipment. With today's technology, such short- term sharing is difficult or impossible to accomplish due to the difficulties associated with quickly configuring radios for different applications in novel spectrum configurations. As a result, we believe that significant public benefits might flow from software defined radio technology. The public benefits include increased communications capacity for end users and better utilization of the spectrum resource. We seek comments regarding these potential benefits and what regulatory steps we might take to permit the use of software defined radios to enable such sharing arrangements. 16. In a slightly different sharing scenario, the licensee of a block of spectrum that is not fully utilized might negotiate with a second party to permit the use of a portion of the spectrum at times when it is available. The licensee could use a beacon system to ensure that it has primary access to the spectrum. Under such a system the primary user transmits a beacon signal when the band is available for use by the second user. The second user’s transmitters must check for the presence of the beacon signal continuously and must immediately cease use of the block if the beacon signal disappears. These checking/ cessation capabilities within software defined radios guarantee the primary user quick reliable access to the spectrum when needed. The shared spectrum is thus “interruptible”. While interruptible spectrum is not appropriate for some applications, it may be appropriate for other applications, particularly those in which users are willing to pay less for less reliable service and in data applications where alternative transmission exists. 13 See 47 C. F. R. § 24.3 (allowing PCS licensees to provide any mobile communications service and fixed service on a co- primary basis but prohibiting Broadcasting as defined by the Communications Act); see also 47 C. F. R. § 24.229- 24.238 (minimal technical standards to prevent interference to other services with no requirements for channelization, bandwidth or transmission format). 14 The spectrum may include segments from multiple licensees who have agreed to temporary use by another party. 6 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00- 103 11 should include the following words in the body of the message, "get form ." A sample form and directions will be sent in reply. 26. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appear in the caption of this proceeding, commenters must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. All filings must be sent to the Commission's Secretary, Magalie Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, The Portals, 445 Twelfth Street, S. W., Room TW- A325, Washington, D. C. 20554. 27. Parties who choose to file by paper should also submit their comments on diskette. These diskettes should be submitted to: Hugh L. Van Tuyl, Office of Engineering and Technology, Federal Communications Commission, The Portals, 445 Twelfth Street, S. W., Room 7- A133, Washington, D. C. 20554. Such a submission should be on a 3.5 inch diskette formatted in an IBM compatible format using Word for Windows or compatible software. The diskette should be accompanied by a cover letter and should be submitted in "read only" mode. The diskette should be clearly labeled with the commenter's name, proceeding (including the lead docket number, in this case ET Docket No. 00- 47, type of pleading (comment or reply comment), date of submission, and the name of the electronic file on the diskette. The label should also include the following phrase "Disk Copy - Not an Original." Each diskette should contain only one party's pleadings, preferably in a single electronic file. In addition, commenters must send diskette copies to the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20037. 28. Comments and reply comments will be available for public inspection during regular business hours in the Reference Information Center (Room CY- A257) of the Federal Communications Commission, The Portals, 445 Twelfth Street, S. W., Washington, D. C. 20554. Copies of comments and reply comments are available through the Commission's duplicating contractor: International Transcription Service, Inc. (ITS, Inc.), 1231 20th Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20036, (202) 857- 3800, TTY (202) 293- 8810. 29. Alternative formats (computer diskette, large print, audio cassette and Braille) are available to persons with disabilities by contacting the Consumer Information Bureau, Consumer Education Office at (202) 418- 2514, TTY (202) 418- 2555, or at fccinfo@ fcc. gov. The Notice can also be downloaded at: www. fcc. gov/ dtf/. 30. IT IS ORDERED, that pursuant to Sections 4( i), 301, 302, 303( e), 303( f), 303( r), 307 and 332( b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U. S. C. Sections 154( i), 301, 302, 303( e), 303( f), 303( r), 307 and 332( b), this Notice Inquiry is hereby ADOPTED. 31. For further information regarding this Notice of Inquiry, contact Mr. Hugh L. Van Tuyl, Office of Engineering and Technology, (202) 418- 7506. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 11 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00- 103 12 Magalie Roman Salas Secretary 12 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00- 103 13 Separate Statement of Commissioner Susan Ness Re: Inquiry Regarding Software Defined Radios I am bullish about the prospect of “software defined radio” (SDR), a new generation of technology that potentially will allow communications equipment to adapt to multiple standards and add service features without changes to the equipment’s hardware. The Notice of Inquiry we release today is both a culmination of efforts and the beginning of a new initiative. While work still lies ahead, SDR holds the potential to enhance our participation in the global economy, to access new services, and to utilize the spectrum more efficiently. The Notice is the outgrowth of efforts by the Department of Defense (DOD), members of the SDR Forum, and the FCC’s Technical Advisory Council (TAC). DOD and members of the SDR Forum have pioneered the first generation of SDR, seeking to generate equipment that can be programmed to transmit and receive on any frequency within a wide range using a variety of transmission formats. The FCC has held several forums on new technologies and spectrum use, at which the potential benefits of SDR technology have been demonstrated. The TAC has reviewed SDR technology over the past year, studying the ways in which this technology may assist us in managing our precious resource – spectrum. This Notice is the result of such study. Hopefully, it will launch us in the direction of new products that better serve consumers; these products can be governed by streamlined rules that place the products in the marketplace more rapidly. As a consumer, I am excited about SDR because it has the potential to add new meaning to the words “anywhere, anytime.” As envisioned, SDR devices can be adapted to work anywhere on the planet through software changes or upgrades that can be installed or downloaded from remote locations. Such devices also could download new service applications as they are developed and made available. As a spectrum manager, I am excited about SDR because it augments the tools we have to more efficiently manage spectrum. Today, we struggle to squeeze multiple services into spectrum, or to mandate specific standards to permit communications devices to work seamlessly. With SDR, the software could make such decisions, not the FCC. The availability of such software also might make it easier for different users to share crowded spectrum. Of course, protection of other spectrum licensees from interference resulting from SDR devices is paramount. Given the promise of SDR, it is my hope that industry participants will help us address the complex issues raised in the Notice, so that we can move quickly to make any necessary changes in our rules. I am particularly interested in ways that we might revamp or streamline our equipment approval process to accommodate SDR. Any rules that would enable new and innovative products to reach the marketplace more quickly without compromising safety and interference protection for existing services would most certainly serve the public interest. 13 Federal Communications Commission FCC 00- 103 14 14