Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Cognitive Radio on agenda for FCC's meeting in March

[Marcus Leech]

While that sounds interesting (particularly as I'm a part-time radio 
astronomer), what
 you'll find is that most of the more sensitive facilities would rather 
not have
 transmitters of any kind anywhere near them--even their own.

At some facilities, the vehicular traffic within the facility is *all* 
diesel, to
 eliminate ignition noise--which is particularly bothersome for pulsar
 observations at 74 and 150mhz.

Given that cognitive radios will have a plenitude of tiny silicon 
microchip brains, they
 can (at least as a starting point), avoid the ITU-agreed radio 
astronomy frequencies, listed
 here:

Specific Protected radio astronomy frequencies:

-          13.36-13.41 MHz

-          25.55-25.67 MHz

-          38.0-38.25 MHz

-          73-74.6 MHz

-          406.1-410 MHz

-          1400-1427 MHz  [Hydrogen Line at 1420.406 MHz]

-          Radio Astronomy on a secondary basis 1610-1626.5 MHz

-          1660.5-1668.4 MHz [Hydroxyl Spectral Line 1665 and 1667 MHz]

-          Radio Astronomy on a secondary basis 1718.8-1722.2  MHz

-          2690-2700 MHz

-          4825-4865, 4950-4990 MHz

-          Formaldehyde Line 14,470-14,500 MHz

-          31.2-31.3, 36.43-36.5, 42.5-43.5, 48.94-49.04 GHz

-          97.88-98.08, 140.69-140.98, 142-149 GHz

-          262.24-262.76, 265-275 GHz



John Gilmore wrote:

> This msg is about "Cognitive" radios, not just software-defined
> radios.  Cognitive radios make major adjustments in their transmission
> and reception behavior, based on observing the local radio environment.
>
> Cornell makes some good points.  There are small areas of the spectrum
> where NOBODY can transmit, so that passive receivers such as
> radiotelescopes can receive.
>
> I've been advocating for defining a simple scheme for "posting"
> frequency bands with machine-readable signs (like the "No Hunting"
> signs found on trees and fences).  It would have to be simple enough
> that every cognitive radio transmitter could implement it, listening
> to learn the rules of the neighborhood before transmitting.  The radio
> astronomers could "fence off" their frequencies and physical locations
> by occasionally transmitting these "No Trespassing" signs on a nearby
> coordinating frequency.  Anyone interested?
>
>         John
>
> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:03:02 -0800
> From: Seth David Schoen <address@hidden>
> To: John Gilmore <address@hidden>
>
> John Gilmore writes:
>  
>
> > [Have we talked recently to folks at FCC about this?  Let's check in and
> > see what we can learn.  ...
> >    
>
> This is presumably going to be a rule in ET Docket 03-108.
>
> There's some continuing ex parte activity there.
>
> Here's a reply comment critical of us and PK from the radio
> astronomers at Cornell.
>
> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6516210510
>
>