4 ms·

5G NR allows for 5Ghz to be used as primary carrier in band 46. (as opposed to LTE that only allows it as a secondary carrier.) This wouldn't require a license

5G NR allows for 5Ghz to be used as primary carrier in band 46. (as opposed to LTE that only allows it as a secondary carrier.) This wouldn't require a license to use. I believe CBRS band 48 (3.5Ghz) is lightly licensed but I don't remember if you can set it up as a primary carrier on LTE.

ksec 5y ago
Do you know how does the patent licensing works on 5G NR-U? I have been trying to find an answer but literally everyone in the industry are mum about it. I really really want to see real world usage of NR-U and as a possible replacement of WiFi.
- g_p 5y ago
  I understand that NR-U is a full implementation of a 5G base station (and client handset/CPE if you can find one that actually implements NR-U!), and therefore you will require patent licenses for the full implemented stack. In an ideal world, your radio manufacturer and software vendors would have appropriate patent licenses in place. For this and other reasons (handset support being commercially problematic since carriers want to preserve their dominance), I don't see NR-U really replacing Wi-Fi. The friction to joining a device to a network is also far higher, and there's much more complexity in running the network and architecting a suitable core network and user plane functions and keeping it all running. WiFi really is a lot simpler in many ways.
  - ksec 5y ago
    Well NR-U is pretty much a Qualcomm technology ( MultiFire ) brought to 3GPP for standardisation. So I expect it to be supported in all 3GPP Rel 16 modem and Qualcomm X60+ modem as well. I dont think Handset support would be a concern unless I am missing something. I was hoping for some exemption or special arrangement on the patent issues for consumer private 5G Network. WiFI just sucks, comparatively speaking. Including WiFI 6E. And judging from the ways they are doing things I have very little hope for 802.11ay and 802.11be ( WiFi 7 ).
    - socraticmethod 5y ago
      >WiFi Sucks...Including 6E Outta curiosity, why do you say 6E sucks?
karteum 5y ago
CBRS is very US-specific... It is indeed an innovative way to give access to spectrum, but it's a pity it has been done in this band (which had a huge potential for usual operators in terms of site reuse). I suspect in Europe a light licensing approach such as CBRS might be considered in higher bands such as 26 GHz...

ksec 5y ago

Do you know how does the patent licensing works on 5G NR-U? I have been trying to find an answer but literally everyone in the industry are mum about it. I really really want to see real world usage of NR-U and as a possible replacement of WiFi.

g_p 5y ago
I understand that NR-U is a full implementation of a 5G base station (and client handset/CPE if you can find one that actually implements NR-U!), and therefore you will require patent licenses for the full implemented stack. In an ideal world, your radio manufacturer and software vendors would have appropriate patent licenses in place. For this and other reasons (handset support being commercially problematic since carriers want to preserve their dominance), I don't see NR-U really replacing Wi-Fi. The friction to joining a device to a network is also far higher, and there's much more complexity in running the network and architecting a suitable core network and user plane functions and keeping it all running. WiFi really is a lot simpler in many ways.
- ksec 5y ago
  Well NR-U is pretty much a Qualcomm technology ( MultiFire ) brought to 3GPP for standardisation. So I expect it to be supported in all 3GPP Rel 16 modem and Qualcomm X60+ modem as well. I dont think Handset support would be a concern unless I am missing something. I was hoping for some exemption or special arrangement on the patent issues for consumer private 5G Network. WiFI just sucks, comparatively speaking. Including WiFI 6E. And judging from the ways they are doing things I have very little hope for 802.11ay and 802.11be ( WiFi 7 ).
  - socraticmethod 5y ago
    >WiFi Sucks...Including 6E Outta curiosity, why do you say 6E sucks?

karteum 5y ago

CBRS is very US-specific... It is indeed an innovative way to give access to spectrum, but it's a pity it has been done in this band (which had a huge potential for usual operators in terms of site reuse). I suspect in Europe a light licensing approach such as CBRS might be considered in higher bands such as 26 GHz...