Appropriate Rules for Managed or Specialized Services

<p>Poorly written rules for specialized services or managed services, a category of services recognized in the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet Order, could turn the pending Open Internet proceeding into a farce. (This comment will use the terms specialized services and managed services interchangeably.) There are people who seem to believe that any service from an Internet service provider (ISP) that has a quality of service (QoS) that is different from standard Internet service must be a specialized service, and that specialized services are exempt from all Open Internet rules. If the FCC accepts both premises, then it is possible that no form of discrimination, no matter how unreasonable or anticompetitive, could ever be prohibited under Open Internet rules. Imagine that an ISP offers a new service that complements its standard Internet service. If the new service has a different QoS from standard Internet, then the new service is labeled a specialized service and there are no applicable Open Internet Rules to break. On the other hand, if the new service has the same QoS as standard Internet, then there is probably no discrimination going on, which means there is also no chance that the ISP has violated antidiscrimination rules. There is a similar problem if specialized services are exempt from all rules, and if any service that carries traffic from just one application type is considered a specialized service. In this case, the mere act of blocking traffic from the other application types makes the service exempt from rules that prohibit unreasonable blocking based on application.</p

From TV to Public Safety: The Need for Fundamental Reform in Public Safety Spectrum and Communications Policy

The events surrounding Hurricane Katrina and the 9/11 attacks demonstrated that the communications systems used by first responders in the United States are not adequate to meet the challenges of a post-9/11 world. The U.S. system is based on assumptions that local agencies should have maximal flexibility at the expense of standardization and regional coordination, that commercial carriers and municipal systems have little role to play, that public safety should not share spectrum or network infrastructure, and that narrowband voice applications should dominate. Many programs have been proposed to incrementally improve public safety communications systems, but without any fundamental changes to these policies, such incremental changes are likely to have limited impact. However, a tremendous opportunity is coming thanks to the transition to digital television; 24 MHz of spectrum has been identified for reallocation from TV to public safety in 2009, roughly doubling the public safety spectrum below 2 GHz. Unless policymakers act, this new spectrum will be managed under these same old policies. This paper explains why it is time for fundamental reform. Policy reforms should include some combination of: shifting some responsibility and authority for decisions about public safety communications infrastructure from many independent local government agencies to the federal government; further expanding the role of commercial service providers, municipal Wi-Fi networks, and other systems that serve the public; allowing public safety to share spectrum, and possibly multi-purpose network infrastructure as well, with other users; and further expanding capabilities beyond traditional voice communications. Since the TV band spectrum reallocated to public safety has few legacy systems that must be accommodated or moved, it is an excellent place to launch a new policy

Bridging the Divide Between Technologists and Policy-Makers

Modern governments face an increasing number of issues that require extensive knowledge of science or technology for effective decision-making. These include issues of health care, environment, energy, agriculture, national defense, communications and transportation, to name a few. There is no shortage of expertise to address these issues; the majority of scientists and engineers who have ever lived are alive today. Yet all too often, the policy-making process does not benefit from this technical expertise. There is a great divide between technologists-research-oriented, forward-looking engineers and scientists-and policy-makers, elected legislators and their staffs at the local, state and Federal levels. As a result, we have a system in which policy-makers are too often deprived of knowledge that they need to do their job well, and in which technologists with this knowledge have limited influence. Each side may blame the other for its inaccessibility. At the core of this failure to communicate are two groups with different operational systems and different culture

A New Proposal for a Commercially-Run Nationwide Broadband System Serving Public Safety

The FCC proposes a basic approach that has great promise, but also potential dangers. This paper will discuss issues that deserve serious attention, and it will propose a new policy that is consistent with many aspects of this NPRM, but has extensions and modifications that would increase the chances of success, and eliminate much of the risk. While the FCC clearly plays a critical role on this issue, no one government agency has the resources and authority needed to make all of the necessary changes. There should be a concerted effort from multiple federal agencies, as well as state and local organizations. By sad necessity, the FCC is proposing in this NPRM to act alone in this NPRM, and that limits the options available. However the FCC has begun an important process, and we can hope that others will follow the FCC’s lead. This paper will also address some of the areas where other federal agencies could make critical contributions, perhaps initiated by an act of Congress or leadership from the Administration

Making the Internet Fit for Commerce

The laws of commerce, which were established in a marketplace where sellers and buyers met face-to-face, cannot be expected to meet the needs of electronic commerce, the rapidly expanding use of computer and communications technology in the commercial exchange of products, services, and information. E-commerce sales, which exceeded $30 billion in 1998, are expected to double annually, reaching$250 billion in 2001 and $1.3 trillion in 2003. In addition, by 2003 the Internet will compete with radio to be the third largest medium for advertising, surpassing magazines and cable television. On-line banking and brokerage is becoming the norm. In early 1998, 22 percent of securities trades were made online, and this figure is rising rapidly. Now is the time to review and update the laws of commerce for the digital marketplace

Spectrum Management Policy Options

As market-based reform sweeps telecommunications industries around the world, it is a good time to reevaluate the spectrum management policies which govern wireless industries ranging from broadcast television to satellite communications. Most countries have been using a central planning approach to spectrum management, but there are many alternatives with varying degrees of flexibility and market-based incentives. This paper provides a survey of spectrum management approaches, addressing methods of determining how spectrum can be used, which commercial entities can use it, and how governments can manage their own spectrum. It identifies some of the crucial choices to be made, and summarizes advantages and disadvantages of each.</p

A “Successful” Policy for Public Safety Communications

No commercial company stepped forward in the recent auction to deploy a nationwide communications system that would serve public safety agencies in the 700 MHz band. Many have mistakenly referred to this outcome as a “failure.” Such statements demonstrate an important misconception about what must be accomplished. The lack of a winning bidder should not be seen as failure, and more importantly, the existence of a winning bidder should not be seen as success. “Success” means providing American emergency responders with a communications system that truly meets their needs in a post-9/11 world. “Failure” means allocating this valuable spectrum in any manner that fails to meet public safety and homeland security needs. The lack of a bidder in the last auction or even the next auction is only a delay. Although no delay is welcome, this delay is small compared to the period that has already elapsed since September 11, 2001. No one should use a small delay as the principal excuse to compromise on the final objective

Unrestricted Permits for Ultrawideband Devices

Ultrawideband (UWB) technology offers tremendous benefits. It enables new applications, and makes other valuable applications more cost-effective than was previously possible. However, this technology creates novel challenges f o r regulators. UWB devices share spectrum with existing licensed systems, potentially causing interference. Moreover, some UWB applications raise serious privacy concerns. This submission proposes an alternative spectrum management approach f o r UWB devices that will encourage deployment while managing spectral interference and privacy abuses. Under this approach, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) would distribute permits to manufacture or import devices, instead of the more traditional approach of distributing licenses to use the devices at a given location. This would allow the FCC to monitor, and if necessary, regulate the number and type of UWB devices deployed, without placing onerous restrictions on users

Sharing Spectrum through Spectrum Policy Reform and Cognitive Radio

Traditionally, interference protection is guaranteed through a policy of spectrum licensing, whereby wireless systems get exclusive access to spectrum. This is an effective way to prevent interference, but it leads to highly inefficient use of spectrum. Cognitive radio along with software radio, spectrum sensors, mesh networks, and other emerging technologies can facilitate new forms of spectrum sharing that would greatly improve spectral efficiency and alleviate scarcity, if spectrum policies are in place that support these forms of sharing. On the other hand, new technology that is inconsistent with spectrum policy will have little impact. This paper discusses policies that can enable or facilitate the use of many spectrum-sharing arrangements, where spectrumsharing arrangements are categorized as being based on either coexistence or cooperation, and as either sharing among equals or primary-secondary sharing. A shared band of spectrum may be managed directly by the regulator, or this responsibility may be delegated in large part to a license-holder. The type of sharing arrangement and the entity that manages it have great impact on which technical approaches are viable and effective. The most efficient and cost-effective form of spectrum sharing will depend on the type of systems involved, where systems under current consideration are as diverse as television broadcasters, cellular carriers, public safety systems, point-to-point links, and personal and local-area networks. In addition, while cognitive radio offers policy-makers the opportunity to improve spectral efficiency, cognitive radio also provides new challenges for enforcement of policies. A responsible regulator will not allow a device into the marketplace that might harm other systems. Thus, designers must seek innovative ways to assure regulators that new devices will comply with policy requirements and will not cause harmful interference.</p

Encryption Policy Issues

Controlling the flow of information in the information age is as important as controlling the flow of water in the desert. Encryption is a critical tool for managing and protecting information. In recent years, encryption has shifted from the obscure obsession of generals and mathematicians to an important policy issue for all citizens, with impact on crime, civil rights, national defense, and economic competitiveness. A great deal of important and sensitive information is stored in computers, or transmitted across communications networks. Ironically, more and more of this information is carried on inherently unsecure media such as the Internet and cellular phones. Encryption makes it easier to prevent information from being observed, corrupted, or falsified. This paper will briefly summarize current encryption controversies. Section 2 provides background on encryption technology and its common uses. Section 3 summarizes the typical objectives of encryption policy, which are often in conflict. Section 4 describes the extent to which strong encryption is currently available. Sections 5, 6, and 7 address the three areas where legislation is most likely in the next two years: key recovery, restrictions on domestic use of encryption, and export control. This paper is summarized in Section 8