Enforcement in Dynamic Spectrum Access Systems

Abstract

The spectrum access rights granted by the Federal government to spectrum users come with the expectation of protection from harmful interference. As a consequence of the growth of wireless demand and services of all types, technical progress enabling smart agile radio networks, and on-going spectrum management reform, there is both a need and opportunity to use and share spectrum more intensively and dynamically. A key element of any framework for managing harmful interference is the mechanism for enforcement of those rights. Since the rights to use spectrum and to protection from harmful interference vary by band (licensed/unlicensed, legacy/newly reformed) and type of use/users (primary/secondary, overlay/underlay), it is reasonable to expect that the enforcement mechanisms may need to vary as well.In this paper, we present a taxonomy for evaluating alternative mechanisms for enforcing interference protection for spectrum usage rights, with special attention to the potential changes that may be expected from wider deployment of Dynamic Spectrum Access (DSA) systems. Our exploration of how the design of the enforcement regime interacts with and influences the incentives of radio operators under different rights regimes and market scenarios is intended to assist in refining thinking about appropriate access rights regimes and how best to incentivize investment and growth in more efficient and valuable uses of the radio frequency spectrum.

Enforcement and Spectrum Sharing: Case Studies of Federal-Commercial Sharing

“…There are 27 MetSat fixed earth stations that need protection; see Figure (5) and exclusion zones have been proposed for each [7] (Details in Appendix B) 9 . Since there are large areas between those stations that are not part of an exclusion zone, significant spectrum sharing opportunities exist.…”

“…As was argued in [9], spectrum sharing is a complex dynamical multi-stakeholder systems that could benefit from the feedback provided by practice; so that the system can be optimized to perform "better" (by whatever set of attributes). A collaborative, adaptive approach to ex ante and ex post enforcement could result in benefits to both parties.…”

Enforcement and Spectrum Sharing: Case Studies of Federal-Commercial Sharing

“…[9] examined the question of enforcement in a broad sense. The paper specifically addressed the relationship between ex ante and ex post enforcement measures, as well as taking the initial steps needed to relate the cost of enforcement to the needed precision.…”

“…As described in [9], there are two loci at which usage rights may be enforced: (1) ex ante: before a potentially harmful interference event has occurred; and (2) Ex post: after a potentially harmful interference event has occurred. Further, ex ante and ex post approaches work in tandem, not in isolation.…”

“…Spectrum sharing agreements that do not explicitly define obligations and their enforcement are essentially non-binding [9] and thus provide no protection for incumbents. The emergent nature of DSA systems suggests that enforcement approaches should allow for learning from direct experience as well as the experiences of other DSA systems.…”