|
Archive
ViewsLetter on
Provisioning 5 Nov.
2004 #42
Provisioning automation--from chips to
the business layer.
PROVISIONING COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES FOR
HOMELAND SECURITY AND FIRST RESPONDERS
By V. Kaminsky, Associate Editor
With this issue of ViewLetter, Flanagan Consulting begins a series
related to Homeland Security--specifically, how to provision
communications services for first responders such as police,
paramedics, and fire. The topic is always important and now very
timely--recent events showed that incompatibility of communications
equipment prevents government agencies from communicating with each
other. Many first responders have outdated radios, which can't respond
reliably or quickly in many plausible emergency scenarios.
INTRODUCTION
The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 publicly exposed major vulnerabilities in
communications systems for government agencies. First responders
could not communicate between departments, the result of incompatible
and outdated radios utilizing different proprietary technology.
Fortunately, industry and government learned a lesson and opened a new
era in radio development. A Wireless Public Safety Interoperable
Communications Program is housed within the recently created Office of
Interoperability and Compatibility at the Department of Homeland
Security.
The need for standards became apparent in the 1980s as manufacturers
began offering improvements to the functionality and efficiency of
their analog radio systems. Better, more secure systems emerged,
but each manufacturer used unique protocols to provide these
enhancements.
In the U.S., more than 2.5 million first responders work within more
than 50,000 public-safety organizations--police, fire, emergency
medical, and public-health. Volunteers constitute 85
percent of fire personnel, and nearly as many emergency management
technicians are volunteers with elected leadership. Each group
might make its own decision about which radios to buy.
These agencies shared the mission of national security but until this
year had no means to coordinate technical polices. As a
result, they did not establish a homogeneous network infrastructure,
plan adequately for network redundancy, or provide for continuity of
operations. They also had problems with keeping first responders'
communications tools in line with the newest technological trends.
These volunteers not always technically educated and they need
communications means that guarantee ease of operation and high
reliability.
NEW TECHNOLOGIES
The key to network and radio interoperability are two maturing radio
communications standards known as
--Project 25, or P25 for short, which gained popularity exclusively in
the U.S, and
--TETRA, which was developed by ETSI in Europe and spread around the
world.
The P25 standard was developed by industry and public sector officials
and published by the Association of Public-Safety Communications
Officials International (APCO). P25 brings Land Mobile Radios
(LMRs) into the digital world and seeks to eliminate the
incompatibilities that hamper first responder analog systems.
Similarly, TETRA provides backwards compatibility, digitized voice, and
many enhanced features.
Equipment built to these standards is compatible with existing analog
radios, which means that cash-strapped public organizations can
introduce new standards gradually, while they continue using their
existing LMRs.
Interoperability, which these standards bring, is not the only
advantage, however. Because they address the use of digital
technology, they efficiently use a narrow band of the radio
spectrum. Spectrum efficiency is a mandate by the governments and
a practical necessity for local organizations as signals from wireless
phones, televisions, and commercial radio crowd the airwaves.
Although P25 and TETRA focus on voice communication, they also bring
new data applications to handsets. Because they can use
voice-over-IP protocols, users can send IP data mixed with voice via
LMR networks. Eventually, equipment could be used to send video
information such as pictures of terrorists or guidance on handling
hazardous materials to the handsets of first responders in the field.
CONCERNS
Not everyone's jumping on the new standards bandwagon, however.
Two perceptions cloud the picture on this subject:
--Overcrowded spectrum, and
--Old techniques are cheap and reliable and nothing can be changed.
The public safety community is possibly correct in their assertion that
they are critically short of frequencies. Congress has instructed
the FCC to consider additional spectrum for public safety uses. A
similar situation exists around the world.
It is also true that they have been slow to adopt new technologies that
could provide much more efficient use of the spectrum. Most
public safety radio systems remain based on 50-year old spectrum
technology: i.e., single-channel, 15 kHz bandwidth analog FM
radio.
There is no serious research on whether spectrum-efficient systems
would allow public safety communications requirements to be met using
the spectrum that they already possess. The public safety community has
claimed that these more advanced systems are not suitable for public
safety functions and have declared that public safety needs can be met
only by massive amounts of new spectrum.
The new standards and technology address these concerns. Besides
compatibility, they bring such features as effective spectrum
utilization, which became possible using digital modulation techniques.
NEW ARCHITECTURES
A new public safety architecture would be based on a multi-site radio
system shared among many government agencies. It would, ideally,
replace the large number of independent radio systems that currently
serve Federal, State, and local organizations. This single government
radio entity would serve a metropolitan area or provide statewide
coverage. Federal users would be a part of the appropriate local
or statewide system serving their area of operations. That was
envisioned when P25 and TETRA standards were developed.
Many individual agencies and municipalities will buy into the system
over the next 2-5 years as their existing radio systems are replaced
for obsolescence or expanded to meet growth needs. Private and
corporate use of the system could be allowed, when the need for a
higher level of communications robustness justifies the cost (this
would be almost inevitable if the service were provided by a private
corporation).
The initial cost to deploy such systems is quite high. Today a
P25 or TETRA radio costs one to two thousands
dollars. The base station infrastructure for these systems
is also expensive. In spite of this, new equipment is gaining a
lot of interest, mostly due to government mandates to rebuild public
safety communications infrastructure to utilize the narrow
spectrum.
On the bright side, a mass market based on open standards and
competition among vendors will drive prices down. (Cellular telephones
cost $2000-3000 when first introduced.) The digital system,
shared across agencies, will also reduce the incremental cost of adding
a user and make self-provisioning of new radio sets a logical step
forward.
============ + ===== + ===== + ===== + ============
PON MARKET REVIEW
For a close look at more than two dozen
PON companies, you are invited to purchase the report, "PON Industry
Players--2004" available from Flanagan Consulting. Offered on
paper and a PDF file via email, this 25-page document describes each
company's products, shows which market segments they participate in,
and provides current contact information. Either form is priced
at US$60.00, payable by check to Flanagan Consulting, 45472 Holiday Dr.
#3, Sterling, VA 20166.
============ + ===== + ===== + ===== + ============
FLANAGAN CONSULTING
-- Call us for a vendor-neutral network architecture and strategy for
expansion or convergence. We know voice AND data--and how to
avoid expensive bear traps on the migration path, such as security
arrangements.
-- Working on product positioning or a marketing message for
telecom? Yes, we've done that--for hardware products and
carrier services.
-- Need an Expert Witness? Associates at Flanagan Consulting have
aided in many legal proceedings involving telecom intellectual property
and technology.
-- For RFP preparation, bid analysis, proposal evaluation--call
us. We have current experience in Federal network procurement
processes.
"We Have the Experience."
-- Special thanks for supporting ViewsLetter to www.webtorials.com,
your best source for communications tutorials and white papers.
============ + ===== + ===== + ===== + ============
"Flanagan Consulting" and "ViewsLetter"
are Service Marks of W. A. Flanagan, Inc.
|