Cable broadband operators are buffeted by shifting competition which includes 3.5-4G wireless broadband. While the cable to the premises can be described as a 'last mile' connection to residential and business users, wireless broadband increasingly plays the more encompassing and enabling role of always-on 'personal broadband' connection. The FCC new rule making proposes to adopt open access mandates for IP data networks: open devices, and open applications and content. However, the FCC has conceded that PtP file sharing as enabled by torrent programs and other uses that can adversely impact overall network performance can be managed. The principle the FCC apparently pursues is 'fair trade' usage: while it can be ok to restrict detrimental use of network resources, this must be provided on a fair and equal commercial basis to all legal usage.

As a private citizen, I think Meridith Baker is relying on vested interest cliches. The FCC has fundamental right to regulate free and open access that stems from the monopoly grant to use spectrum in the public interest. Pursuant to that, the evolution of wireless technology has become inseparable to unified communications that must work in harmony with all IP communications. Furthermore, all broadband communications media is rapidly innovating and unleashing productivity as part of ICT Cloud environments. Moreover, market pressures are complimentary to a revision of the FCC basic rules: AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile concede in several areas including open VoIP because the battle for cash flows is driven by consumer preference for open applications and content. Other analysts have suggested that, therefore, the market is sufficient to ensure enterprise in the public interest. That may well be what emerges but if redundant enforcement will not be cumbersome or even necessary. It is timely and fitting to set out the new rule making. What's more, its fitting and necessary that communications companies become boiler rooms of collaborative innovation. In some ways that takes disruptive transformation from tight control to acceptance of a shared role. Furthermore, what is necessary is what society compels to fulfill its needs within cognizance of human rights. -Robert Syputa Maravedis cloud4g green4g

The operators and suppliers that form the incumbent mobile industry are very much like the 3G BORG: it is large, square but very well adapted to seek out things it can assimilate to advantage. That is why 3GPP/3GPP2 has come around to assimilate WiMAX technology and call it LTE. In doing that, NG becomes WiMAX+LTE. Both in legal & regulatory bounds and in ecosystem and business structure. WiMAX or LTE? Frankly, you and I do not decide, we observe. And so do does the WBA industry as a whole unless it acts strategically. Mike, its good to see your thoughts entering into the various discussions.

This looks very similar to the mechanisms in 802.16m. The Verizon open development webinar too place today. The talk mostly was confined to the rel. 8 specification and Verizon's overlay spec. They did clarify a few points and gave some hints about future developments including that they would evolve the network to the LTE-Advanced specification including E-UTRAN developments. However, there are some limitations including use of MIMO. I suspected that this might be the case because the network will use AWS 700MHz spectrum. The 10MHz x 10 MHz FDD channel access organization makes sense for that spectrum but, and many here may disagree, I think this is a limiting approach in networks that evolve to use micro-cellular SONs tiered spectrum. That will be something that Clearwire might develop to an advantage. The strength of Verizon's network will be the great penetration and range. And, of course, leveraging of their market position, capital and partners. Another point is that VZW will use SIMs. Frankly, I think 3GPP should adopt the virtual SIMs embedded firmware approach that was propsoed for rel 8 and get away from discrete SIM cards. That makes sense for mobile controlled devices but makes little sense for the multiple-attach usage model that Verizon's CEO said would become the virtue of the new network. He said that while 3G networks are measured as having reached 90+ saturation, the LTE network would achieve 300%-500% saturation, - going on to say that means users will have several devices. In that situation, why use the little discrete SIMs cards? I suspect that approach will end up going away within five years as it will just add cost and less flexiblity.

I posted a list of references and will have an short article on this subject out this week: http://www.agglom.com/set/65849/What_We_Read_from_the_Verizon_700_MHz_C_Block_LTE_Specifications BTW, the agglom site is a good way to save commented links to sources. Groups can also be allowed to add to a set of links which could be useful for collaboration on articles, books, and research work.

Verizon has left much to the imagination as might be expected. 1 - They have to operate within the FCC open access and open device requirements for the AWS 700 C-Band. In response to questions raised following Verizon's comments about how open they intend to make the network, the FCC said at the OpenMobile Summit last winter that they intend to enforce these requirements vigorously. 2 - This likely means that VZ won't require but cannot restrict VoIP. Seems to me that they could set guidelines to assure good operation but since they cannot control the revenue from VoIP on open devices, they might have little motivation to help out the competition to their own LTE-VoIP. 3 - My understanding is that handoff between LTE and LTE, CDMA, 2G, 3G and even, heaven forsake Verizon, WiMAX, networks will be defined by the referenced 3GPP specifications. Since this is very important to user experience, particularly if used in a mixed service offering, VZ will probably test rigorously. But there is a question of how much VZ needs to offer to the open developer community. It is very certain that they will work with their network partners, Alcatel-Lucent and Ericsson and major handset providers for Verizon labeled devices and multiple mode service within the Verizon network. But they won't likely have much motivation to spend money to enable developers to work out the kinks for other operators to hand-off and roam their LTE network. I'm doing creative speculation since some details remain unknown. I've asked VZ for details on many aspects of the development but they have not been overly forthcoming as of yet.

From the looks of the spec and comments on the VZ openDevelopment web board, Verizon won't define requirements for multiple mode operation. And I don't know how they could do that and live within the FCC requirements for open access and open devices.