ECC(11)018
COST IC0905 “TERRA”:
Brief Overview and Update
Presentation for #28 ECC
March 2011
Current Participants
 19 European countries have seats on the Management
Committee:
 Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal,
Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Sweden, Republic of Macedonia
 One MC participant from non-COST countries:
 Communications Research Centre of Canada
 In the process of joining or considering:
 Europe: Romania
 Outside: researchers from USA, South Africa
FUTURE CR DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
&
(planned) WORK AREAS FOR COST-TERRA
Main issues
 Part I. High-level scenarios for CR business
 Part II. Future work areas for COST-TERRA:
 Cataloguing and categorising CR Use Cases
 Understanding impact of TVWS regulation
 Considering impact of CR Licensing Schemes
 Co-existence issues
High-level scenario planning
 Need for scenarios for future development of CR
 Scenarios to be limited in number and transcending the
entrenchments of institutional mind-sets
 To provide abstracted view of the overall CR business landscape and
“eco-system”
 To expose the most critical issues defining the development path for
CR evolution
 NB: “most critical” = beyond the will of any of the stakeholders in the
field
 e.g. regulatory regime in this context could not be seen as really critical
unpredictable factor as it is adjustable under will of the respective
governments, usually as co-evolutionary response to changing business
and technological environment
COST-TERRA scenarios
Cost (complexity) of CR
technology
HIGH
POLAR EXPEDITIONS
PARTY AT DAVOS
LOW
CHINA BOX TAKE-AWAY
PARTY
RISE OF VINEYARDS
NO
YES
Does a viable business case
emerge for CR as enabler of new
wireless service opportunities?
Description of scenarios (I)
 “Polar expeditions” – this scenario would be characterised by the
absence of proven business opportunities for CR and high costs of
technology (i.e. more or less the situation we see today)
 In such environment it could be envisaged that the CR deployments
would be limited to some experimental pilot deployments or,
alternatively, employed by high demanding users that might value
some benefits more than the costs (e.g. government applications,
military)
 Environmental response (policymakers, businesses) – being in stand-
by and observing if any shift from this situation is likely
 Year 2020 prediction for deployment of CR:
 Nowhere (did not leave laboratories; geeks)
Description of scenarios (II)
 “China box take-away party” – this scenario would be characterised by
the absence of proven business opportunities for CR within telco-grade
services but yet availability of some affordable equipment
 In such environment it could be envisaged that the CR developments
would be limited to private/local deployment islets (“CR Hot-spots”),
of which the TV White Space opportunistic deployments would be an
obvious example
 Environmental response (policymakers, businesses) – localised
regulation, opportunities for small businesses (both on vendor and on
service provision sides)
 Year 2020 prediction for deployment of CR:
 Mass market but specific customers (e.g. machine-to-machine (ITS
(Intelligent Transport Systems); SRD in factory)
Description of scenarios (III)
 “Party at Davos” – this scenario would be characterised by emergence of
a viable business case(s) but developments being hampered by high
costs (CAPEX)
 In such environment it could be envisaged that the CR developments
would be driven by a few rich market-players, e.g. big telcos or the likes
of Apple or Google, who might use the new service opportunities
provided by CR for entering new market segments or cementing their
existing market positions regardless (at least for a while) of high initial
costs
 Environmental response (policymakers, businesses) –
market/competition regulation, attempts at the international
standardisation (global frequencies/standards), playground of big
businesses
 Year 2020 prediction for deployment of CR:
 Few niche markets (e.g. defence, R&D, high yield businesses)
Description of scenarios (IV)
 “Rise of vineyards” – this scenario would be characterised by existence
of a viable business case(s) and availability of affordable technologies
 In such environment it could be envisaged that the number of market
players would grow, yet it is likely that the high-tech specifics of
technology would remain the barrier limiting the overall number of
global market players to a certain number of regional or specialised
providers
 Environmental response (policymakers, businesses) – the international
standardisation likely to get a boost (global frequencies/standards),
rich and varied business eco-system
 Year 2020 prediction for deployment of CR:
 Mass market and accessible to general population (e.g. ubiquitous IP-based
access to www)
 Intelligent devices rule
Part II: Future work areas
The following represents the ideas for the work areas and
issues to be addressed by the COST-TERRA research
community with the highest priority:
 Cataloguing and categorising CR Use Cases
 Understanding impact of TVWS regulation
 Considering impact of CR Licensing Schemes
 Co-existence issues
Cataloguing CR use cases
 It is important to catalogue and categorise the various CR Use and
Business Cases:
 different classes of use and business cases:



depending on licensing scheme
depending on who keeps the infrastructure
depending on “who pays” for services/infrastructure maintenance
 dynamism of scenarios over time/changing environment
 apply tags to categorize use cases
 seek eventual refinement of CR definition: today multiple definitions exist
leading to confusion
 As of today two types of scenario building:
 technical system configurations (as used in ETSI TC RRS, OneFIT)
 business development scenarios (as reported by AaltoU)
 How to map these two to each other?
Ongoing TVWS regulation
 Understanding business cases?
 Understanding the technical solutions for implementing
the proposed regulatory schemes?
 Co-existence between secondary users?
 Role/relation/complementarity of geolocation database vs.
sensing solutions?
 Possibility of “exporting” TVWS regulatory solutions into
other bands, e.g. with peer-to-peer communication where
all transceiver could be detected more easily?
Impact of Licensing Schemes
 How licensing scheme should interveawe into business
case and technology modelling:
 licensed?
 light-licensed (incl. database-interrogation-based authorisations)?
 unlicensed?
 How frequency band access regime come into picture:
 overlay (“white spaces” concept)?
 shared dedicated CR bands (ISM bands, commons)?
 self-managed CR bands?
 what about “underlay” (UWB-like)? Other innovative
combinations?
Co-existence issues
 Mapping needed between ETSI and IEEE coexistence
models/approaches?
 Exploring the role of innovative techniques (FBMC, spectrum
“sculpting”, else) in physical layer to facilitate co-existence?
 Simultaneous multi-band CR operation?
 Advanced co-existence (e.g. the one employing above methods)
modelling in terms of probability of interference estimates?
 Promotion of “self-regulation”/”good-neighbour” protocol concepts?
Understanding of “cheating” risks in this context.
 Common signalling/control approaches? IP-based Over-The-
Air/wireline infrastructure for that?
Call for contributions
 All interested bodies are welcome to contribute to the work
of COST-TERRA by responding to the ideas/issues raised
in this document by:
 submitting written contributions, discussion papers, information
data sheets
 proposing a talk for the next COST-TERRA meeting (20-22 June
2011 in Brussels)
 If interested, please contact [email protected]
 For more information visit: www.cost-terra.org