Author: Alan Weissberger
What’s the real status of Internet access in Cuba?
by Matteo Ceurvels of eMarketer (edited with Notes by Alan J Weissberger)
Few people in Cuba have regular access to the Internet, and those who do encounter slow download speeds, according to an eMarketer study. Although Cuba’s state-run service provider (see details below) has built WiFi hotspots throughout the country, the relatively high rate of $1.50 an hour is too much for most Cubans to pay. [Please see references below for additional information on the WiFi hotspots in Cuba- mostly in Havana]
eMarketer estimates that there will be 360.4 million internet users in Latin America in 2017. While the market research firm does not break out specific metrics for Cuba, the latest figures from the government’s National Office of Statistics and Information (ONEI) show that over 4.5 million people, or roughly 40.3% of the total population, accessed the Internet at least once during 2016.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Editor’s Note: The actual ONEI ICT report (via Google Translate) states that for 2016 there were 403 people that accessed the Internet out of every 1,000 people living on the island. That compares with 348, 271, 261, 257 and 232 people for the years 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, respectively.
The same report (which I don’t trust) says the mobile population coverage (not usage) has been 85.3% of the population from 2012-2016, up from 83.7% in 2011.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
The number of people with internet access in their homes was significantly lower: The BBC reported in March of last year that the at-home internet penetration rate was roughly 5%.
Web access in the country remains relegated to a few options. State-run telecom Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Cuba S.A. (ETECSA), which first began offering public Wi-Fi spots in 2015, claims to provide 391 such spots across the country. But at a cost of about $1.50 per hour, access remains too expensive for most Cubans, and internet speeds are reportedly excruciatingly slow.
ETECSA also began a pilot program in December of last year to provide some 2,000 users in Havana, Cuba’s capital, with fixed broadband internet access for a free two-month trial period. In March, ETECSA said 358 participants in the program signed up to pay for the service, which offered data speeds of between 128 kilobits per second (Kbps) and 2 megabits per second (Mbps).
And when residents of the country do manage to get online, they are subject to strict internet censorship overseen by the government. Some websites and services are blocked, and communications can easily be monitored by government figures.
During parliamentary sessions held in July, Vice President Miguel Díaz-Canel acknowledged that Cuba has one of the lowest internet access rates, but rejected the notion that its society was “fully disconnected.”
He added that tech companies that had entered into agreements with the country’s government to provide them with the infrastructure necessary to expand internet access had been met with “fierce financial prosecution.”
Despite these claims, the government has sought out partnerships with some of the world’s leading tech companies. In April, Google brought servers in the country online for the first time, making it the first foreign tech firm to host its own content in Cuba.
At the parliamentary sessions, Díaz-Canel also claimed that the penetration of social media platforms had grown by 346% in 2016. (The government did not respond to eMarketer’s request to verify this figure.)
However, Martín Utreras, vice president of forecasting at eMarketer, noted that the majority of social media users in the country were most likely foreign tourists looking to stay connected while on vacation.
According to data from StatCounter, there are signs that Facebook is a leading social media platform in the country. Facebook was responsible for 83.3% of page views resulting from social network referrals in Cuba in July, more than either Pinterest (8.4%) or Twitter (4.3%). (StatCounter’s figures take into consideration website referral traffic from both locals and visitors in Cuba.)
Despite signs that internet access is increasing in the country, Cuba still has a long way to go before getting online is something residents consider normal. In fact, many in the country rely on “el paquete semanal,” or the weekly package—a hard drive that is loaded with contraband content such as news, music, TV shows and other videos and passed from person to person.
“Cuba’s journey resembles that of similar trends we’ve seen in the case of China or Vietnam,” Utreras said. “Although Cuba is still many years behind in terms of private telecom investment, infrastructure development and overall internet adoption, by comparison, the immediate future will most likely be driven by government interests rather than the market itself.”
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
References:
https://www.emarketer.com/Article/Cuba-on-Slow-Crawl-Toward-Increased-Internet-Access/1016352
http://www.one.cu/aec2016/17%20Tecnologias%20de%20la%20Informacion.pdf
http://www.businessinsider.com/is-there-internet-in-cuba-2017-1
https://insightcuba.com/blog/2017/03/05/havanas-wifi-hotspots-and-getting-online-cuba
Cuba to expand Internet access and lower price of WiFi connections
Schedule for Development of IMT-2020 “5G” Radio Interface Recommendations
Editor’s Note:
While Verizon [1] and many other wireless network operators plan to roll out their “5G” services between 2018 and 2020, that will be in ADVANCE OF THE ITU-R IMT 2020 “5G” standard. We believe these “5G” roll-outs are extremely negative for the REAL market for standardized “5G,” which won’t begin till 2021 at the earliest.
Note 1. According to Light Reading, a Verizon executive said that the operator’s home-brewed fixed 5G service will get up in running in 2018 but that he doesn’t expect true mobile 5G to arrive until 2020.
John Stratton, executive vice president and president of operations for Verizon Communications Inc., talking at the Deutsche Bank 25th Annual Media & Telecom Conference in Florida, said that Verizon will deliver fixed 5G in 2018. It is working on customer trials in 11 US cities now. (See Verizon Fixed 5G Tests to Top 3Gbit/s? and Verizon to Start Fixed 5G Customer Trials in April.)
Stratton promised a “meaningful commercial deployment of 5G” in 2018 from Verizon. He was cagey about what exact services the fixed system will provide, but it seems clear that a wireless alternative to cable/DSL services is high on Verizon’s priority list.
“The way we’re thinking about 5G… the ability to leverage the full scale of our business is an important factor,” Stratton added.
The customer trials, Stratton says, will allow Verizon to better understand the signal propagation characteristics of the fixed 5G system and “the load per node.” Verizon has previously said that it has been testing at ranges of up to 1,500 feet in diverse environments for its fixed option.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
| Draft REVISION of ITU-R WP5 document IMT-2020/2: |
| Submission, evaluation process and consensus building for IMT-2020 |
This document describes the process and activities identified for the development of the IMT‑2020 terrestrial components radio interface Recommendations.
1. Time schedule
The time schedule described below applies to the first invitation for candidate RITs (Radio Interface Technologies) or SRITs (Set of Radio Interface Technologies). Subsequent time schedules will be decided according to the submissions of proposals.
Submission of proposals may begin at 28th meeting of Working Party 5D (WP 5D) (currently planned to be 3-11 October 2017) and contribution to the meeting needs to be submitted by 1600 hours UTC, 7 calendar days prior to the start of the meeting. The final deadline for submissions is 1600 hours UTC, 7 calendar days prior to the start of the 32nd meeting of WP 5D in July 2019. The evaluation of the proposed RITs and SRITs by the independent evaluation groups and the consensus-building process will be performed throughout this time period and thereafter. The detailed schedule can be found in Figure 1.
2 Process
2.1 General
Resolution ITU-R 65 on the “Principles for the process for future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond” outlines the essential criteria and principles that will be used in the process of developing the Recommendations and Reports for IMT-2020, including Recommendation(s) for the radio interface specification.
Recommendation ITU-R M.2083, IMT Vision – “Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond” identifies three usage scenarios for IMT-2020 and envisions a broad variety of capabilities, tightly coupled with intended usage scenarios and applications for IMT-2020, resulting in a great diversity/variety of requirements. Recommendation ITU-R M.2083 also identifies the capabilities of IMT-2020, recognising that they will have different relevance and applicability for the different use cases and scenarios addressed by IMT‑2020, some of which are currently not foreseen. In addition, IMT-2020 can be applied in a variety of scenarios, and therefore different test environments are to be considered for evaluation purposes.
A test environment is defined as the combination of usage scenario and geographic environment as described in the draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.EVALUATION]
2.2 Detailed procedure
The detailed procedure is illustrated in Figure 2 and is described below. Some activities are external to ITU-R and others are internal.
IMT-2020 terrestrial component radio interface development process
Step 1 – Circular Letter to invite proposals for radio interface technologies and evaluations
The ITU Radiocommunication Bureau, through Circular Letter 5/LCCE/59, invites the submission of candidate RITs or SRITs addressing the terrestrial component of IMT-2020. Addenda to the Circular Letter provide further details on the invitation for submission of proposals (including technical performance requirements, evaluation criteria and template for submission of candidate technologies).
This Circular Letter and its Addenda also invite subsequent submission of evaluation reports on these candidate RITs or SRITs by registered independent evaluation groups in addition to the initial evaluation report endorsed by the proponent.
Step 2 – Development of candidate RITs or SRITs
In this step, which is typically external to ITU-R, candidate terrestrial component RITs or SRITs are developed to satisfy a version of the minimum technical performance requirements and evaluation criteria of IMT-2020 currently in force (as defined in Resolution ITU-R 65, resolves 6 g)) that will be described in the Draft New Report ITU-R M.[IMT‑2020.SUBMISSION][4].
The required number of test environments for an RIT or SRIT to be fulfilled is as follows:
An RIT needs to fulfil the minimum requirements for at least three test environments; two test environments under eMBB and one test environment under mMTC or URLLC.
An SRIT consists of a number of component RITs complementing each other, with each component RIT fulfilling the minimum requirements of at least two test environments and together as an SRIT fulfilling the minimum requirements of at least four test environments comprising the three usage scenarios.
Step 3 – Submission/reception of the RIT and SRIT proposals and acknowledgement of receipt
The proponents of RITs or SRITs may be Member States, Sector Members, and Associates of ITU‑R Study Group 5, or other organizations in accordance with Resolution ITU-R 9-5.
The submission of each candidate RIT or SRIT must include completed templates (these templates will be provided in draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION], together with any additional inputs which the proponent may consider relevant to the evaluation. Each proposal must indicate the version of the minimum technical performance requirements and evaluation criteria of the IMT-2020 currently in force that it is intended for and make reference to the associated requirements.
The entity that proposes a candidate RIT or SRIT to the ITU-R (the proponent) shall include with it either an initial self-evaluation or the proponents’ endorsement of an initial evaluation submitted by another entity. The submission will not be considered complete without an initial self-evaluation or the proponents’ endorsement of an initial evaluation submitted by another entity.
Proponents and IPR holders should indicate their compliance with the ITU policy on intellectual property rights, as specified in the Common Patent Policy for ITU‑T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC available at: http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/dbase/patent/patent-policy.html (See Note 2 in Section A2.6 of Resolution ITU-R 1-7).
The Radiocommunication Bureau (BR) receives the submission of technical information on the candidate RITs and SRITs and acknowledges its receipt
Submissions should be addressed to the Counsellor for ITU-R Study Group 5, Mr. Sergio Buonomo ([email protected]). These submissions will be prepared as inputs to ITU-R Working Party
Working Party 5D (WP 5D) and will also be made available on the ITU web page for the IMT-2020 submission and evaluation process.
Step 4 – Evaluation of candidate RITs or SRITs by independent evaluation groups (mid 2018-2010)
Candidate RITs or SRITs will be evaluated. The ITU-R membership, standards organisations, and other organizations are invited to proceed with the evaluation. Organizations wishing to become independent evaluation groups are requested to register with ITU-R[6] preferably before the end of 2017. The independent evaluation groups are kindly requested to submit evaluation reports to the ITU-R. The evaluation reports will be considered in the development of the ITU-R Recommendation describing the radio interface specifications.
The evaluation guidelines, including criteria and test models, will be provided in draft new Report ITU‑R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION] as announced in Circular Letter 5/LCCE/59 and its Addenda.
In this step the candidate RITs or SRITs will be assessed based on draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION]. If necessary, additional evaluation methodologies may be developed by each independent evaluation group to complement the evaluation guidelines in draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION]. Any such additional methodology should be shared between independent evaluation groups and sent to the BR for information to facilitate consideration of the evaluation results by ITU-R.
Coordination between independent evaluation groups is strongly encouraged to facilitate comparison and consistency of results, to assist ITU-R in developing an understanding of differences in evaluation results achieved by the independent evaluation groups and to form some preliminary consensus on the evaluation results. Consensus building is encouraged, such as grouping and/or syntheses by proponents in order to better meet the requirements of IMT-2020.
Each independent evaluation group will report its conclusions to the ITU-R. Evaluation reports should be addressed to the Counsellor for ITU-R Study Group 5, Mr. Sergio Buonomo ([email protected]).
The evaluation reports will be prepared as inputs to WP 5D and will also be made available on the ITU web page for the IMT-2020 submission and evaluation process.
The technical performance requirements and evaluation criteria for IMT-2020 are subject to reviews which may introduce changes to the technical performance requirements and evaluation criteria for IMT-2020. Proponents may request evaluation against any of the existing versions of the technical performance requirements and evaluation criteria that are currently in force for IMT-2020.
Step 5 – Review and coordination of outside evaluation activities
WP 5D will act as the focal point for coordination between the various independent evaluation groups. In this step, WP 5D monitors the progress of the evaluation activities, and provides appropriate responses to problems or requests for guidance to facilitate consensus building.
Step 6 – Review to assess compliance with minimum requirements
In this step WP 5D makes an assessment of the proposal as to whether it meets a version of the minimum technical performance requirements and evaluation criteria of the IMT-2020 in draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION].
In this step, the evaluated proposal for an RIT/SRIT is assessed as a qualifying RIT/SRIT, if an RIT/SRIT fulfils the minimum requirements for the five test environments comprising the three usage scenarios.
Such a qualified RIT/SRIT will go forward for further consideration in Step 7.
According to the decision of the proponents, earlier steps may be revisited to complement, revise, clarify and include possible consensus-building for candidate RITs or SRITs including those that initially do not fulfil the minimum requirements of IMT-2020 that will be described in the draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION].
WP 5D will prepare a document on the activities of this step and assemble the reviewed proposals and relevant documentation. WP 5D will keep the proponents informed of the status of the assessment.
Such documentation and feedback resulting from this step can facilitate consensus building that might take place external to the ITU-R in support of Step 7.
Step 7 – Consideration of evaluation results, consensus building and decision
In this step WP 5D will consider the evaluation results of those RITs or SRITs that have satisfied the review process in Step 6.
Consensus building is performed during Steps 4, 5, 6 and 7 with the objective of achieving global harmonization and having the potential for wide industry support for the radio interfaces that are developed for IMT-2020. This may include grouping of RITs or modifications to RITs to create SRITs that better meet the objectives of IMT-2020.
An RIT or SRIT will be accepted for inclusion in the standardization phase described in Step 8 if, as the result of deliberation by ITU-R, it is determined that the RIT or SRIT meets the requirements of Resolution ITU-R 65, resolves 6 e) and f) for the five test environments comprising the three usage scenarios.
Step 8 – Development of radio interface Recommendation(s)- mid 2018 till Dec 2020
In this step a (set of) IMT-2020 terrestrial component radio interface Recommendation(s) is developed within the ITU-R on the basis of the results of Step 7, sufficiently detailed to enable worldwide compatibility of operation and equipment, including roaming.
This work may proceed in cooperation with relevant organizations external to ITU in order to complement the work within ITU‑R, using the principles set out in Resolution ITU-R 9-5.
Step 9 – Implementation of Recommendation(s)
In this step, activities external to ITU-R include the development of supplementary standards (if appropriate), equipment design and development, testing, field trials, type approval (if appropriate), development of relevant commercial aspects such as roaming agreements, manufacture and deployment of IMT-2020 infrastructure leading to commercial service.
________________
[1] The term RIT stands for Radio Interface Technology.
[2] The term SRIT stands for Set of RITs.
[3] The draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.EVAL] is under development and will be finalized in June 2017.
[4] The draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION] is under development and will be finalized in June 2017.
[5] Provides the confirmation to the sender that the submission was received by the BR and that the submission will be forwarded to WP 5D for subsequent consideration.
[6] Independent evaluation group registration forms are available at:
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/study-groups/rsg5/rwp5d/imt-2020/Pages/submission-eval.aspx.
[7] As defined in Step 2, each component RIT of the SRIT needs to still fulfil the minimum requirements of at least two test environments.
[8] As defined in Step 2, each component RIT of the SRIT needs to still fulfil the minimum requirements of at least two test environments.
Weightless SIG Hopes to Drive LPWA Standard in ETSI; Ubiik as IoT Game Changer?
The Weightless Special Interest Group (SIG) is expanding its effort to drive open standards in low-power, wide-area (LPWA) networks for the Internet of Things (IoT). That area is one of many where there are a plethora of competing standards which results in IoT wide area connectivity market fragmentation.
Three different Weightless specifications are available for LPWA networks: Weightless-N, Weightless-P and Weightless-W.
Each spec is designed to be deployed in different use cases depending on a number of key priorities. These are summarized in the table below:
| Weightless-N | Weightless-P | Weightless-W | |
| Directionality | 1-way | 2-way | 2-way |
| Feature set | Simple | Full | Extensive |
| Range | 5km+ | 2km+ | 5km+ |
| Battery life | 10 years | 3-8 years | 3-5 years |
| Terminal cost | Very low | Low | Low-medium |
| Network cost | Very low | Medium | Medium |
- If low cost is the priority and 1-way communication is adequate for your application, use Weightless-N
- If high performance is the priority, or 2-way communication is required, use Weightless-P
- If TV white space spectrum is available in the location where the network will be deployed and an extensive feature set is required, use Weightless-W
Source: http://www.weightless.org/about/which-weightless-standard
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
In a November 1, 2016 press release, the Weightless SIG said “Ubiik emerges as IoT game changer.”
“Operating out of Taiwan and Japan, Ubiik. is creating the next wave of smarter LPWAN products and is bringing substantive disruption to this dynamic technology space.
Showcased recently at CTIA in Las Vegas, Weightless offered an early insight into Ubiik’s revolutionary LPWAN technology offering a step change in performance expectations. Formed from the core team responsible for the groundbreaking LPWAN technology behind the Weightless-P open standard, Ubiik is set to deliver transformative change in every one of the key parameters that define IoT performance. Integrating cutting edge design philosophy with established, best in class cellular approaches Ubiik is building the high performance, carrier grade, industrial IoT infrastructure of the future.”
Ubiik hopes to roll out hardware in February for Weightless-P, the Weightless SIG’s third effort at defining a spec for LPWA networks. Fabien Petitgrand, chief technologist at Ubiik said that technology has an edge over current market leaders, Sigfox and LoRa, that will help it find traction in the still-emerging sector of IoT LPWA networks.
“We don’t expect significant revenue from meaningful deployment [of Weightless-P] for the next potentially two years,” he said. “Weightless-P is coming later to the game, but we are only at the beginning of this LPWA market.”
In a white paper, Ubiik makes the case that Weightless-P is the lowest-cost approach to applications such as smart meters. The technology could serve an area the size of San Diego with 542 base stations at a total cost of about $2.7 million per year. By contrast, Sigfox and LoRa would need 1,900 and 29,000 base stations and cost $9.5 million and $14.4 million a year, respectively, it said.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Weightless SIG chief executive William Webb makes the case that it’s still in the early days for a highly fragmented sector of LPWA networks. To realize predictions of 50 billion IoT nodes by 2020, vendors need to deploy nearly 13 million a day, but so far, market leaders in LPWA such as Sigfox and LoRa each have connected an estimated 7–10 million total to date.
“The message we are hearing very strongly is that the biggest problem in LPWA is the fragmentation of the industry,” said Webb. “If you are making a sensor what wireless chip do you put in it? Most people stop because they don’t want to use the wrong one. We are bumbling along the bottom,” Webb added.
Machina Research estimates that Sigfox now has public networks in the works or running in 26 countries, with LoRa following at 19 and Ingenu at 10. At CES, many top cellular carriers and module makers announced that they were ready to start trials of the (2nd generation) LTE Category-M (also known as LTE Category M1) intended for IoT LPWA networks.
“We project [that,] as of the end of 2017, the LPWA networks using unlicensed spectrum will collectively cover 32% of the world’s population with 11% for licensed LPWA,” which includes both cellular operators and other spectrum holders such as M2M Spectrum Networks, according to Machina Research analyst Aapo Markkanen.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
ETSI’s Task Group 28 has an informal subgroup called Low Throughput Networks (LTN) that will act as a “document rapporteur.” It expects to release a suite of LPWA specifications by the end of the year. The Weightless SIG plans to take their specs to ETSI for approval.
“The way ahead for us is to transfer our standards into ETSI and let Weightless act like the Wi-Fi Alliance, a public face for the ecosystem and a forum for regulator input and future directions,” Webb said.
Sigfox, Germany’s Fraunhofer Institute, and Weightless members such as Telensa are expected to make submissions to the ETSI process, which opens in March. The Weightless SIG will submit its specs to the group.
”Our intention is to produce a single LTN standard…that will consist in a set of three documents–LTN use cases and system requirements, LTN architecture and LTN protocols and interfaces,” said Benoit Ponsard, a representative from Sigfox that runs the ETSI subgroup.
“I suspect that [ETSI] will have a family of standards, and you can argue that that will defeat the aim of ending fragmentation, but we hope that a single-chip design could implement all of them, although not all at the same time,” Webb said.
Here’s a comparison of Weightless P vs. LoRaWAN vs. Sigfox from Ubiik. It considers capacity and range for a single LPWA base station.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
“The real success [of Weightless-P] will be if we can bring on more players,” said Webb. “We’re talking to quite a few semiconductor companies, and a number of them like Weightless as a vehicle for LPWA.”
The current effort marks the third change in direction for the Weightless SIG. It started in 2010 to work on a Weightless-W specification for the 700-MHz “white spaces” TV bands with technology from startup Neul.
When it became clear that those bands would not become available as expected, the group developed an ultra narrowband spec, called Weightless-N, using technology from NWave. It was a uni-directional link aimed at lowest cost and data rate to compete directly with Sigfox in the 800- to 900-MHz bands. But NWave struggled to gain traction, and Weightless ultimately transferred the technology to ETSI.
References:
http://www.weightless.org/about/the-argument-for-lpwan-in-the-internet-of-things
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1331207
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LPWAN
http://internetofthingsagenda.techtarget.com/definition/LPWAN-low-power-wide-area-network
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1330671
http://community.comsoc.org/blogs/posts?page=51&sort=date&order=asc
Facebook & AT&T to Test Drones for Wireless Communications Capabilities
1. Facebook to Test Drones over Menlo Park, CA Campus:
Facebook recently filed documents with the FCC to request the right to operate a drone over its Menlo Park, CA campus using an experimental radio in the 2.4 GHz band. The company plans to fly at least one small, wireless-beaming drone at an altitude of 400 feet around its headquarters in the coming months. The smaller drone is simply being used to test the wireless technology, which Facebook thinks could be used with its larger Aquila drones which are for wireless broadband Internet access in developing countries.
“The purpose of this operation is to test potential new communications applications and equipment in a controlled, low-altitude airborne environment,” one filing says. Another filings specifies the drone will fly at an altitude of 400 feet. The filings, which Facebook made under its FCL Tech drone subsidiary, says it wants to conduct the tests between October and April. Mike Johnson, Facebook’s Deputy General Counsel, is listed as the point of contact on the filing.
More information at: http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-to-test-wireless-equipment-on-small-drone-2016-10
and http://fortune.com/2016/10/12/facebook-drone-fcc-headquarters/
Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook Inc., views a drone flying.
Photo credit: Michael Short—Bloomberg via Getty Images
2. Telecom Council’s 2016 TC3 Summit featured a case study with AT&T and Qualcomm on Cellular Drone Communication with 4G LTE:
Abstract: Wide-scale deployments of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), or drones, are expected to reshape countless industries, including agriculture, delivery, insurance, public safety, and real estate to name a few. Cellular networks can bring a new dimension of reliability, security, coverage and seamless mobility to commercial drone operation, enabling connectivity and control of drones Beyond Visual Line Of Sight (BVLOS). This will be key to safe, wide-scale drone operation and the many new services enabled by them in the years to come. AT&T and Qualcomm are joining forces to trial drone operation on AT&T’s commercial 4G LTE networks — testing key performance indicators (KPI’s) such as coverage, signal strength, throughput, latency and mobility under various real-world scenarios. Findings from this research will not only help us optimize 4G LTE networks for safe and reliable drone operation, but also inform positive developments in drone regulations and 5G specifications as they relate to wide-scale deployment of numerous drone and other mission-critical use cases.
Discussion: Greg Belaus ([email protected]), Lead Business Development – UAV, Internet of Things (IoT) Solutions Group, said AT&T’s “drone play” was to build a technology foundation for connected drones that would create a supporting ecosystem which is part of the Internet of Things (IoTs).
AT&T’s IoT DNA includes:
- 2.9M connected devices
- 9.4M connected vehicles
- IoT Platform tools include: M2X, global SIM card, LTE modem, internal use cases and collaboration
- IoT starter kit
AT&T plans to use drones for: cell tower inspection, a venue for real time performance validation, potential future use cases, eg. flying Cellular On Wheels (COWs). AT&Ts IoT Solutions Group is developing drone solutions for AT&T’s business customers.
Qualcomm is helping to build the drone ecosystem foundation. It will be used to characterize AT&Ts commercial LTE network at altitude, across its network infrastructure and locations. Recordings will include: flight path, time of day, network parameters (e.g. frequencies, hand-offs).
The Connected Drone Platform consists of:
- 4G LTE cellular connectivity
- Video transmitter
- GPS receiver
- Camera Printed Circuit Board (PCB)
- WiFi PCB
- Flight Controller PCB
The trials will analyze how UAS can operate safely and more securely on commercial 4G LTE and wireless networks of the future (such as “5G”). The research will look at elements that would impact future drone operations.
–>A key objective is to optimize AT&T’s LTE network for safe drone operations that use it.
Drone Applications mentioned were:
- Small farmer/agriculture
- Certify drone operators
- Drone fleet management
- Precision location tracking
More information at: https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2016/09/06/qualcomm-and-att-trial-drones-cellular-network-accelerate-wide-scale
Other 2016 TC3 Session Summaries:
Highlights of Telecom Council TC3 Panel on 5G Telecom Regulation
Summary & Conclusions of SD-WAN sessions at Telecom Council’s TC3 Summit
Telecom Council 2016 SPIFFY Award Winners include Simless (Virtual SIM Card)
AT&T to use LTE, Cat-M1 & M2 for IoT Applications
AT&T is moving forward with LTE future for its cellular Internet of Things (IoT) applications, despite earlier suggestions that the network operator could consider other low-power, wide-area (LPWAN) specifications. The LTE only decision is consistent with AT&T’s existing LTE based IoT platform, which we described in an earlier article:
AT&T claims to have the largest share of the connected device market with 19.8M IoT devices or 47% of the U.S. total IoT market in 2013. There are GSM location tracking capabilities in over 100 countries with roaming access in more than 200 countries.
AT&T is a founding member of the Industrial Internet Consortium where over 100 companies are now involved. As part of that effort:
- IBM and AT&T are collorating on IoT solutions for cities, institutions, and enterprises.
- GE and AT&T are working on remotely controlled industrial machines.
“I think the decision that we have made as a company is that AT&T is going to standardize on the LTE stack as opposed to unlicensed bands,” Mobeen Khan, AVP of AT&T IoT Solutions, at AT&T Mobile and Business Solutions, told Light Reading Wednesday, June 22nd. AT&T has “many reasons” for the decision: The specialized IoT LTE technologies uses AT&T’s existing spectrum; it’s more secure and can be managed using existing infrastructure. “It has a lot of benefits for our customers,” Khan said.
AT&T is going to standardize on Cat-M1 (a.k.a. LTE-M) for devices like smart meters and wearables. Cat-M1 is optimized to offer a 1Mbit/s connection but with superior battery life compared to the typical 4G smartphone radio chipset. The operator has just approved its first modules for this specification. There will be trials in the forth quarter.
For even lower-power applications, AT&T will use Cat-M2 modules in units like smoke detectors and networked monitors. Cat-M2 is “still being specced out” but is anticipated to go to kilobits-per-second connection rates to further extend battery life, Khan said. AT&T will test Cat-M2 devices on the network in 2017 and hopes to go commercial early in 2018.
This doesn’t mean that AT&T won’t support any other types of networking for IoT. WiFi, Bluetooth and mesh networking will all be part of the mix. “We’re living in a multi-network world,” Khan said.
References:
http://www.lightreading.com/iot/iot-strategies/atandt-settles-on-lte-for-cellular-iot/d/d-id/724289
http://www.lightreading.com/iot/m2m-platforms/atandt-readies-low-power-lte-for-iot/d/d-id/720150
Energy versus security–the IoT tradeoff:
AT&T and other leading telcos are highlighting the security advantages of using cellular networks in licensed spectrum to connect IoT devices. They point to the benefits of having a SIM card authenticate the device on the network, such as being able to remotely bar devices, where necessary. Without a secure link, IoT applications may be more vulnerable to attacks, such as spoofing, where a fraudulent end device injects false data into the network or a fraudulent access point hijacks the data captured by a device.
2013 Ethernet Tech Summit- Market Research Panel & Carrier Ethernet Comment
Introduction:
This session covered the prospects for Ethernet in the enterprise, among carriers (especially for cellular backhaul), and in the data center. The session was chaired by Crystal Black, Channel Marketing Manager, APTARE
Panelists:
-Michael Howard, Infonetics Research
-Casey Quillin, Dell’Oro Group
-Sergis Mushell, Gartner
-Jag Bolaria, Linley Group
-Vladimir Kozlov, LightCounting
The summary of this panel will be posted at viodi.com shortly
Comment: Surprisingly, there wasn’t any talk about the Carrier Ethernet market, which was the subject of an all day track at this conference. Carrier Ethernet lets carrier businesses use low cost Ethernet systems to offer data services with all the operation, administration and Maintenance (OAM) features and benefits, including QoS. Existing Carrier Ethernet Services include Private Line, Ethernet Tree (point to multi-point) and Ethernet LAN (multi-point to multi-point). In addition, the MEF is positioning Carrier Ethernet 2.0 for use in wire-line access to Private Cloud services.
The problem seemed to be that there weren’t any carriers willing to participate in those sessions, so it was just equipment and silicon vendors talking to one another.
A new report forecasts the Global Ethernet Access Device market to grow at a CAGR Of 13.62% from 2012-2016.
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130411006525/en/Research-Markets-Global-Ethernet-Access-Device-Market
Another highlight of the Ethernet Technology Summit was a Wednesday evening award ceremony to the “Unsung hero’s of Ethernet,” chosen by the IEEE Santa Clara Valley (SCV) section. They were: Dave Boggs who worked with Bob Metcalfe on the original 3M b/sec Ethernet (and whose name appears on the Ethernet patent), Ron Crane who designed the first working 10 Mb/s coax based Ethernet adapter interface at Xerox (which later became standardized by IEEE 802.3 as Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) Access Method and Physical Layer Specifications or simply 10Base5) and also co-founded 3Com Corp, Tat Lam who worked on the original version of Ethernet and early 10 Mb/s transceivers and long time IEEE ComSoc contributor Geoff Thompson for his hard work, long term support and leadership of Ethernet standards work in IEEE 802 (he was chair/vice-chair of the 802.3 WG for many years), TIA and the ISO.
The Unsung Heroes of Ethernet etched crystal plaques were paid for by the IEEE SCV section (the largest IEEE section in the world). They include an image of Bob Metcalfe’s original sketch of the Ethernet system.
Editor’s Note: This author has been a member of the IEEE SCV Executive Committee for many years and decades. He nominated Ron Crane and Geoff Thompson for their Unsung Hero of Ethernet awards. More info at:
References:
A video of this session is available at: http://www.papitv.com/ethernet-technology-summit-market-research-marketsinvestors-track-the-panelist-video-by-kc-leung
2013 Ethernet Tech Summit Presentations can be downloaded from:
http://www.ethernetsummit.com/English/Conference/Proceedings_Chrono.html