The quest for “principles evident in the operation of actual high-demand, high-performance, and high-efficiency wireless networks and in the trajectory of near-term spectrum research and development” continues.
Spectrum policy needs to be guided by the realities of network engineering rather than the desires of network incumbents to protect legacy business models from competition from wireless upstarts. Spectrum policy need not be a team sport.
Many government systems can be replaced by modern upgrades with zero incremental spectrum footprint above the commercial and private systems on which the highly productive civilian sector depends. Look at FirstNet.
Transferring spectrum from old to new users have proven to be much speedier and easier than imagined by PCAST and similar plans of 10 – 15 years ago. Getting governments and government agencies to cooperate is the harder problem.
The only way through our 1,200 year drought is get better at managing and using water than we have been. While RF spectrum isn’t in a similar crisis yet, it’s wise to prepare for an eventuality where demand far outstrips supply. Spectrum, like water, is a finite resource at each point in time even if both are reusable.
It goes without saying that US regulatory performance on the 5G mid-band and aviation is well below the international standard. Dickson was a poor choice when the former president appointed him, and he hasn’t grown into the job. A balanced hearing would show this.