The Great 6G Spectrum debate

Previously I blogged about the EuCNC & 6G Summit 2024 here. One of the sessions in that was the highly anticipated “Great 6G Spectrum Debate” which took place on Tuesday, 4 June 2024, in Elisabeth Hall, organised by Director of Sustainability and Regulation Marja Matinmikko-Blue from 6G Flagship, University of Oulu. 

Quoting from the event summary here: 

The panel brought together stakeholders to discuss the future of 6G spectrum management, addressing critical questions about sustainability, spectrum sharing, and regulatory challenges. The debate was one in a series of timely conversations on how spectrum management should evolve to meet the demands of next-generation wireless technologies.

In her opening, Matinmikko-Blue emphasised the significance of spectrum as a scarce but renewable resource essential for wireless communications. The regulatory decisions will impact market landscapes for years to come. Matinmikko-Blue stressed the necessity for a more dynamic and flexible approach to spectrum access, which could lead to long-term compromises between conflicting stakeholder claims. “Spectrum management in the 6G era needs to integrate these approaches from the beginning to avoid restrictions later,” she noted.

The panel featured a range of expert opinions, including Dr Doriana Guiducci from the European Communication Office (ECO), Eiman Mohyeldin of Nokia, Dr Martha Suarez from the Dynamic Spectrum Alliance (DSA), and Robin Leblon from Citymesh. Each brought unique insights into the debate, reflecting their varied experiences and roles within the industry.

Guiducci discussed the complexity of spectrum regulation, especially given the numerous stakeholders and uses. She noted that current efforts are directed towards preparing for the next World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-27) and highlighted the ongoing studies into various frequency bands that will impact future 6G deployments. “We need to ensure that our regulatory frameworks are robust and adaptive to the technological advancements and requirements of 6G,” she said.

Mohyeldin discussed the technological requirements for 6G. She pointed out that additional spectrum is needed to meet the increasing demand for high-speed, reliable connectivity. Innovative applications and growing traffic necessitate the allocation of new spectrum bands. “For 6G, we anticipate needing spectrum between 7.25 and 15 GHz and potentially refarming existing bands to accommodate the new applications,” she stated.

Suarez highlighted the importance of dynamic spectrum management systems, advocating for flexible frameworks that can accommodate a variety of applications and technologies. She cited the successful implementation of the Spectrum Access System (SAS) in the US as a model for managing shared spectrum. “We need systems that are transparent to users but provide opportunities for broader ecosystem engagement and efficient spectrum use,” she argued.

From an operator’s perspective, Leblon stressed the need for regulatory innovation to facilitate more flexible spectrum usage. He pointed out smaller operators’ challenges in acquiring and utilising spectrum effectively and suggested that shared spectrum models could provide a viable solution. “We need to award spectrum based on merit and the ability to provide the most value to the largest number of users,” he proposed.

The panel discussion is embedded below:

Related Posts: 

Posted by on

Comments

Post a Comment