![#1569123664 2
In this paper, we will examine this trend from linear Taylorist production methods [3], which were first introduced
standardization taking place mainly in the domain of formal in the United States and from there spread to Europe, lead to
Standardization Organizations, to a highly complex and multi- the production of uniform products; parts of both these end
layered process simultaneously involving formal products and the machines assembling them were uniform,
organizations, informal bodies and industrial consortia. replicable and interchangeable thanks to agreements between
Subsequently, we will apply the insights gained above to the manufacturers, in order to speed up and simplify production,
relatively recent trend towards Flexible Spectrum lower maintenance and inventory holding costs and stimulate
Management, by analysing the recently initiated the specialization of production. During the First World War,
standardization –and concurrent regulatory– process of one of scarcity in the workforce meant an increase in machines
its potential key enablers, the Cognitive Pilot Channel (CPC). needed and, thus, an increased importance for standardization.
Flexible Spectrum Management (FSM), used as a concept Initially, low strategic importance was attributed to
pointing to a set of new and dynamic procedures and standardization; industry and trade associations contented
techniques for obtaining and transferring spectrum usage themselves with what they perceived as common benefits of
rights and dynamically changing the specific use of standardization, leading to lower inventory holding costs and
frequencies, plays an important role in fully exploiting the giving incentives to specialize production in interchangeable
advantages of cognitive, reconfigurable networks and parts [4]:8-9 [5].
terminals. Here, we argue that the standardization of the CPC, As David and Steinmueller note, the increasing importance of
although in a very early stage, constitutes a good example of standards for reaching economies of scale and
the complex, synchronous, multi-layered collaboration interchangeability implied that ad hoc agreements between
process towards innovation in wireless telecommunications. industry actors started to give way to more formalized,
Finally, starting from the assumption that crucial design regulated types of standardization. As informal associations
choices with regard to the CPC will be taken during the and periodic regulatory interventions were no longer sufficient
standardization and regulation process, and that these design to meet the growing demand for standards, dedicated
choices might influence the eventual deployment of such a Standards Development Organisations (SDOs) started to be
cognitive radio technology and networks and services enabled established. The first such body on a national level was the
by it, as well as the business models for it, we perform a British Standards Institute (BSI), founded in 1901. German
business model scorecard analysis on some of the different (DIN) and French (AFNOR) organisations followed in 1917
revenue sharing models coming out of diverging (theoretical) and 1926 respectively, while the US-based ANSI was
design choices of the CPC. To be clear, this part of the established in 1918. Soon, these national SDOs –which,
analysis shall be exploratory in nature: since the CPC according to the authors, numbered more than 81 in 1996–
standardization process has only just begun, technology were complemented by regional and international bodies. For
choices are yet to be made and political or industrial alliances the telecommunications sector, but arguably for any
to be formed; even the concept in itself is far from being specialized area, the International Telecommunications Union
accepted. However, we consider it worthwhile to make an ex (established as a UN agency in 1947, but with roots going
ante analysis of what the consequences of future choices with back to 1865) is probably the oldest example. Other important
regard to the CPC could be, as an alternative to the more ones include the International Organisation for
common ex post evaluations of standardization processes, Standardization (ISO, 1947), the European Committee for
precisely because so much is still unknown and so many Standardization (CEN, 1961), the International
different directions could still be taken in its eventual Electrotechnical Commission (IEC, 1906) and, for Europe, the
deployment. European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization
(CENELEC, 1973) and the European Telecommunications
II. FROM LINEAR TO MULTI-LAYERED STANDARDIZATION Standardization Institute (ETSI, 1988). More than in other
sectors, an immediate need for international standards was felt
A. Linear, Formalized Standardization of in the telecommunications sector in order to ensure safety and
Telecommunications network interoperability, leading many international SDOs in
It is impossible to locate the roots of standardization as a this sector to precede generalized national standardization
means of facilitating goods production; without any doubt, bodies [5]-[14]. As technology progressed and (national)
agreements have been concluded between craftsmen or traders markets expanded, standardization became more and more
on procedures and rules for production, construction, trading crucial in the sector of telecommunications. As Schmidt and
conduct and other industrial and commercial activities at any Werle put it: “Autonomous actors involved in the production,
point in history. However, standardization as we know it operation and use of such a large technical system as
today, defined by ISO as the process of creating a “document, telecommunications rely on a minimum amount of
established by consensus and approved by a recognized body, coordination.” [15]:108. It is therefore not surprising that,
that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines although some 25 other international organisations exist which
or characteristics for activities or their results, aimed at the are similar to the ITU in terms of standardization activities, the
achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context ISO, IEC and ITU together are responsible for 85% of all
[1], first became important in the nineteenth century. In this current international standards [5].
era, production of goods became centralized, resulting in the Although international coordinating bodies for
emergence of large economies of scale and scope. Fordist and telecommunications have existed since the nineteenth century,]()
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Multi level standardization and business tugas paper (alwi fauzi - 163.100.010)
Similar to Multi level standardization and business tugas paper (alwi fauzi - 163.100.010) (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Multi level standardization and business tugas paper (alwi fauzi - 163.100.010)
- 1. #1569123664 1 Multi-level standardization and business models for cognitive radio: the case of the Cognitive Pilot Channel Simon Delaere and Pieter Ballon IBBT-SMIT, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium Tel +32-22691622, E-mail firstname.lastname@vub.ac.be to-end solutions to customers, and in which international, Abstract— This paper examines the international, inter- formal organisations brought together operators, organizational collaboration processes for the development of manufacturers and regulators to enable inter-country cognitive radio, wich will be at the basis of potentially profound connectivity. Nor is it still true that large integrated changes in the telecommunications value network, as well as its companies, with full-time standards-developing staff, functional architecture, cost and value structure and the eventual collaborate exclusively in the standardization organisation that value proposition of any services deployed in such a value network. The paper will analyse the transition in they were historically linked to and/or that fits best with their telecommunications from linear standardization taking place broader objectives. mainly in the domain of formal Standardization Organizations, Today, driven by privatization, competition (policy) and the to a highly complex and multi-layered process simultaneously much increased complexity of telecommunications involving formal organizations, informal bodies and industrial technologies and their markets –a trend further reinforced by consortia. Subsequently, the paper discusses the development of the continuing convergence with the IT and media sectors– a Cognitive Pilot Channel to show how innovation in this kind of linear process is no longer sufficient. In order for a telecommunications markets is determined by this complex technology to be successfully introduced, it needs to be interplay, and explores how the collaborative process between research, regulation and standardization of a Cognitive Pilot standardized on at least a regional and preferably a global Channel in different standardization platforms (viz. IEEE scale, with support from a large variety of stakeholders – SCC41 and ETSI TC RRS) might influence the eventual operators, network and equipment manufacturers, service deployment of such a cognitive radio technology and networks providers, regulators and user groups– and interoperable with and services enabled by it, as well as the business models for it, the modules, systems and services offered by many of these by performing an exploratory business model scorecard analysis stakeholders. Moreover, where it concerns wireless on some of the different revenue sharing models coming out of technologies, adequate spectrum needs to be found which, in diverging design choices of the CPC. many cases, needs to be harmonized on a regional or multi- regional basis, requiring significant political and industrial Index Terms—Standardization, Business Modelling, Cognitive support and, equally important, time. Pilot Channel, Radio Enabler, Business Modeling As a consequence, many different platforms for standardization have now been established, which include formal, de iure as well as de facto standardization I. INTRODUCTION organisations, complemented by ad hoc industrial consortia It is safe to say that standardization in telecoms has undergone and fora and situated on national, regional and global levels. dramatic changes over the past century or so. The times are These organisations both work in parallel, cooperate and definitely over in which incumbent telecommunications compete with each other, and nationally or regionally based operators, who were often the creators, implementers and consortia often attract stakeholders from outside their original exclusive users of a standard within their territory, only territory and subsequently strive to extend the influence of needed to work together with national equipment their standards beyond the borders of that territory. Moreover, manufacturers –so-called national champions– to provide end- while some of these bodies may have originated in a telecoms context, others find their roots in the IT or electrotechnical Manuscript received May 1, 2008. This work was performed within the E3 world or spectrum community, yet all of these bodies now project, which has received research funding from the Community's Seventh work on standardizing converged beyond 3G services. Often, Framework programme. This paper reflects only the authors' views and the Community is not liable for any use that may be made of the information different processes of standardization are initiated at least contained therein. The contributions of colleagues from E3 consortium are partly simultaneously on different levels, for example in order hereby acknowledged. to gain geographical influence, tackle different components of Simon Delaere is a researcher at the Centre for Studies on Media, the technology in a different way, or simply to play out one Information and Telecommunication (SMIT) of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. SMIT is part of Interdisciplinary Institute for Broadband Technology (IBBT) standardization body against the other in what could be called (e-mail: simon.delaere@vub.ac.be) a standardization shopping strategy. In short, standardization Pieter Ballon is a programme manager at SMIT-IBBT, Vrije Universiteit of telecoms has become a complex, multi-layered process Brussel (e-mail: pieter.ballon@vub.ac.be) involving many stakeholders and varying strategies.
- 2. #1569123664 2 In this paper, we will examine this trend from linear Taylorist production methods [3], which were first introduced standardization taking place mainly in the domain of formal in the United States and from there spread to Europe, lead to Standardization Organizations, to a highly complex and multi- the production of uniform products; parts of both these end layered process simultaneously involving formal products and the machines assembling them were uniform, organizations, informal bodies and industrial consortia. replicable and interchangeable thanks to agreements between Subsequently, we will apply the insights gained above to the manufacturers, in order to speed up and simplify production, relatively recent trend towards Flexible Spectrum lower maintenance and inventory holding costs and stimulate Management, by analysing the recently initiated the specialization of production. During the First World War, standardization –and concurrent regulatory– process of one of scarcity in the workforce meant an increase in machines its potential key enablers, the Cognitive Pilot Channel (CPC). needed and, thus, an increased importance for standardization. Flexible Spectrum Management (FSM), used as a concept Initially, low strategic importance was attributed to pointing to a set of new and dynamic procedures and standardization; industry and trade associations contented techniques for obtaining and transferring spectrum usage themselves with what they perceived as common benefits of rights and dynamically changing the specific use of standardization, leading to lower inventory holding costs and frequencies, plays an important role in fully exploiting the giving incentives to specialize production in interchangeable advantages of cognitive, reconfigurable networks and parts [4]:8-9 [5]. terminals. Here, we argue that the standardization of the CPC, As David and Steinmueller note, the increasing importance of although in a very early stage, constitutes a good example of standards for reaching economies of scale and the complex, synchronous, multi-layered collaboration interchangeability implied that ad hoc agreements between process towards innovation in wireless telecommunications. industry actors started to give way to more formalized, Finally, starting from the assumption that crucial design regulated types of standardization. As informal associations choices with regard to the CPC will be taken during the and periodic regulatory interventions were no longer sufficient standardization and regulation process, and that these design to meet the growing demand for standards, dedicated choices might influence the eventual deployment of such a Standards Development Organisations (SDOs) started to be cognitive radio technology and networks and services enabled established. The first such body on a national level was the by it, as well as the business models for it, we perform a British Standards Institute (BSI), founded in 1901. German business model scorecard analysis on some of the different (DIN) and French (AFNOR) organisations followed in 1917 revenue sharing models coming out of diverging (theoretical) and 1926 respectively, while the US-based ANSI was design choices of the CPC. To be clear, this part of the established in 1918. Soon, these national SDOs –which, analysis shall be exploratory in nature: since the CPC according to the authors, numbered more than 81 in 1996– standardization process has only just begun, technology were complemented by regional and international bodies. For choices are yet to be made and political or industrial alliances the telecommunications sector, but arguably for any to be formed; even the concept in itself is far from being specialized area, the International Telecommunications Union accepted. However, we consider it worthwhile to make an ex (established as a UN agency in 1947, but with roots going ante analysis of what the consequences of future choices with back to 1865) is probably the oldest example. Other important regard to the CPC could be, as an alternative to the more ones include the International Organisation for common ex post evaluations of standardization processes, Standardization (ISO, 1947), the European Committee for precisely because so much is still unknown and so many Standardization (CEN, 1961), the International different directions could still be taken in its eventual Electrotechnical Commission (IEC, 1906) and, for Europe, the deployment. European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC, 1973) and the European Telecommunications II. FROM LINEAR TO MULTI-LAYERED STANDARDIZATION Standardization Institute (ETSI, 1988). More than in other sectors, an immediate need for international standards was felt A. Linear, Formalized Standardization of in the telecommunications sector in order to ensure safety and Telecommunications network interoperability, leading many international SDOs in It is impossible to locate the roots of standardization as a this sector to precede generalized national standardization means of facilitating goods production; without any doubt, bodies [5]-[14]. As technology progressed and (national) agreements have been concluded between craftsmen or traders markets expanded, standardization became more and more on procedures and rules for production, construction, trading crucial in the sector of telecommunications. As Schmidt and conduct and other industrial and commercial activities at any Werle put it: “Autonomous actors involved in the production, point in history. However, standardization as we know it operation and use of such a large technical system as today, defined by ISO as the process of creating a “document, telecommunications rely on a minimum amount of established by consensus and approved by a recognized body, coordination.” [15]:108. It is therefore not surprising that, that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines although some 25 other international organisations exist which or characteristics for activities or their results, aimed at the are similar to the ITU in terms of standardization activities, the achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context ISO, IEC and ITU together are responsible for 85% of all [1], first became important in the nineteenth century. In this current international standards [5]. era, production of goods became centralized, resulting in the Although international coordinating bodies for emergence of large economies of scale and scope. Fordist and telecommunications have existed since the nineteenth century,
- 3. #1569123664 3 they were essentially inter-governmental in that they merely Further exacerbation of this complexity of ensured interconnection of different, heavily protected telecommunications systems standardization has been caused national markets. Indeed, until at least the end of the 1960s, by the convergence of the sector with others, such as those of postal and telecommunications operators (PTOs) were mostly IT and broadcasting. To be clear, this convergence is not just owned by national governments, which means operation and technological in nature, but in fact comprises four different regulation were dealt with by the same administrations, and domains: institutional (e.g. the move of telecoms groups into exclusive links existed with domestic manufacturers, the so- cable operators), technological (e.g. digital broadcasting called national champions. In many cases, this was justified as requiring telecommunications based transmission processes being a remedy against market failures and a consequence of for conditional access systems, set top boxes, electronic natural monopolies, even though the history of many programming guides etc.), functional (e.g. the rise of the incumbents clearly also shows the involved states’ interest in internet as an add-on to traditional telecommunications), and appropriating monopoly profits -dating back to pre-industrial infrastructural (e.g. telecoms services running over cable postal monopolies [16][17]. Many of the PTOs were large systems or video-on-demand via copper wire DSL lines). [20] integrated companies –integrating R&D, production as well as Therefore, not only does standardization of these networks and distribution of their products and services– with a staff of full- services bring together experts from diverging technological time engineers dedicated to develop the organisations’ internal backgrounds, but also previously separated interest groups standards and introducing them to specific recognized SDOs focusing on different basic functions of the technologies they [18]. Since vertical integration between PTOs and their support, and traditionally relying on diverging infrastructures. preferred equipment providers was tight, the technical In this context, the coming about of the X.25 standard for agreements resulting from this integration had a status similar packet switched inter-computer datacommunications, issued in to intra-firm standards, which were subsequently 1976, is one good and early example of the sometimes interconnected on an international level [4]:10 [15]:44. As a “theatrical clash” between the IT and (voice) consequence of this triple integration (between PTOs on the telecommunication sectors within the Comité Consultatif one hand, and regulators, equipment manufacturers and International Télégraphique et Téléphonique (CCITT, the standards developers on the other hand), the members of the predecessor of ITU-T) [14]:91-92; [4]:182-184. international SDOs were mostly PTOs themselves [4]:100, A final factor influencing standardization complexity is the coordinating their international communications business globalization of telecommunications [19]:89. According to through such international treaty organisations [5]. Brunsson, this influence manifests itself in four ways: more However, two evolutions began to put a strong pressure on the actors are involved which are far apart geographically, more standardization of telecommunications which could, until organisations are international or transnational in nature –and then, be characterized as relatively simple, formal and thus, cannot be pinpointed onto a national interest or controlled by national monopolies: increasing system jurisdiction (see also [15]:143 in this regard), communication complexity –ultimately culminating in complete convergence over vast distances is possible and people feel more associated between telecoms, IT and broadcasting worlds– and the and more receptive to developments happening in other parts liberalization of markets. of the world (what Brunsson calls mental globalization). Brunsson argues that while globalization increases the demand B. Transformations for standardization (because the need of interfaces to 1) System Complexity interconnect national or regional systems, and the general As Steinmueller and Werle argue, only three internationally absence of common norms), the smaller mental distance standardized, end-to-end-compatible telecommunications equally facilitates such standardization. Besides this, services existed in the 1970: telegraphy operated by PTOs, globalization obviously creates global markets for telex-based business communications and telephony [5]:123. telecommunication-related products, providing another strong However, as data generated an increasing amount on incentive for standardization whilst at the same time rendering telecommunications networks, and potential as well as it more complex [21]:37-39. demand for new types of services grew, SDOs were 2) The Liberalization of Markets confronted with an increased amount of standardization As said above, for many decades the standardization of activities. In the same vein, Blind distinguishes three reasons telecommunications was a matter either of companies why increased technical complexity increases the needs for themselves (internally or within the national context on a more standardization. Firstly, further increase in mass production or less ad hoc basis) or of formal national, regional or and inherent economies of scale extend the drive towards international SDOs whose members were in most cases again variety and cost reduction; secondly, not only are complex the incumbent operators [4]. However, from the 1970s products and services less transparent to users, they also carry onwards this situation started to change. In Europe, the with them new types of risks which may affect not only to economic depression of the seventies helped to create a free users but the wider community as well, and may occur not market rationale which was at the basis of many of the policy only during the period of usage but for much longer periods. initiatives taken towards telecoms market liberalization. Finally, the increased demand for health, safety and Furthermore, an ‘electronic alliance’ of large corporate users, environmental protection brought about by increased multinational companies and IT equipment suppliers gave a economic welfare also further stimulates the formulation of strong impetus to this drive. Policy action on the European rules and procedures [19]:1-2. level coincided with national tendencies inside and outside the EU: the initial focus on liberalization of telecoms under
- 4. #1569123664 4 Commissioner Davignon in 1979 almost coincided with • Slower procedures, Thatcher’s call for telecoms liberalisation in UK opposition in • Possibly comprising participants with different 1978, and came in the midst of the illustrious government- backgrounds and antagonistic objectives, incited AT&T divestiture operation in the US (already • Intransigent participant behaviour caused by diverging preceded by important events such as the Hush-a-Phone, views, slowing down the process since it is consensus Carterfone, MCI and Execunet decisions between 1957 and oriented, 1978) bringing an end to nearly a century of • If a new standard replaces existing solutions, firms may telecommunications monopoly and opening up competition in participate to slow down its standardization [25]. the long distance, manufacturing and R&D markets Wehnert, who studied standardization processes within CEN, [17][22][23]. A similar, gradual path was followed on the concurs with the view that much could be done to increase the European level, albeit with a slower pace. First, equipment efficiency and speed of SDOs; among other factors, he cites and value added services markets were liberalized in 1988 and lack of personal and technical support, lack of focus by both 1990 respectively (severing ties between PTOs and equipment the SDO and the actor that steers its work (viz. the European ‘national champions’ after a thirty month legal battle between Commission), lack of funding, suboptimal management, no the European Commission and several Member States). full representation by the problem owners (e.g. users), the Subsequently, the 1997 Open Network Provision (ONP) voluntary nature of the standardization work, lack of Directive created a full-fledged market for public network willingness to compromise, incompatible working services, and forced the separation between market regulation methodologies, cultural differences and administrative and service provision, leading to the establishment of constraints including enquiry and balloting procedures and independent regulatory authorities in most Member States translation requirements [26]. A number of these elements, [17]. particularly with regard to speed, are also echoed by Schmidt Obviously, these evolutions have had a far-reaching impact on and Werle ([15]:142-146), Sherif [24] and Egyedi ([4]:108). the standardization process. Firstly, the separation between To this, the latter author adds that some of the basic regulators and operators decreased the influence of PTOs in ideological principles differentiating formal SDOs from SDOs, leading to pressure for reform. Secondly, the consortia, such as the orientation towards consensus and liberalization of markets resulted in the establishment of new, democratic procedures, may not be as clear when it comes to private telecommunications operators having their own their practical application: “dominant rhetoric underestimates interest in standards, and setting up their own networks, which openness of most industry consortia and overestimates the needed to be interconnected to the existing ones. Finally, the practical implications of the formal democratic procedures” separation between PTOs and equipment vendors caused a [27]. Not only does Egyedi note a “friction between ideology proliferation in the number of systems, increasing the need for and praxis” (for example because national delegations to standardized interfaces. Taken together, these influences –the SDOs most often consist of industrial delegations), but also a increased number of heterogeneous stakeholders and systems, friction between ideological features (for example those of and vertical disintegration of the telecoms ecosystem broad representation on the one hand, and technical including regulation and standardization– started to exert great discussion on the other hand) and negative effects of pressure on standardization bodies and methods. ideologies on the process of standardization itself. Examples of this are the consensus principle which promotes C. Shift Towards Alliance Based Standardization and SDO compromises and multi-option standards, national Reform membership which increased politicization of standardization As mentioned, the above evolutions towards increased activities, the democracy principle allowing minorities to technical complexity, increased number of stakeholders hijack the process, and the need for internationally recognized coming from more heterogeneous backgrounds, globalization standards which again results in more compromise oriented and a regulatory context of liberalization and competition- activities [4]:113-116. Finally, in 1996 David and Shurmer oriented policies, have changed the way in which standards identified the following difficulties for formal SDOs, come about. As a first consequence, criticism grew on the concluding that these occasion “profound doubts as to the long formal SDOs, of which the decision making procedures were term sustainability of an institutional regime founded on the increasingly considered slow and cumbersome, at a time when present set of industry-based SDOs” [28]: more and more standards were needed to enable and • Potential bias towards less innovative solutions due to need interconnect converging networks and services contributed to of consensus, by a very large array of actors. As a consequence, other, • Difficulties due to large growth in number of participants: seemingly more dynamic ways of standardization are paradox of increased need for interoperability versus an increasingly explored. As Sherif puts it: “It is widely believed increased complexity of reaching it; many SDOs still have that formal standards bodies are less responsive to market a sphere of expertise and membership structure based on a needs than industrial associations or consortia. This belief has limited number of incumbents, had at least two consequences. First, there has been an • Globalization and convergence have increased the unprecedented increase in the number of ad hoc groups to economic stakes of telecommunications, increasing the promote specific technologies. Second, some traditional risk of antagonized vested interests and the deliberate standards-developing organisations have fallen out of favour slowing down of standardization processes, and have reduced their activities” [24]. Van Wegberg • Convergence causes uncertainty with regard to the summarizes the drawbacks of SDOs as follows: ‘jurisdiction’ of SDOs in closely related areas.
- 5. #1569123664 5 The criticisms on formal SDOs gave rise to two evolutions, formal standards as a basis for their work, many private one being the proliferation of standardization consortia, and consortia take long a long time to revise their initial standards, the other the reform of SDOs procedures to better fit industry and little are free of delayed or cancelled standards. Finally, needs. For what the first tendency is concerned, David and not all private organisations are free of political influence: the Shurmer distinguish two strategies. At one extreme, there is example mentioned by Sherif is that of the Internet the de facto standardization performed by non-cooperative, Engineering Task Force (IETF), which has been described as competitive industrial players, which, in the absence of the an “open and democratic forum”, but which has been heavily need for a regulated solution, may provide a rapid and influenced by the US Department of Defense, and of the efficient mechanism for selecting a technology and gaining related Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers momentum for it. Often, one major player introduces a (ICANN), which was authorized by the US Department of technology and creates a so-called bandwagon effect, causing Commerce to oversee domain name assignment and early adopters to take on the system and alternative provider to registration processes, and has been criticized of not being integrate the proprietary specifications into their products democratic [24]. Finally, David and Shurmer add some and/or services. A second option consists in the formation of additional relevant concerns with regard to private consortia: private standardization consortia. According to David and • Duplication of efforts by rival groups, Shurmer, more than 400 such private organisations existed in • No single standards for certain technologies (e.g. diverging the US alone by the early 1930s. Often these consortia have cellular technology standards in the US and New Zealand, cooperation agreements with formal SDOs; however, more different co-existing DVD standards), and more these SDOs are simply by-passed, and standards • Potentially high start-up costs, agreed upon by a private consortium are directly passed on to • Loss of specialized administrative and procedural the market for de facto ratification –that is, acceptance through expertise, uptake. Unlike technocratic formal or professional • Prioritization of profit driven private interests over public committees, which are described as “collective attempts to interests (e.g. in technology choices made), achieve consensus in a collaborative professional effort” • Lack of openness and democracy: free and equal access to [15]:61, business interests have a very central role in these committee meetings, access and feedback channels to draft consortia, and industry-wide consensus on the technical recommendations, possibility for non-exclusive licensing solution is not primordial. Often, these types of consortia of technologies at reasonable rates and restrictions on the directly compete with others, such as in the recent cases of use of monetary side-payments for speeding up consensus, HD-DVD (supported by Toshiba, NEC, Sanyo, Microsoft, • Lack of continued support for legacy standards and RCA, Intel, Kenwood and others) versus BluRay technologies provision of backwards compatibility, (promoted by Sony, Hitachi, LG, Panasonic, Philips, • If coupled to recognition by formal SDOs, inferior quality Samsung, Sharp, Dell, HP and others) and WiMAX versus formal standards. LTE. Some of the advantages of these types of consortia In summary, whereas a clear tendency towards de facto identified by David and Shurmer, which contribute to the standardization by private consortia can be noted, this strategy flexibility and speed of the standardization process, are: too is not without its deficiencies. The second way that • Membership, internal organization and procedures tailored criticisms on formal SDOs have been dealt with, is to reform to the objectives of the group, of SDOs themselves, in order to create rules and procedures • More adapted to ICT standardization characterized by that better fit the needs of converged IT and telecoms short product cycles, faster change and inherently more industries. A good typology of the different mechanisms at collaborative R&D-styled standardization tradition (as play is again provided by David and Shurmer, who locate the opposed to traditional SDO diversity reduction activities first of these reforms already in the early 1980s, and among several existing technologies), distinguish between three types of changes. Firstly, procedural • Flexibility to dispense with rules and guidelines that slow reforms have been undertaken. These include, for example, the the decision making process, strengthening of committee support; the introduction of new • Less political intervention, project information management systems and new production • More financial resources than formal SDOs [28]. techniques, by-passing of the SDO’s General Assembly for These advantages attributed to industrial consortia are widely certain approval procedures or increase of General mentioned in the literature. However, a lot of criticism also Assemblies’ meeting frequency; speeding up and streamlining exists as to the ideological bias of statements, which hail SDO of Technical Committee procedures for deliberating, drafting, by-pass strategies to the detriment of formal SDO public comment and revision stages; and introduction of e- standardization. Egyedi has already been mentioned in this mail and internet deliberation in order to drive down meeting respect; Similarly, Sherif argues that “unqualified statements costs. on the benefit of one type of standardization over another are A second category of reforms is related to new modes of essentially ideological statements that, in the current context, coordination and cooperation between different SDOs. As tend to favor deregulation, privatization, and the mentioned, many jurisdictional problems have arisen between establishment of unfettered markets”. According to the author, global, regional or sectoral bodies with different backgrounds the need for rapid standardization is ultimately dependent on and memberships. While fearing that “there will be further whether it concerns radical, substitutive technologies with intensification of the already dysfunctional jurisdictional long lead times for development or deployment, or more competition and inter-organisational turf battles”, David and incremental innovations. Moreover, many consortia use Shurmer do see considerable effort in SDOs to coordinate
- 6. #1569123664 6 their activities, and to find ways of cooperating with private are fully aware of this, and wish to maximize the potential of consortia, for example by formally approving specifications their technologies by taking advantage of as much qualities as first drafted inside these private organisations (which for possible: on the one hand, they want a rapid and streamlined example was tested with Digital Video Broadcasting standards process leading to a quality standard that is accepted in in ETSI), or to bring more flexible, rapid standardization practice and even accredited or mandated by official bodies; structures directly under the umbrella of an SDO. on the other hand they are also keen on protecting intellectual A third and final domain of reform is the introduction or property rights introduced in the standard, maximizing the refinement of mechanisms for conflict resolution. Here, the rents derived from these property rights and having maximum four key strategies identified are: sacrificing the strict impact on the market. Also, companies are aware that consensus principle (e.g. by introducing weighted majority standardization bodies –even if they strive to be globalized voting); standardizing ahead of the market (i.e. before and holistic– still often have a background in a specific sector considerable costs have been incurred by partners and before (IT, telecommunications, broadcasting or other) and a specific much is known about the possible market impacts for certain region, and may not in themselves have the capacity to solutions compared to others); incomplete standards-setting provide standards that are universally acceptable, or that cover (creating meta-standards or high level performance-oriented all aspects of a technology. standards); and altering participants’ intellectual property For these reasons our hypothesis is that, beyond linear formal rights in order to increase incentives for industrial partners to standardization, the drive towards industrial consortia and the start up SDO trajectories [28]. related transformation of traditional organisations, standardization is evolving towards a third, new stage, actively D. Towards Multi-layered Standardization and simultaneously combining the merits and weaknesses of As the sections above have demonstrated, the complexity of both formal and de facto standardization. This standardization telecommunications standardization has significantly strategy acknowledges that different aspects of a standard increased over the past years. Numerous factors have been might need to be standardized in different bodies, at different mentioned which contribute to this increased complexity: moments in the research, development and deployment cycle convergence of previously separated heterogeneous of a product or service, and possibly in different regions. It technologies, markets and companies; globalization; and also presumes that a successful standard might not only need liberalization and competition policies breaking up the vertical technical quality and industrial support, but often also regional integration between equipment, carrier infrastructure, service or global acceptance and political support, and that neither provision and regulation and causing a proliferation of formal SDOs, nor industrial consortia are able to provide these companies to take into account and technologies to in equal measures. In other words, we hypothesize that standardize and interconnect. These trends have put the standardization has become a multi-layered process, not only traditional, formal SDOs under pressure, and have caused a characterized by its multi-dimensionality but also by its partial transfer of standardization activities to private complexity and lack of certainty. As technologies enter the consortia, which with their higher degree of flexibility and standardization phase –or better said, multiple concurrent or speed are deemed more appropriate to respond to an ever subsequent standardization trajectories– very early onwards in higher need for standardization of products and services with their development and far ahead of the market, very little is ever shorter product life cycles. Many SDOs, in their turn, known about the possible market impacts of design choices have responded by adapting their membership, rules and made, and stakeholders participating in the standardization procedures, in order to move away from standardization cycles process have difficulties in estimating what choices would taking more than four years on average; weighted majority serve their interest best. Moreover, in a multi-layered voting, increased support systems and changed IPR rules standardization context companies might be confronted by strengthen this process. Also, SDOs spend significant effort in diverging alliances in the different standardization bodies; for finding a modus vivendi with other formal SDOs as well as example, while one might be a private consortium with roots with private consortia and other standardization bodies, in the IT sector and dominated by US based firms, another sometimes taking the role of “official validator” of standards might be a European telecommunications oriented formal first developed within the private sphere, in other instances standardization body. Companies might be forced to be internalizing alternative working methods within their own simultaneously active in these different bodies, but could also organization. be absent from one or the other, causing alliances to be In spite of all these measures, standardization complexity has radically different and the outcome of the process even more not decreased, and jurisdictional tensions between uncertain. standardization bodies (both formal and informal, both The multi-track standardization activity with regard to the geographical and sectoral) have not disappeared. As has been Cognitive Pilot Channel constitutes an interesting potential demonstrated above, both formal and de facto SDOs have example of this new evolution. As shall be shown below, the their strengths and their weaknesses; qualities such as speed, standardization of this technology takes place in multiple openness (in membership, access to draft documents, contexts that are, amongst other things, different in geography, standards and meetings, IPR arrangements etc.), orientation type of body, membership, accessibility and objective. As will towards consensus, technical quality, acceptance rate and so be shown, efforts are being made to delineate as well as align on are different from one body to the next and, despite all the different trajectories. Also, the CPC is a good example of a ideological claims, rarely do all these characteristics unite in technology that is entering standardization far ahead of market one specific organization. Companies wanting to standardize introduction. In the absence of definitive design choices for
- 7. #1569123664 7 the CPC, this paper will introduce some potential options, and opportunistic RATs may use varying frequencies depending show what the market impact (in this case the possible on their availability, e.g. by using spread spectrum techniques. revenue sharing models, and the feasibility and desirability of The paradox here is that, in an environment where regulators these models) could be. increasingly make use of market based methods, where reconfigurable systems decentralize decision-making to a III. THE CASE OF THE COGNITIVE PILOT CHANNEL significant degree and where real-time mechanisms for dynamic spectrum management are used, certain inherent A. Introduction risks and challenges could necessitate the introduction of new, centralized instruments of coordination and control. In [41], In this section, we will apply the insights gained above to the where these central controlling entities are discussed in more relatively recent trend towards Flexible Spectrum detail, five risk domains are distinguished where these entities Management, by analysing the recently initiated might prove necessary (based on an earlier analysis of standardization –and concurrent regulatory- process of one of potential secondary market failure performed by Xavier and its potential key enablers, the Cognitive Pilot Channel (CPC). Ypsilanti [29]) 1) an information deficit; 2) interference; 3) a Flexible Spectrum Management (FSM), used as a concept lack of coordination and harmonization of frequencies; 4) pointing to a set of new and dynamic procedures and anti-competitive behaviour; and 5) threats to the public techniques for obtaining and transferring spectrum usage interest and consumer protection issues. Regarding the first rights and dynamically changing the specific use of risk domain (viz. the information deficit), different types of frequencies, plays an important role in fully exploiting the controlling entities can be envisaged, some of which already advantages of cognitive, reconfigurable networks and exist; examples mentioned in [41] include central registers of terminals. It is therefore strongly linked to the development of spectrum availability, license ownership and rights of use, cognitive radio (CR) and software defined radio (SDR) in databases of real-time spectrum occupancy (including terms of research, standardization and regulation. secondary usage) GIS mappings of such data etc. As already mentioned in the introduction of this paper, what However, in a composite and dynamic radio environment, this we will argue in this section is that the standardization of the information deficit may become even more acute. In CPC constitutes a good example of the complex, synchronous, particular, as radio frequency usage becomes highly complex multi-layered collaboration process towards innovation in and variable in terms of frequency and bandwidth as well as wireless telecommunications. At the same time, we posit that Radio Access Technology (RAT) used for a given service at a the way in which protocols and interfaces for the CPC are given time and in a given space, cognitive radio terminals – standardized, and the specific harmonization of bands for it, although able to reconfigure themselves in order to connect to may have a significant impact on the market deployment of all these different RATs on various frequency bands- may the CPC itself and of the networks and services enabled by it. experience significant difficulties in locating wireless services To be clear, this part of the analysis shall be exploratory in in the first place. In order to get knowledge of its radio nature: since the CPC standardization process has only just environment, cognitive radios might simply scan the entire begun, technology choices are yet to be made and political or spectrum or significant parts of it, but most probably this industrial alliances to be formed; even the concept in itself is process would be far too power- and time consuming to be far from being accepted. However, we consider it worthwhile efficient. Therefore, a new type of central controlling entity is to make an ex ante analysis of what the consequences of currently under research, which could be considered as an future choices with regard to the CPC could be, as an advanced, active registry: the Cognitive Pilot Channel (CPC). alternative to the more common ex post evaluations of This concept consists in using an invariable radio link to standardization processes, precisely because so much is still convey, in real-time, all necessary information to terminals unknown and so many different directions could still be taken concerning the available frequency bands, RATs, services, in its eventual deployment. load situation, network policies, etc., so that terminals can be Below, we will first explain the concept of the CPC. Then, an reconfigured to connect to whatever service available on outline will be given of the regulatory process towards the whatever frequency. Moreover, CPC-distributed policies 2011 ITU World Radio Conference, followed by an analysis could help to manage composite networks by imposing certain of the multi-level standardization process currently set up for constraints upon terminals, while at the same time potentially the CPC. Finally we shall reflect on the possible consequences allowing terminals to dynamically make use of whatever RAT of standardization en harmonization on the market structure fits the requested service best (in terms of bandwidth, quality and business models for the CPC itself and FSM-enabled of service, price etc.). Therefore, the CPC may not only be wireless networks and services. considered as a potential new controlling entity in the B. CPC concept telecommunications ecosystem, but as a crucial environment- The concepts of Flexible Spectrum Management and knowledge enabler for the Cognitive system in a multi-Radio reconfigurability carry the potential to significantly enhance Access Technologies (RATs) and dynamic spectrum spectrum efficiency. In particular, underused frequencies can allocation context [30]. be leased or sold to parties which value these frequencies In the current state-of-the-art of the concept, the CPC would more, secondary use may be allowed if it does not cause operate in a certain geographical area subdivided into meshes. excessive interference, radio access technologies (RATs) A mesh is defined as an area where certain radio-electrical operating on these frequencies may be changed, and commonalities can be identified (e.g. a certain frequency that is detected with a power above a certain level in all the points
- 8. #1569123664 8 of the mesh etc.). The mesh is defined by its geographic coordinates, and its size would depend on the minimum spatial resolution where the mentioned commonalities can be identified. Figure 1 illustrates the concept [31]. Figure 1: CPC meshes Three variants of the CPC are under study. The first is the Global/Public Advertiser CPC, where a single, previously non-existant operator would deploy an infrastructure to Figure 2: Four deployment models for CPC transmit RAT and frequency information for all operators in a given mesh. This CPC would preferably use a dedicated, As mentioned, the CPC as a concept is currently still in a universal frequency, making it accessible regardless of the research phase; for a general, up-to-date overview we refer to deployed RATs available or the country or region in which [30] as well as to [32], while [33]-[40] provide further the terminal is located. From a business/regulatory technical background. Also, Delaere and Ballon have already perspective, this type of CPC could be run by a government performed exploratory business-model oriented research as to agency (regulatory option), by one designated operator (under possible deployment configurations and revenue sharing strict rules), or by multiple operators in a competitive setting. options [41][42][43]. However, at the recent ITU 2007 World The second variant of the CPC is the Private Advertiser CPC, Radio Conference, the issue of the CPC was put on the agenda in which the CPC falls under the domain of the existing for WRC-11, effectively initiating a regulatory roadmap for it, operators. This solution does not need a dedicated frequency and different components of the concept are part of current and infrastructure, but reduces discoverability of the CPC as standardization activities. Below, we shall give a short well as possibilities for DSA in the country or region where it overview of the current regulatory context and standardization is deployed. From a business perspective, two subvariants are process underway, focussing on the two main areas of possible: a ‘pure’ operator model on the one hand, and an standardization activity, i.e. that within IEEE and ETSI. association model on the other hand, in which an operator deploys a CPC but allows complementary RATs from other C. Regulatory context operators to be advertized on it. The third and final variant A worldwide implementation of the public CPC in the same would be a hierarchical solution, combining both an upper- frequency channel –which would constitute the optimal level, single CPC on a harmonized frequency and several solution for maximizing the benefits of a CPC while lower-level, operator-based CPCs. The four options (operator, minimizing the complexity by not having take into account association, intermediary and hierarchical) are shown in regional, national or even sub-national CPC frequencies– Figure 2 [30][31]. requires not only standardization but also regulatory activity. A worldwide implementation requires an appropriate decision taken by a World Radio Conference (WRC) modifying the Radio Regulation (RR) of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). WRCs convene every four years and the agenda of a WRC is decided at the previous one. Often, a decision on including a particular item is taken at the second WRC where this item is discussed. To prepare such potential agenda setting, work was undertaken from 2006 to initiate a Question on Cognitive Radio within the ITU. In the ITU-R context, a question is defined as a “statement of a technical, operational or procedural problem, generally seeking a Recommendation” [44]. Recommendations in their turn are defined as international technical standards developed by the Radiocommunication Sector of the ITU, which are approved by the Member States and which, while not mandatory, enjoy a relatively high status and are widely implemented [45].In September 2006, the question was approved. With regard to
- 9. #1569123664 9 the CPC, it is important to note that subquestion 2 of this and be aware of their environment” into the capacity to “gain document includes “reconfigurable radio, policy-defined knowledge on that environment”, so that assisting, central adaptive radio and their associated control mechanisms and controlling entities are also included) as well as a description their functionalities that may be a part of cognitive radio of the concept of cognitive networks, mentioning that these systems” (own emphasis) as objects of study. The question networks enable the introduction of a cognition radio enabler, further resolves to include the results of the studies performed such as the CPC [52][53][54]. However, as mentioned, the in one or more recommendations, reports or handbooks, and deadline of 2010 for completion of the report leaves many sets the deadline for these studies at the year 2010, thereby questions unanswered. The figure below represents the making WRC-11 the first potential forum for introducing hypothetical regulatory path for the CPC in the coming years. regulatory change [46]. Then, in June 2007, a contribution from France Télécom was filed which specifically introduced the CPC concept into the work of ITU-R 8A [47]. This contribution stemmed from the EU research project E2RII and had the support of project partners such as Motorola, Nokia, Alcatel Lucent, Telefonica and Telecom Italia. As a consequence, the CPC was included as a related radio technology in the working document which was to lead to a draft report, and a detailed explanation was added as an annex [48]. The most recent meeting of ITU-R 8, which changed into ITU-R WP5A following an internal restructuring of activities, was held in February 2008. Meanwhile, however, efforts shifted towards the upcoming 2007 WRC. In July 2007, the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) submitted a proposal to put the CPC Figure 3: Potential CPC regulatory roadmap concept on the agenda for the 2011 edition of the WRC, and Besides the very early, specific regulatory steps described CEPT members promoted this agenda item in the discussions above with regard to the Cognitive Pilot Channel, one also that took place at the WRC-07 (October-November 2007, needs to take into account the more general regulatory Geneva). At the same time, a number of Arab States, via evolutions towards more flexible forms of spectrum agenda item 1.10, introduced their own proposal with regard management which, for example, introduce secondary trading to cognitive radio studies, putting more emphasis on SDR of spectrum frequencies, flexible use of spectrum (by which is aspects. As a result of the ensuing negotiations, in which the meant that the specific RAT to be used on a certain frequency Netherlands administration allegedly played an important is no longer prescribed in the spectrum license), and mediating role, the approved agenda of the WRC-11 proposes secondary use of frequencies. An overview of the European “to consider regulatory measures and their relevance to context in this regard, including the WAPECS initiative, as enable the introduction of software defined radio and well as evolutions in the US and a number of EU Member cognitive radio systems based on the results of ITU-R States, is provided in [43]. With regard to policies towards studies”, indicating with regard to the CPC that “some studies FSM, this paper concluded that, while there is a clear shift of indicate a possible need for a worldwide harmonized policy focus from the command-and-control model to more cognitive supporting pilot channel (…) whilst other studies market based forms of spectrum management, other indicate that the availability of a database could support mechanisms have not been abandoned, and no consensus access and connectivity, and therefore support the use of these exists among regulators as to what constitutes the optimum systems” . However, it needs to be noted that wired or wireless balance between them. In view of this existing work we shall access to some form of database is also mentioned as a not go into these evolutions here; however, it is clear that potential alternative to the CPC [30][49][50][51]. these changing policies –as well as the relatively slow pace at Following the inclusion of this agenda item to WRC-11, which these changes occur and the considerable resistance studies are now to be carried out between 2007 and 2011 at against some of them– play an important role in relation to the CEPT and ITU levels so that appropriate proposals can be (lack of) development of cognitive, reconfigurable considered and possibly endorsed by WRC. Although telecommunications networks and services in general, and to different Study Groups are concerned (SG1 and SG3 to SG7) the scope of application and the potential success of the and different relevant Questions are being studied (e.g. Cognitive Pilot Channel in particular. Question ITU-R 230-1/8 on Software Defined Radio), with D. Standardization of the CPC specific regard to the CPC this first and foremost concerns the work within ITU-R WP5A mentioned above [51]. Relevant As was mentioned already, different standardization tracks accepted contributions made so far with regard to the CPC have been set up for the CPC, in conjunction with the include a proposal by Alcatel-Lucent, France Telecom, regulatory roadmap 2006-2015. The most important of these Motorola, Telecom Italia and the administration of The are the IEEE’s P1900.4 SCC41 committee, which started as a Netherlands to alter the definition of “Cognitive Radio Study Group in September 2006 and in evolved into a Systems” in such a way that it would better fit the CPC Working Group in the Spring of 2007, and the ETSI RRS concept (re-wording the capability for radio systems to “sense committee, which initiated as an ad-hoc group on SDR and
- 10. #1569123664 10 CR in May 2007 and was upgraded to a committee in January an overview of standardization activities in relation to the 2008. Both activities will be discussed here. Figure 4 provides regulatory roadmap of the CPC. Figure 4: Overview of CPC standardization and regulation roadmaps projects under development [56]. In the typology of As will be shown below, the discussed platforms for CPC Krechmer, the IEEE-SA is defined as a Standards Setting standardization differ from each other in quite a number of Organisation (SSO) on the same level as, for example, ETSI aspects, of which the most important are: 1) timing; 2) or ANSI, because it is directly or indirectly recognized by a geography; 3) member structure; 4) scope of work; 5) nature government (and in that sense is to be distinguished from of the standard. These variables to a great extent explain the industrial consortia) [18]. Egyedi however –along with many chosen strategy of initiating these multiple parallel other scholars– differentiates the IEEE as a de facto standardization tracks. standardization body which, unlike de iure bodies (such as 1) In IEEE SCC41 ETSI), operates outside of official, national or regional The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE, administration related SSOs [4]:5-6. Then again, the now only referred to by its acronym due to the considerable distinguishing notion of “official recognition” is a vague one expansion in other than the original domains of expertise) is a since IEEE standards are widely distributed, and the IEEE-SA professional, not-for-profit organization established in 1963 as has strategic relationships with the IEC, ISO and ITU, as well a merger of the Institute of Radio Engineers (IRE, 1923) and as satisfying all SDO requirements set by the World Trade the American Institute of Electrical Engineers (AIEE, 1884). Organization [56]. Equally, although IEEE is a US national A United States based organization in principle, the 900-staff organisation in origin and is accredited as such by the IEEE now counts more than 375,000 members in more than American National Standards Institute [57]:91, this 160 countries, grouped in 324 geographical sections, 1,784 geographical distinction is no longer tenable since the IEEE, local chapters, 38 subject-related societies, 7 technical as mentioned, is internationally oriented in its activities and councils and 390 affinity groups (data of end 2007) [55]. membership, its standards are often applied worldwide [1]:9- 10. Because of this confusion, Egyedi rightly introduces a Besides the publication of 144 journals and the yearly specific type of de facto standards called grey standards, of sponsoring of more than 850 conferences, the IEEE is also which professional organisations such as the IEEE are active in standardization through its IEEE Standards important providers. Grey standards are defined as “publicly Association (IEEE-SA). It develops global industry standards available or accessible multi-party specifications, which are on a wide range of topics, including power and energy, developed with a multi-vendor intention”, which distinguishes biomedical and health care, information technology, them from proprietary de facto standards developed within transportation, nanotechnology and information assurance. industry consortia and later ‘imposed’ onto the market. [4]:6). More than 20,000 people contribute to the standards portfolio Finally, when following the typology of De Vries, developed of IEEE-SA, which currently counts 1,300 standards and
- 11. #1569123664 11 as a consequence of his critique on formal versus informal and this group was to complete work by the end of 2007 and to national versus international standardization typologies, one initiate the IEEE sponsor balloting process at that time could describe IEEE-SA as a sectoral standardization [58][59]. The official purpose of SCC41 1900.4 is defined as organisation, to be distinguished from consortia, “to improve overall composite capacity and quality of service governmental organisations and company standardization, and of wireless systems in a multiple Radio Access Technologies defined as “standardization set by an organization that unites (RATs) environment, by defining an appropriate system parties in a certain branch of business” [1]:11. architecture and protocols which will facilitate the optimization of radio resource usage, in particular, by Standardization activity in the IEEE typically takes place exploiting information exchanged between network and within Working Groups. These are initiated after an IEEE- mobile Terminals, whether or not they support multiple approved organization has taken up sponsorship of a standard, simultaneous links and dynamic spectrum access.” [60]. and the IEEE-SA standards board has reviewed and approved a Project Authorization Request. After a standard is drafted To work towards this objective, three reference use cases of and approved within the Working Group, it goes into a the P1900.4 system have been defined: a) Dynamic Spectrum balloting process in which all interested members of IEEE-SA, Assignment, i.e. the dynamic assignment of frequencies to a as well as entities that have paid a balloting fee, may vote on given RAT within a composite network for a given space and the proposal. There is a quorum of 75 percent (of those time; b) Dynamic Spectrum Access, i.e. the dynamic access by individuals and entities which expressed their interest in the different RATs to a given set of overlapping frequencies standard at the beginning of the activity), and an approval rate without excessive interference and with or without of 75 percent of votes cast. Upon approval, the standard is negotiation; and c) Distributed Radio Resource Usage then reviewed by the IEEE-SA Standards Board Review Optimisation, i.e. an optimized use of spectrum by different Committee and receives a final vote from the IEEE-SA RATs in a composite network by distributing decision-making Standards Board [55]. Although every individual is able to intelligently between networks and terminals. On this basis, a contribute to a standard, the membership and balloting fees number of system requirements were collected, and three (almost USD 4,000 for entities), and the registration fees and crucial system entities defined: travel costs for Working Groups do constitute a significant • The Network Reconfiguration Manager (NRM), managing barrier for smaller organizations and individuals. the Composite Wireless Network and terminals for network-terminal-distributed optimization of spectrum The standardization of the CPC within IEEE was initiated usage, through the creation of a new Working Group P1900.4 within • The Terminal Reconfiguration Manager (TRM), managing the P1900 Standards Group, dealing with “New Generation the terminal for network-terminal-distributed optimization Radio Standards”. This Standards Group was established in of spectrum usage within the framework defined by the early 2005 under joint sponsorship of the IEEE NRM and in a manner consistent with user preferences and Communications Society and the IEEE Electromagnetic available context information, Society, with the objective to develop supporting standards • The Radio Enabler (RE) used as a logical communication dealing with new technologies and techniques being channel between NRM and TRM. developed for next generation radio and advanced spectrum It is this last component, which may run over one or more management. Three earlier Working Groups were already existing (or dedicated) RATs, that constitutes the Cognitive dealing with Standard Definitions and Concepts for Dynamic Pilot Channel. These entities, extended by additional ones on Spectrum Access (P1900.1), Recommended Practice for the terminal and RAN side (in either case an entity for Analysis of In-Band and Adjacent Band Interference and reconfiguration control and an entity for measurements Coexistence Between Radio Systems (P1900.2) and with a collection) have subsequently been integrated into a System Standard for Assessing the Spectrum Access Behavior of Architecture, and functional requirements for them have been Radio Systems Employing Dynamic Spectrum Access Methods listed. As a further refinement, a functional architecture based (P1900.3). After a meeting in May 06 (Hannover, Germany) on these functional requirements has been introduced. between IEEE representatives, the P1900 and P1900.3 Subsequently, an Information Model has been elaborated chairmen and interested parties, a Study Group (SG) P1900.B which is to match the requirements of the System and was set up in September of that year, which was more Functional architecture, is to be extensible and flexible, not specifically oriented to the overall system architecture of overly complex, and making use of platform and technology- cognitive radio systems. A few months later, in December 06, independent information and data type definitions. Finally, a PAR was approved and in February 07 P1900.B was scenario examples are given to show how the NRM manages upgraded to a Working Group entitled “Architectural Building the TRM via the RE, by performing operations Blocks Enabling Network-Device Distributed Decision (read/set/create/delete) on a number of well-defined objects in Making for Optimized Radio Resource Usage in the system. It should be noted that the actual execution of Heterogeneous Wireless Access Networks”. One month later, reconfiguration operations on the network or terminal side, IEEE P1900 was reorganized into the Standards Coordination based on the choice made by NRM or TRM, is outside of the Committee 41 (SCC 41), Dynamic Spectrum Access project’s scope, as are the protocols needed for these Networks (DySPAN). Again, the IEEE Communications operations [61][62][63]. Society and EMC Society are sponsoring societies for this After successful working group internal letter ballot in July Committee. Like all Working Groups under SCC41, WG 08, it was expected that a sponsor ballot on the 1900.4 1900.4 continued its work under this name. The objective of
- 12. #1569123664 12 Baseline Document would start in August 08. As of July 08, The recognition of ETSI by the European Commission as well the Working Group consisted of 21 voting members. A large as by the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) implies a number of these were/are participants in the European E2R II number of ‘official’ responsibilities. One well-known example and E3 projects (e.g. Motorola, France Telecom, Alcatel- is the set of harmonized standards (currently over 270) that Lucent, Toshiba Research Europe, King’s College London, ETSI has released in pursuit of the Commission’s Radio and the Universities of Athens and of Piraeus and the Polytechnic Telecommunications Terminal Equipment Directive University of Catalunya). A significant part of the other (R&TTD) of 1999. It is this set of standards that allows members is from Japanese origin (e.g. NICT, Tokyo equipment manufacturers to self-declare conformity of their University of Science, Hitachi, KDDI, NEC, ISB Corporation, products and introduce them in all European markets. Another Kozo Keikaku Engineering and Worldpicom). Other members important point of interaction is the use of mandates by the are, e.g., Intel and BAE systems [58]. Commission and by EFTA in order to develop standards in 2) In ETSI TC RRS line with European policies. Since 1996, 49 such mandates The European Telecommunications Standardization Institute have been forwarded to ETSI [14]. Taking all the above into (ETSI) is a European regional standardization organisation for account, we can conclude that ETSI is a formal, de iure Information and Communication Technologies. It was standardization organization. Note that, as Egyedi points out, established in 1988 by the Conférence Européenne des de iure does not mean that standards must imperatively be Administrations des Postes et des Télécommunications applied since ETSI, as most formal bodies, works towards (CEPT), the organisation of European postal and telecoms consensus-based, voluntary standards. Like IEEE, ETSI is administrations. CEPT did this at the incitement of the regional in nature but supersedes this level through its daily European Commission, whose Directorate-General XIII activities and membership [4]:5; [1]: 9-11. This membership (Telecommunications, Information Industries and Innovation) includes network operators, manufacturers, consultants, had proposed the creation of the organisation in its 1987 national standardization organisations and administrations, but Green Paper on Telecommunications; the Commission itself also service providers, universities, public research bodies and took up the position of Counsellor and could influence ETSI’s user associations. For the latter three categories, as well as for priorities through the use of mandates; yet it was not until micro-enterprises, reduced membership fees apply, whereas 1992 that the organization was officially recognized as a for large companies and administrations contributions are European SSO. Egyedi interestingly notes that, while ETSI determined by turnover and country GDP respectively [14]. was primarily oriented towards DG XIII in its first years, The standardization activities of ETSI take place inside ‘competing’ organisations CEN/CENELEC focused on DG III Technical Committees, Special Committees, Projects and (Internal Market and Industrial Affairs) which preferred the Partnership Projects. A Technical Committee (TC) is defined national sub-structure of the latter bodies, a structure ETSI, as a “semi-permanent entity organized around a number of with its direct individual membership and clear European standardization activities addressing a specific technology outlook, clearly (and consciously) lacked; this, at least partly, area”. TCs may have different Working Groups, which in explains why ETSI was able to be established as an their turn discuss one or more Work Items. These Work Items independent organisation. Later, the three bodies would are inserted into ETSI’s Work Programme. During the work, conclude a “CEN-CENELEC-ETSI Basic Cooperation consensus is sought but weighted, secret balloting is also Agreement for the Handling of Technical Work”, thereby possible, in which case 71 percent of votes is needed (or 71 streamlining a cohesive European standardization [4][64]. As percent of full member votes in a second round); however, no with the IEEE, ETSI has local roots and enjoys official quorum applies. Eventually, the work of a Technical recognition on a regional level, but has since its establishment Committee (as other Technical Bodies) results in European grown into a global standardization organisation, counting Standards (EN), Harmonised Standards, ETSI standards, ETSI almost 700 member organisations from 62 countries. This guides, Technical Specifications, Technical Reports, Special international outlook is evidenced first and foremost by the Reports and Group Specifications. For the approval of these global application of some of ETSI’s standards such as GSM, different types of deliverables, diverging and complex the SIM card, DECT, TETRA, xDSL and DVB. Secondly, regulations exist which fall outside the scope of this paper ETSI has a permanent representation in China and contributes [65]. to several collaboration projects with Latin America. Finally, The work of ETSI regarding the Cognitive Pilot Channel will but equally important, the organisation has partnership take place in a newly established Technical Committee on agreements with the International Electrotechnical Reconfigurable Radio Services (RRS). Following a workshop Commission (IEC), the International Standards Organisation on SDR and Cognitive Radio in February 07, the ETSI Board (ISO) and with the ITU, and keeps formal links with 3GPP, decided to establish the SDR/CR ad hoc group, in order to EMTEL, MESA, ICANN and GSC. Within Europe, ETSI has evaluate the potential for standardization on these topics and signed a Memorandum of Understanding with National propose orientation to the Board. The ad hoc group held its Standardization Organisations (NSOs) in 36 countries, first meeting in May 07 and decided to draft a report analyzing regulating, among other things, the flow of information SDR/CR requirements and standardization opportunities, and between the bodies, the standstill procedure (obliging NSOs making recommendations to the Board. Among other things, not to undertake standardization activity which could the report –completed in September 07– called for more jeopardise the preparation of European harmonized standards) support from Members for the effort and suggested that the and the transposition of these standards into national ones. outcome of WRC07 would first be awaited. Therefore, the ETSI Board approved the establishment of the TC RRS only
- 13. #1569123664 13 in January 08, and the first meeting was held in Sophia IV. IMPACT OF CPC STANDARDIZATION ON MARKET Antipolis in March of this year [58][66]. As defined by its STRUCTURE AND BUSINESS MODELS Terms of Reference, the Committee’s primary tasks at this stage are to 1) study the feasibility of standardization activities A. Introduction related to Reconfigurable Radio Systems; 2) collect and define In the sections above, we have given an overview of the the related Reconfigurable Radio Systems requirements from transitions in telecommunications standardization, and have relevant stakeholders; and 3) identify gaps, where existing outlined the different concurrent regulatory and ETSI standards do not fulfil the requirements, and suggest standardization tracks of the Cognitive Pilot Channel as an further standardization activities to fill those gaps. example of this. It is clear that these trajectories are only in the Deliverables envisaged are Technical Reports and ETSI start-up phase, and that no definite design choices have been guides, which are to be completed within 18-24 months. In made on which an analysis of potential business impacts can other words, actual ETSI standards on reconfigurability be performed. However, on a conceptual level it is possible to principally are not part of the committee’s current description outline at least some of the design choices for which a of work; rather than this, the focus is on the mere feasibility of decision will eventually have to be taken, and to use these standardization, requirements from stakeholders and design choices as the basis for an exploratory analysis of shortcomings in current standardization material that would possible business impacts. For this paper, we have focused on legitimize ETSI standardization [67]. how different deployment models might influence the At the time of writing of this section, two meetings of ETSI relationships between different actors in the TC RRS have taken place. During the second meeting, which telecommunications ecosystem, focusing in particular on the was held in Sophia Antipolis on 02-04.06.08, a Working revenue sharing models that are feasible when introducing Group on Functional Architecture and Cognitive Pilot Channel certain CPC deployments. As shall become clear, different was set up [68] with the following responsibilities: deployments lead to different potential revenue sharing • To collect and define the system functionalities for models, not all of which are technically feasible, economically Reconfigurable Radio Systems. These system viable or strategically desirable. Therefore, after defining nine functionalities are e.g. related to Spectrum Management different CPC-enabled revenue sharing models, we will apply and Joint Radio Resource Management across the business model scorecard methodology to evaluate the heterogeneous access technologies, feasibility and desirability of these models. • To develop a Functional Architecture for Reconfigurable B. Flexible Spectrum Revenue Sharing Options Radio Systems including the defined system functionalities The CPC typology proposed in Section 4.5.1, which as building blocks, distinguishes between an Operator, Association, Intermediary • To describe key interfaces between these building blocks, and Hierarchical model, puts an emphasis on the different • To describe and analyze the concept of a Cognitive Pilot configurations that are possible for the CPC (e.g. with regard Channel as an enabler to support the management of the to which actors exchange data, how many CPCs would need to RRS including on how information on e.g. available radio be standardized and deployed, and how many RATs they need resources and network policies are distributed and how to to carry) and their impact on FS business models. However, take decisions based on this information, when considering the different ways in which value may be • To verify that the Functional Architecture and Cognitive created through the CPC, some other discriminating options Pilot Channel fulfils the requirements for Reconfigurable need to be taken into account. Radio Systems as defined in the WG SA – System Aspects. First, asset control and customer ownership need to be The CPC aspects of this work will be dealt with in the context distinguished when considering different potential revenue of a specific Work Item on Cognitive Pilot Channel streams. Second, the various configurations identified earlier Specification, which was set up during the same meeting [69]. need to be taken into account. Obviously, in the pure Operator Its scope is to study the CPC as a means “to support and model no revenue sharing mechanism is needed, therefore the facilitate end-to-end connectivity in a heterogeneous radio associated revenue model can be combined conceptually with access environment where technologies are used in a flexible the Association model, in which also a single operator and dynamic manner in their spectrum allocation context”. operates the CPC. Therefore these configurations will be This implies that technical work has now started, and a first summed up below as both being operator-based models. parallel WG meeting will take place in September 08. Two basic variables can be distinguished which may each A clear differentiation needs to be made between the IEEE have three modes. 1900 and ETSI work on CPC. Proposals so far seem to • Variable 1 is linked to the question of CPC control –i.e. indicate that, while IEEE focuses on Cognitive Radio aspects who deploys the CPC? The potential modes, related to the of Reconfigurable Systems (including context information FS business configurations identified earlier, are: gathering and autonomous terminal behaviour), the role of o Mode 1: a CPC is controlled by the operator, e.g. in ETSI could lie more in the facilitation of the adoption of SDR both the operator-based models, equipment by industry, through the definition of interfaces o Mode 2: a CPC is controlled by both the operator and and APIs and –in a second stage– the through provision of an independent party (i.e. the hierarchical model), cognitive support functions such as context provisioning, o Mode 3: a CPC is controlled by an independent decision making in terminals, etc. [70]. intermediary (i.e. the intermediary model).
- 14. #1569123664 14 • Variable 2 refers to the issue of customer ownership –i.e. CPC operator to get access to the services of this with whom does the end user have a contractual agreement operator as well as to those listed by partners of the and/or billing relationship? Again, the potential modes, operator association, and then may enter into a related to the FS business configurations identified earlier, contractual relationship with one of these partners are: offering one or more particular RATs. In a hierarchical o Mode 1: CPC customer ownership. In the operator- scenario, the end user pays both the independent CPC- based models, this implies that one operator deploys a operator and the operators of the listed RATs that this CPC, and that various other operators are present under end user chooses via the CPC. In an intermediary-based that CPC, but that the end user only has an agreement scenario, the end user similarly pays for the services of with the CPC-operating entity to get access to the an independent CPC operator, and for use of the RATs different RATs available under the association. The chosen, CPC-operator would then pay the RAT operators for o Mode 3: RAT customer ownership. In the operator- making their services available. In a hierarchical based scenarios, this means that the discovery of the scenario, this implies that the customer has a contract services offered by an association of operators happens with a CPC operator, to offer this customer favourable via the CPC of one particular operator, but that the end access to a host of operators via their CPCs, but does user does not pay the CPC operator but enters into an not have direct contact with these operators’ CPCs. In agreement with the operator of the RAT chosen. In a an intermediary-based scenario, the end user has an hierarchical scenario, similarly only the operator agreement with an independent CPC operator to get (deploying its own, second-level CPC and underlying Figure 5: FS Revenue Sharing Models direct access to the RATs of different operators listed RATs) is paid by the end user. In an intermediary- on this CPC. In the two latter variants, the CPC based scenario, the end-user also only pays the operator operator remunerates the RAT operators that it gives of the underlying RATs. In these three variants, the access to, RAT operators then compensate the CPC operator, or it o Mode 2: Mixed customer ownership. In the operator- is a subsidized entity. based models, this implies that the customer pays a