From: Admin <music@catt.com>
To: uwbtestplan <uwbtestplan@ntia.doc.gov>, Admin <music@catt.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 15, 2000 5:46 AM
Subject: Corrections to grammar of previous comments, 64-bit IP, Internet, and UWB

I have corrected some simple grammatical errors.

I would like to comment on UWB.

Before proceeding with furtherance of the UWB experiment, I would like to include comments on the management of current frequency allocations and availabilities.

The Internet and Routing in the Internet will shortly be increased by its being squared in needed bandwidth. That is, currently, the Internet and Routing use 2 raised to the 32nd power (32-bit addressing), and in the very near future that figure will itself be squared raising the available bandwidth to 2 raised to the 64th power.

Such an increase in bandwidth, required bandwidth for communications, transmission and reception, will be impacted by interference from UWB devices. If UWB is as wide and frequency consumptive as it is purported to be, a critical conflict will arise between UWB frequency consumption and Internet frequency consumption.

The frequencies referred to are on the order of 1.844674407371e+19 Hz. That is, the square of the current 32-bit bandwidth limitation of 4,294,967,296 Hz. This represents the difference between the current 32-bit scheme and the ensuing 64-bit scheme.

The critical path of the collision of these two new technologies will occur in TCP/IP addressing in the Internet, Routing, and Internet Address assignments. The number of available IP Addresses will square and the required bandwidth will begin to grow exponentially, approaching the stated new bandwidth limit.

With the squaring of available IP Addresses, allocated frequencies will require consideration that the transmission and reception to and from Internet locations, i.e., the effect on Internet Traffic, and studies thereof, will be impacted significantly.

One possible result is the misallocation of frequency to UWB channels which interfere with currently established channels of communications such as the Internet.

The Internet is still growing exponentially and may soon be hailed as the medium of communications for the 21st Century.

UWB allocation without consideration for the advances in Internet Technologies could effectively stifle these leading technologies.

UWB should take a back seat to Internet and IP Addressing research and advances in the best interests of the public. Public bandwidth should take precedence over private industry bandwidth because frequency and bandwidths belong to the Public, the People, and are not privately owned or controlled.

There is a conceivable threat to the Internet which is still part and parcel of the National Security issues for which the Internet was created, Department of Defense Emergency Communications, etc.

Further comments are invited.

Terry James