Ultra-wideband developer XtremeSpectrum said Fri. it supported De...

there be no intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz, except for imaging systems. XtremeSpectrum said it backed that caveat and had told FCC it supported DoD proposal. Company said CEO Martin Rofheart met with Sen. Warner (R-Va.) on upcoming FCC UWB decision and that Warner “pledged his support” for XtremeSpectrum and for solution that would meet concerns of both industry and govt. Rofheart said XtremeSpectrum’s proposal “more than meets all the department’s concerns regarding intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz.” He said requirement for low-power emissions in restricted bands would eliminate need for ban on communications between 2 battery-operated devices, or “peer- to-peer communications.” XtremeSpectrum described peer-to- peer networking as “key unresolved issue” before FCC in advance of Feb. 14 agenda meeting at which Commission is expected to take up UWB item. Washington attorney for XtremeSpectrum Mitchell Lazarus said ban on peer-to-peer communications as way to protect GPS and PCS systems from interference wasn’t necessary under “more flexible” solution of DoD. Rofheart described wireless peer-to-peer communications as “commercial driver” for UWB because it could deliver high data rates with lower power consumption. “If the FCC bans peer-to-peer communication for UWB by requiring a fixed, plugged-in node as part of all installations, there is no ability to leverage the low power consumption of UWB and the commercial industry will falter,” Rofheart said. Meanwhile, intense bickering over UWB continued in filings at FCC, showing how far apart some opponents remained on issue. AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless and Qualcomm, citing Qualcomm test results submitted to FCC this month, disputed emissions mask proposed by XtremeSpectrum that would be as low as 35 dB below certain Part 15 levels. Wireless companies said XtremeSpectrum proposal missed “fundamental point” that FCC must resolve. Carriers said tests had shown that “wireless phones suffer harmful interference as a result of transmissions from nearby UWB devices, and no private or public party, including XtremeSpectrum, the other UWB proponents and the Commission itself, has conducted any test of an emissions mask or other restriction to prove that such protective measures will successfully mitigate the harmful interference.” Wireless companies said they still urged FCC not to authorize UWB communications devices below 6 GHz. They expressed concern about critical aviation systems operating between 4.2 and 6 GHz.