RRC-06

MIGS, EXCESS and EQUITABLE ACCESS

EBU

TECHNICAL DEPARTMENT

TERRY O’LEARYTERRY O’LEARYTERRY O’LEARYTERRY O’LEARY

RRC-06

TOPICS

1. MIG

2. SYNTHESIS

3. EXCESS & EQUITABLE ACCESS

RRC-06

TOPICS

• DEFINITION OF A MIG

• BIG MIG

• EXCESS XS• SUBTLETIES (1, 2, 3, ..., )

• RELATIVE SPECTRUM DEMAND RSD• WHAT ‘THEY’ LOOK LIKE• COMPLICATIONS

• CONCLUSIONS

1. MIG

RRC-06

MIGMUTUALLY INCOMPATIBLE GROUP

2 requirements, compatible less than 2 channels needed

2 requirements, IN-compatible 2 channels needed

‘1’ ‘1’

‘1’ ‘2’

‘1’ ‘2’

‘3’

2-MIG

3 requirements, IN-compatible 3 channels needed

3-MIG

‘1’ ‘2’

‘1’

3 requirements less than 3 channels needed

NOT a MIG

4 requirements, IN-compatible 4 channels needed 4-MIG

‘2’ ‘3’

‘4’‘1’

4 requirementsless than 4 channels needed

NOT a MIG

‘2’ ‘3’

‘2’‘1’

RRC-06

THIS IS A BIGGER MIG WITH 13 REQS

Q: HOW MANY CHANNELS REQUIRED?

BIG

MIG

RRC-06

XSEXCESS

DRAFT PLAN: BAND IV/V

MIG SIZE = M = 358

# CHANNELS = C = 49

EXCESS = XS = M – C = 358 – 49 = 309

CASE BMIG = 4

ONLY 2 CHANNELS:1, 2

2 REQS CAN HAVE A CHANNEL2 REQS CANNOT HAVE A CHANNEL

THERE IS AN EXCESS OF 2 REQS

EXCESS = XS = 4 – 2 = 2

CASE AMIG = 4

5 CHANNELS:1, 2, 3, 4, 5

EACH REQ CAN HAVE A CHANNELWITH NO INCOMPATIBILITY

THERE IS NO EXCESS IN REQS

RECALL: ‘BIG’ MIG SIZE 13

RRC-06

NO 3-MIG

2-MIGs

2 CHANNELS ?

1

2

12

?? = 3

MORAL :SOMETIMES

MORE CHANNELSMAY BE NEEDED

THAN THE MIG SIZE INDICATES

SUBTLETIES (1)

RRC-06

10 requirements

GIVEN REQ

REQs IC with

MIG SIZE 5

MIG SIZE 4

MIG SIZE 4 MORAL :SOMETIMES

LARGE MIGsMAY HIDE SMALLER

MIGs

SUBTLETIES (2)

RRC-06

Interconnected MIG: size 7 (= 5 + 2 )

A1

B1

E1

C1

D1

R2

S2

Admin '1'

Admin '2'

Figure 2: interconnected MIGs

MIG 2: size 2MIG 1: size 5

SUBTLETIES (3)

MORAL :INTERNAL SMALL

MIGS MAY COMBINE TO EXTERNAL

LARGE MIGS

RRC-06

5 REQUIREMENTS : A, B, C, D, EMIG SIZE = 2

3 CHANNELS : 1, 2, 3

NO XS REQS ???

REQs ACs

A 1,2,3

B 1

C 1

D 1

E 1

A B

C

D

E MORAL :RESTRICTIONS ON

ACCEPTABLE CHANNELS

MAY ALSO CAUSE

XS

3 1

1––

SUBTLETIES (4)

RRC-06

5 REQUIREMENTS : A, B, C, D, EMIG SIZE = 2

3 CHANNELS : 1, 2, 3

XS = 2 – 3 = - 1 ?????

REQs ACs

A 1,2,3

B 1

C 1

D 1

E 1

A B

C

D

E

CONSIDER SUBSETS (B,C) OR (C,D) OR (D,E)

MIG SIZE = 2; 1 AC

XS = 2 – 1 = 1

MORAL :MIG SUBSETS CAN LEAD TO LARGER

XS

SUBTLETIES (4 CONT)

RRC-06

SUBTLETIES (5)

CH 17 CH 18 CH 19

56

7

12

34

MIG = 3

R5

R6

R7

1 AC R4

R3

R2

R1

1 AC

MIG = 5

MIG = 4

PROBLEM

XS = 2

PROBLEM

XS = 3

LET’S LOOK AT REQ NUMBER “5” MORAL :

ADDING ACs CAN LEAD TO

LARGER XS

RRC-06

RSD (1)RELATIVE SPECTRUM DEMAND

CASE AMIG = 50 = MCHANNELS = 49 = C

XS = 50 – 49 = 1

CASE BMIG = 2 = MCHANNELS = 1 = C

XS = 2 – 1 = 1

RSD M/C 100 %CASE A: RSD = 50/49 x 100 = 102 %

CASE B: RSD = 2/1 x 100 = 200 %

XS CAN BE REDUCED BY RESOLVING 1 IC AMONGST

1225 ICS:

MORE ‘FLEXIBILITY’

XS CAN BE REDUCED BY RESOLVING 1 IC AMONGST

1 IC:

LESS ‘FLEXIBILITY’

RRC-06

XS M – C

RSD M/C 100 %

RSD (2)RELATIVE SPECTRUM DEMAND

DRAFT PLAN BAND IV/VOTHER CASES

M = 50 C = 25 : XS = 25 , RSD = 200 %

M = 196 C = 49 : XS = 147 , RSD = 400 %

M = 35 C = 1 : XS = 34 , RSD = 3500 %

M = 42 C = 49 : XS = (- 7) , RSD = 85 %

M = 358 C = 49 : XS = 309 , RSD = 731 %

RRC-06BIG MIG ZONE

WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE (1)

EXAMPLE FROM 1ST PLANNING EXERCISE

RRC-06

MIG size = 227RSD = 463 %

CLOSER LOOK

WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE (2)

SOME MIGS HAVE SIZE 358 IN THE DRAFT PLAN!!

RRC-06

COMPLICATIONSUHF vs. VHF

UHF: UNIFORM CHANNELING 4 ACs = 4 x 8 MHz = 32 MHz

MIG SIZE = 10 10 x 8 MHz = 80 MHz SPECTRUM NEEDED

XS = 10 – 4 = 6 REQS = 48 MHz = 10 x 8 – 4 x 8

RSD = 10/4 x 100 = 250% = (10 x 8)/(4 x 8) x 100

VHF: NON-UNIFORM CHANNEL WIDTH 4 ACs = 4 x ? MHz

MIG SIZE = 10 10 x ? MHz SPECTRUM NEEDED

ACs CAN BE 1.75, 7, OR 8 MHz WIDEMIGs CAN CONSIST OF DAB (1.75), DVB (7), DVB (8 MHz)

XS = SPECTRUM NEEDED–SPECTRUM AVAILABLE

RSD = (SPEC NEEDED)/(SPEC AVAIL)x100

RRC-06

MIG CONCLUSIONS1. MIGs ARE A SIMPLIFICATION OF A COMPLEX PROBLEM

2. MIGs ARE USED TO PINPOINT DIFFICULT PLANNING SITUATIONS

3. MIGs INDICATE MORE REQUIREMENTS THAN THE AVAILABLE SPECTRUM CAN HOLD

4. MIGs CAN BE RESOLVED BY • REDUCING THE NUMBER OF REQUIREMENTS• INCREASING THE NUMBER OF ACCEPTABLE CHANNELS• ACCEPTING INTERFERENCE• ACCEPTING SMALLER COVERAGE AREAS ...

5. RESOLUTION OF ONE MIG MAY REVEAL THE EXISTENCE OF ANOTHER MIG, INVOLVING THE SAME REQ

6. MORE EXACT METHODS TO DETERMINE RSD SOUGHT

7. MIGs ARE NOT JUST ‘THE OTHER GUY’S PROBLEM’

RRC-06

2. SYNTHESIS

1. AIM ALL REQUIREMENTS ASSIGNED

MAXIMUM NUMBER ASSIGNED

2. CONSTRAINTS AMOUNT OF SPECTRUM

NUMBER OF REQUIREMENTS

ALL REQUIREMENTS “EQUAL”

NO “FAVOURITES”, NO “PRIORITIES”

RRC-06

3. EXCESS & EQUITABLE ACCESS

1. NO EXCESS ALL REQUIREMENTS SATISFIED

EQUITABLE ACCESS TO SPECTRUM

2. EXCESS NOT ALL REQUIREMENTS SATISFIED

NON-EQUITABLE ACCESS

SIMPLE SELF-CONTAINED EXAMPLES TO ILLUSTRATE THESE POINTS

RRC-06

MIG size = 44 channels

A B

EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION

PROBABILITIES

2 - 100.0 %

4

23

1

NO EXCESS REQUIREMENTS

PROBABILITIES

2 - 100.0 %

RRC-06

EXCESS REQUIREMENTS

A B

MIG size = 84 channels

PROBABILITIES

0 - 1.4 %

1 - 22.9 %

2 - 51.4 %

3 - 22.9 %

4 - 1.4 %

4

23

1

4

2

3

1

PROBABILITIES

0 - 1.4 %

1 - 22.9 %

2 - 51.4 %

3 - 22.9 %

4 - 1.4 %

ONLY 4 CAN BE

ASSIGNED

RRC-06

SUPER-EXCESS REQUIREMENTS

MIG size = 124 channels

A B

4

2

3

1

4

2

3

1

PROBABILITIES

0 - 0.2 %

1 - 6.5 %

2 - 33.9 %

3 - 45.3 %

4 - 14.1 %

PROBABILITIES

0 - 14.1 %

1 - 45.3 %

2 - 33.9 %

3 - 6.5 %

4 - 0.2 %

ONLY 4 CAN BE

ASSIGNED

“EQUITABLE ACCESS”

DESTROYED

RRC-06

A B

C

16

16

16

MIG SIZE = 48ACs = 49

100% PROBABILITYA : 16 CHANNELsB : 16 CHANNELsC : 16 CHANNELs

THIS IS “EQUITABLE

ACCESS”

RRC-06

A B

C

50

50

50

MIG SIZE = 150ACs = 49

98% PROBABILITYA, B, C : 11 – 22 CHANs

IS THIS “EQUITABLE ACCESS” ???

12% : 15, 16, 18 7% : 16, 16, 176% : 15, 17, 17

ONLY 49 CAN BE

ASSIGNED

RRC-06

A B

C

200

100

50

MIG SIZE = 350ACs = 49

98% PROBABILITY50 : 2 – 12 CHANs100 : 8 – 20 CHANs200 : 21 – 35 CHANs

THIS IS NOT “EQUITABLE

ACCESS”

ONLY 49 CAN BE

ASSIGNED

RRC-06

XS CONCLUSIONS

1. EXCESS SUBMISSIONS NO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SATISFIED REQUIREMENTS OVERALL

2. EXCESS SUBMISSIONS DISTORT THE DISTRIBUTION OF SATISFIED REQUIREMENTS

3. EXCESS SUBMISSIONS DESTROY EQUITABLE EXCESS

4. EXCESS SUBMISSIONS INCREASE COORDINATION

5. EXCESS SUBMISSIONS INCREASE DISAPOINTMENT

RRC-06

MI G

DON’T LET

THE MIGs

SHOOT YOU DOWN !!!

TAKE HEART

RRC-06

MIG, XS, EA

Terry O’Leary

THANK YOU!

NO

EXCESS

TIME