ITU System Catches Heat as Satcom Tech Evolution Accelerates
The ITU and World Radiocommunication Conference process and tools run the risk of stifling satellite innovation, satcom executives warned at Wednesday's Satellite 2022. The ITU provides stability, which is important, "but that's not innovation," said Lynk Vice President-Government Affairs Tony DeTora.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Lynk expects to launch more than 5,000 satellites for its planned system sooner than any WRC activity that would enable that service, DeTora said. The problem is when some nations stay strictly bound to the ITU. "They just won't get the benefit of that innovation," he said. The problem is any WRC proceeding to enable Lynk -- such as something allowing widespread use of GSM and LTE bands from space -- would have had to start well before 2019, he said. "For us, it doesn't make sense to work within that framework," he said.
A lack of an international regulatory framework can mean some nations don't issue licenses for a service that falls outside the existing box, and it's not clear how to fix that problem, Telesat International Coordination Director Mario Neri said. Echoed Hazem Moakkit, Intelsat vice president-spectrum strategy, satellite operators increasingly want to use broadcasting satellite service allocations for internet rather than video distribution, but regulators often block those plans due to the rules framework: "Meanwhile, you have 100 MHz sitting there."
Some backed the ITU model. The four-year WRC cycle isn't too long, and provides the certitude that's the backbone of investment, said Nelson Malaguti, ITU Radiocommunication Bureau counsellor. He said numerous WRC-23 agenda items have to do with satellite innovation. These include 1.16, to study and develop technical, operational and regulatory measures, as appropriate, to facilitate the use of the frequency bands 17.7-18.6 GHz and 18.8-19.3 GHz and 19.7-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 27.5-29.1 GHz and 29.5-30 GHz (Earth-to-space) by non-GSO FSS earth stations in motion; 1.18, on spectrum needs and potential new allocations to the mobile-satellite service for future development of narrowband mobile-satellite systems; and item 7 post-milestone procedures for NGSOs.
"It's absolutely vital we stick with the ITU process," Aarti Holla-Maini, Global Satellite Operators Association secretary-general, told us. "It's the only way of safeguarding the majority of interests." Even under that framework, "we see so much innovation happening in our sector," she said.
Agenda item 1.17 on inter-satellite links in certain frequency bands could be the focus of a lot of attention at WRC-23, several satellite operators said. Moakkit said unlike WRCs where there was conflict between satellite and terrestrial interests over the C or Ka bands, the WRC-23 agenda doesn't seem to have as polarizing an item.
Several also said they expect NGSOs to be a big part of the 2027 WRC agenda. Moakkit said earth station mobility will likely also be a hot topic, since it's a big growth sector for satellite operators. Neri said NGSO/GSO coexistence could need addressing because it's not clear if the regulatory framework covering that is up to speed. Malaguti said there's an ITU framework for spectrum coordination among NGSOs, but it's now doing studies to develop the technical parameters for the basis of that coordination.
The ITU system is working for NGSO systems, at least for now, Neri said. Currently, NGSO systems can work around existing rules, but as those systems proliferate there will inevitably be changes to technical regulations on interference, he said.
The ITU's Article 5 frequency allocations are increasingly irrelevant as distinctions between services have blurred, Moakkit said. "We continue to live in that box though we have outgrown it," he said, saying protection criteria matter more than what a particular swath of bandwidth is labeled. "It's all Ku," he said. Neri said there's blurring, but the Article 5 definitions are still a valid reference point as long as regulators don't become so stuck on them that they prevent tech development.
The definition issue has come up before, such as at the 2012 WRC and a failed discussion at merging fixed and mobile services, said Malaguti. Touching definitions can be a sensitive issue, but there are ways of accommodating mobility in FSS through footnotes and adapting the rules, he said.