Hubbry Logo
Guard bandGuard bandMain
Open search
Guard band
Community hub
Guard band
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Guard band
Guard band
Guard band
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In telecommunications, a guard band is a narrow, intentionally unused frequency band that is placed between adjacent frequency bands to minimize interference between them.[1] It is used in frequency-division multiplexing. Guard bands exist in both wired and wireless communications.

A guard band can also be licensed for use by low-powered devices such as a private mobile phone network.[2]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Guard band

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A guard band is a narrow, intentionally unused portion of the placed between adjacent allocated bands or channels to minimize interference and ensure . In systems, particularly fixed services, Recommendation ITU-R F.1191-3 (2011) defines it in terms of the bandwidth equal to the separation ZS, as specified in Recommendation ITU-R F.746-11 (2023), between the nominal centre of the outermost channel of a RF channel arrangement and the limit of the allocated band. This ZS represents the radio- distance between the center of the outermost channels and the edge of the band. Guard bands play a critical role in spectrum management by reducing adjacent channel interference (ACI) and out-of-band emissions, which are essential for maintaining the quality of service in fixed and mobile wireless networks. In frequency division duplex (FDD) systems, such as those used in LTE and 5G networks, guard bands are specified to separate uplink and downlink channels, preventing overlap and enabling efficient use of paired spectrum. For example, in the 700 MHz band, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission allocates specific guard bands, totaling 4 MHz of paired spectrum, to protect public safety operations from commercial broadband interference. These bands are also vital in multi-channel arrangements for radio-relay systems, where they accommodate frequency tolerances and unwanted emissions to avoid spillover into neighboring allocations. The size and placement of guard bands vary by regulatory framework, technology, and frequency range; ITU recommendations specify widths based on band-specific needs, such as up to 55 MHz in the 38 GHz range, to account for practical filter limitations and coordination. In modern systems like OFDM-based 5G, guard bands at band edges help mitigate inter-numerology interference when multiple subcarrier spacings coexist. Beyond telecommunications, guard bands are used in fields like broadcasting, calibration, and semiconductor design to prevent interference or crosstalk. Overall, guard bands enable denser spectrum packing while safeguarding against co-channel and adjacent-channel disruptions, supporting the global expansion of wireless communications.

Definition and Purpose

Definition

According to Recommendation F.1191-3, a guard band is defined as "the bandwidth equal to the separation, defined in Recommendation F.746 as ZS, between the nominal centre of the outermost channel of a RF channel arrangement and the limit of the allocated band." This is a narrow, intentionally unused portion of the placed between adjacent bands or channels to minimize interference. This ensures that signals from neighboring allocations do not overlap, thereby preserving in frequency-division systems. Key characteristics of a guard band include its complete lack of use for , making it distinct from active allocations, and its typical narrow width relative to the separated channels—ranging from a few kHz to several MHz depending on the system's requirements and filter capabilities. It functions purely as a protective separation, often determined by the need to accommodate filter roll-off and tolerances without dedicating excessive . Unlike a channel, which is allocated to carry data or signals, a guard band conveys no information and is deliberately left vacant to avoid ; it differs from an incidental "dead band" by being a planned element essential for reliable utilization. For instance, in setups, such as those involving multiple 3 kHz audio channels multiplexed into a 16 kHz bandwidth, guard bands are inserted between channels to prevent inter-channel interference. Similarly, in LTE systems, a 20 MHz channel bandwidth includes guard bands totaling 2 MHz (1 MHz on each side), leaving 18 MHz for active transmission.

Purpose and Benefits

Guard bands primarily serve to prevent in systems by establishing spectral separation between adjacent frequency channels. This separation enables the deployment of filters that can effectively attenuate out-of-band emissions from neighboring signals while minimizing to the desired channel. By creating a of unused , guard bands mitigate the risk of harmful interference, ensuring reliable coexistence of multiple services within the same . The technical rationale for guard bands stems from the non-ideal characteristics of transmitted signals, which feature and irregular shapes due to modulation schemes and hardware imperfections. These extraneous emissions can overlap with adjacent channels without separation, leading to degradation; guard bands absorb such , preventing unintended energy spillover. Furthermore, practical filters exhibit gradual , typically achieving 60 dB attenuation over the guard band width, which is essential for suppressing interference without overly restricting usable bandwidth. Key benefits include enhanced (SNR) through reduced interference levels, decreased between channels, and support for efficient reuse by allowing denser channel packing while maintaining isolation. These advantages are particularly evident in frequency division systems, where guard bands balance overall utilization against performance requirements. In many modern digital systems like LTE, guard band widths are dimensioned at 5-10% of the channel bandwidth—for example, 10% in LTE systems—to optimize this trade-off without excessive inefficiency. A practical illustration occurs in , where insufficient guard bands can cause signal bleed-over between adjacent stations, resulting in audible interference and compromised audio quality for receivers tuned to either channel.

Applications in

In Frequency Division Systems

In (FDM), guard bands consist of narrow, unused frequency intervals inserted between adjacent channels or subcarriers to minimize interference, particularly intermodulation distortion resulting from nonlinear effects in amplifiers and modulators. These bands absorb spurious products generated when multiple signals pass through nonlinear components, preventing them from overlapping into active channels and degrading signal quality. In analog , a typical voice channel spans 3.1 kHz (from 300 Hz to 3.4 kHz) but is assigned a 4 kHz slot that incorporates approximately 0.9 kHz of guard space to separate it from neighboring channels, ensuring isolation without excessive spectral waste. A representative example from early trunk lines involved grouping 12 voice channels using FDM into a 60–108 kHz band, occupying 48 kHz total bandwidth where guard allocations within each 4 kHz slot prevented and across the multiplexed signals. This configuration allowed multiple conversations to share a single transmission path efficiently, with intermodulation products confined to the guard regions rather than active voice bands. In (FDMA) systems, where users share spectrum resources by dividing it into non-overlapping frequency assignments, guard bands provide essential separation between user channels to reduce , eliminating the reliance on orthogonal codes for signal discrimination as seen in (CDMA). Unlike CDMA, which achieves user isolation through code orthogonality without dedicated guards, FDMA's guard bands ensure robust performance in environments with imperfect filtering. The incorporation of guard bands in FDM gained prominence as a standard practice during and 1940s, coinciding with advancements in multi-channel carrier and radio relay systems that expanded long-distance trunk capacity using vacuum-tube modulators on open-wire lines and early cables.

In Wireless Networks

In cellular networks, guard bands are allocated to separate uplink and downlink or to delineate between different operators, thereby mitigating inter-channel interference and ensuring reliable communication. These bands are particularly critical in frequency-division duplexing (FDD) systems, where uplink and downlink operate on distinct ranges, and in time-division duplexing (TDD) configurations to prevent overlap with adjacent services. In Long-Term Evolution (LTE) systems, guard bands are defined relative to the channel bandwidth to accommodate the transmission bandwidth configuration, with the total channel bandwidth encompassing the useful transmission bandwidth plus guard bands on either side. The relationship is given by the channel bandwidth equaling the transmission bandwidth plus twice the guard band width, where the guard band is approximately 5% of the channel bandwidth per side for most configurations, though it varies slightly for narrower channels. For example, in a 1.4 MHz LTE channel, the transmission bandwidth supports 6 resource blocks (1.08 MHz), leaving approximately 0.16 MHz guard band per side, or about 11% of the channel bandwidth, to suppress out-of-band emissions. This design allows LTE carriers to fit within allocated spectrum blocks while complying with regulatory emission limits. Specific examples illustrate guard band allocations for protection in licensed spectrum. In the 700 MHz band, the (FCC) designates 4 MHz of paired guard bands (763–768 MHz and 793–798 MHz) to shield public safety narrowband operations from interference by adjacent commercial services. Similarly, in 5G New Radio (NR), guard bands are mandated to facilitate coexistence with fixed services (FSS), such as in the C-band (3.7–4.2 GHz), where regulatory frameworks like those from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) require at least 20 MHz guard bands to protect FSS earth stations from terrestrial base station emissions. In (OFDMA) schemes used in LTE and , which are evolutions of (FDMA), subcarrier orthogonality inherently provides implicit guard intervals through precise spacing (e.g., 15 kHz in LTE), eliminating the need for explicit guards between subcarriers to avoid inter-carrier interference. However, explicit channel-level guard bands remain essential to manage inter-band interference between adjacent carriers or services, ensuring isolation in dynamic multi-user environments. Narrowband Internet of Things (NB-IoT) deployments further leverage guard bands for spectrum efficiency, with the guard-band mode allowing NB-IoT carriers to occupy unused portions of existing LTE carrier guard bands, provided the LTE channel bandwidth is at least 5 MHz. This mode enables NB-IoT operation without dedicating new spectrum, using up to 7 resource blocks in the guard space while maintaining minimal impact on the host LTE performance, as defined in Release 13 specifications.

In Broadcasting

In radio broadcasting, guard bands play a crucial role in preventing for FM stations. In the United States, FM broadcast channels are allocated 200 kHz of bandwidth, with a maximum of 75 kHz from the carrier, leaving approximately 25 kHz guard bands on each side of the signal to accommodate sidebands and minimize overlap with neighboring channels. This configuration results in a total center-to-center spacing of 200 kHz, ensuring reliable reception amid potential and terrain-induced variations. Television broadcasting employs guard bands to separate analog and digital signals within VHF and UHF frequency allocations, tailored to regional standards. In the analog system used in , each spans 6 MHz, incorporating internal guard bands of about 0.25 MHz at the lower edge to isolate the video signal from the audio carrier of the previous channel, with additional margins up to 0.5-1 MHz effectively provided by the channel spacing to mitigate co-channel and . The transition to digital maintained the 6 MHz channel framework but enhanced signal containment, allowing for more efficient use of spectrum during the rollout, where guard bands helped protect legacy analog broadcasts while enabling simultaneous operation. International standards from the further define guard band requirements for VHF and UHF television bands to accommodate global variations in channel widths. For instance, in VHF (174-230 MHz), common in and parts of , analog channels are 7 MHz wide with 1 MHz guard bands between them, yielding an 8 MHz center-to-center spacing to account for multipath effects and propagation over varied . In UHF bands (470-862 MHz), ITU-R recommendations specify guard bands around 800 kHz between channels in certain arrangements to balance spectrum efficiency and interference protection for both analog and digital services. These guards are essential for maintaining in one-to-many broadcast environments, where fixed transmitter allocations must withstand environmental factors without interactive adjustments. The shift to has optimized guard band usage through advanced modulation techniques. In systems like , which employs coded (COFDM), the inherent of subcarriers allows for sharper spectral roll-off compared to analog signals, enabling smaller effective guard bands while preserving robustness against interference—often reducing the required margin from the 1 MHz typical in analog VHF setups. This efficiency facilitated smoother transitions in regions adopting digital standards, minimizing waste without compromising coverage.

Applications in Other Fields

In Calibration and Metrology

In calibration and , guard banding refers to a statistical technique that adjusts acceptance limits in measurement processes by narrowing them with an offset equivalent to the , thereby reducing the risk of false accepts, also known as Type I errors, where nonconforming items are erroneously deemed acceptable. This approach ensures that conformity decisions account for potential errors in the measurement system, promoting more reliable assessments of instrument performance against specified tolerances. Common methods for implementing guard banding include the expanded uncertainty approach, where the guard band is calculated as the product of a coverage factor and the —typically using a coverage factor of 2 for 95% —such as guard band = k × U, with U representing the expanded uncertainty. The Test Uncertainty Ratio (TUR), defined as tolerance divided by , often guides application (e.g., guard band if TUR < 10 per ANSI/NCSL Z540.3). Alternatively, a fixed method applies a predetermined of the tolerance zone to create the offset, though this is less statistically rigorous than uncertainty-based calculations. These methods align with standards like ANSI/NCSL Z540.3 and ILAC G8, which provide frameworks for incorporating uncertainty into decision rules. Guard banding finds application in ISO/IEC 17025-accredited s for various instruments, such as multimeters and pressure gauges, where it ensures conservative conformity assessments by tightening pass/fail criteria around nominal values. It is particularly vital in high-stakes environments requiring precise measurements, helping to verify that devices meet specifications despite inherent uncertainties in the calibration process. The primary benefit of guard banding is a significant reduction in the risk of false accepts, thereby enhancing and overall measurement reliability, though it may concurrently increase the incidence of false rejects, or Type II errors, potentially leading to unnecessary rework. This trade-off is especially managed in industries like and pharmaceuticals, where the consequences of measurement errors demand conservative strategies to maintain high reliability. For instance, consider a device with a 1% tolerance (e.g., ±0.5% from nominal) and a of 0.2%; applying a guard band offset of approximately 0.4% (using k=2) would shrink the effective limits to ±0.1% from nominal, or roughly 0.6% to 1.4% of the , ensuring only measurements well within true conformance pass.

In Semiconductor Design

In semiconductor design, guard bands, also known as margins or guardbanding, are deliberate additions of extra performance headroom in timing, voltage, or power specifications to accommodate uncertainties arising from variations, voltage fluctuations, temperature changes, and aging effects in integrated circuits (ICs). These margins ensure that the chip operates reliably across variations and environmental conditions, preventing failures due to timing violations or power instability. A primary technique involves timing guard bands in static timing analysis (STA), where additional slack—typically 10-20% of the path delay—is incorporated to derate critical paths and account for on-chip variation (OCV). Voltage guard bands are similarly applied during PVT corner analysis, adjusting operating voltages to simulate worst-case scenarios like slow at high temperatures. These factors model systematic and random variations, ensuring paths meet setup and hold requirements without overdesign. In modern designs, statistical methods like Statistical STA (SSTA) and Path-based OCV (POCV) are used to apply more precise, path-specific derates, reducing the conservatism of traditional flat guard bands, especially in advanced nodes below 7 nm as of 2025. For instance, in system-on-chip (SoC) designs, timing guard bands are added to clock paths to guarantee reliable operation under extreme PVT conditions, mitigating delays from interconnect variations and threshold shifts. This approach balances performance and robustness, particularly in high-speed processors where even minor variations can cascade into functional errors. Guard bands integrate seamlessly with (EDA) tools, such as PrimeTime, through derating factors and uncertainty models; for example, clock uncertainty guard bands are calculated as the sum of and skew margins to pessimistically bound delays. In advanced nodes, these tools apply path-specific derates based on logic depth and , reducing conservatism compared to flat guard bands. The benefits of guard banding include enhanced yield and long-term reliability, as it compensates for PVT-induced delay spreads that can exceed 20% in sub-45 nm nodes, where random fluctuations and line-edge roughness dominate. By incorporating these margins during design signoff, engineers achieve higher success rates, though adaptive techniques like hierarchically focused guardbanding are emerging to minimize overdesign in dynamic environments.

History and Standards

Historical Development

The concept of guard bands emerged in the 1920s and 1930s alongside the development of multi-channel radio systems, where (FDM) enabled multiple signals to share transmission paths while preventing through reserved frequency separations. Early international standards by the CCIR in the 1930s further defined guard bands for transoceanic FDM systems. pioneered early FDM applications for long-haul telephony in the 1930s, such as the L carrier system introduced in 1938, which multiplexed up to 12 voice channels on and relied on initial guard bands to isolate adjacent channels and maintain signal integrity. During in the 1940s, spectrum allocations for systems formalized guard bands to safeguard operations against interference from nearby frequencies, establishing structured separations within designated bands like those in the S and X ranges. This era marked a key milestone in regulatory approaches to , influencing postwar radio engineering practices. The 1960s brought standardization in by the FCC, which allocated 200 kHz channels with embedded 25 kHz guard bands to reduce , as part of broader efforts to optimize the 88-108 MHz band following the 1961 approval of stereo transmission. In the 1980s digital shift, cellular systems like AMPS adopted FDMA with 30 kHz channels incorporating guard bands to minimize interference in the 800 MHz band, enabling the first widespread analog mobile networks./05%3A_RF_Systems/5.15%3A_Early_Generations_of_Radio) The 2000s saw LTE refine these concepts through specifications, defining precise guard band widths—such as 0.16 MHz on each side for 1.4 MHz channel bandwidths, per TS 36.101 Table 5.6-1—to support efficient OFDMA in deployments. Beyond , guard banding in and gained prominence in the under ISO Guide 25, which stressed accounting for to avoid false acceptances, with early methods like those implemented by Fluke for decision-risk analysis. In semiconductor design, adoption expanded with nodes around 2004-2006, where guard bands addressed increasing process variations in timing and power. Influential events included the FCC's spectrum auctions, such as the 1997 PCS C-block auction that raised over $2.7 billion while incorporating guard bands in block designs to enhance reuse.

Regulatory Standards and Examples

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the United States mandates the use of guard bands in the 700 MHz spectrum to protect public safety operations, allocating a total of 4 MHz of paired spectrum specifically for this purpose. This allocation was part of broader efforts to reallocate television spectrum, with the guard bands established to prevent interference between commercial mobile services and public safety communications in the 763-775 MHz and 793-805 MHz ranges. Internationally, the International Telecommunication Union Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R) provides global recommendations for broadcasting spectrum management, including guard bands in the ultra high frequency (UHF) range of 470-790 MHz to mitigate interference in terrestrial television services. These ITU-R guidelines, such as those in Report BT.2302, emphasize spectrum efficiency while ensuring separation between adjacent channels and services in Regions 1 and 3. Key standards organizations have incorporated guard bands into technical specifications for wireless technologies. The 3rd Generation Partnership Project () Technical Specification TS 36.101 defines guard band requirements for Long-Term Evolution (LTE) user equipment, specifying the unused portions of the channel bandwidth—typically about 5% on each side (10% total)—to allow for filtering and prevent emissions. For instance, in a 20 MHz LTE channel, the transmission bandwidth occupies 18 MHz, leaving 1 MHz guard bands on either edge. Similarly, the standard for employs channel spacing of 5 MHz in the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands, with implicit guard bands enforced through spectral masks to reduce , ensuring non-overlapping 20 MHz channels where possible. Real-world examples illustrate the application of guard bands in spectrum allocation. In the European Union, the 800 MHz digital dividend band (790-862 MHz) features an 11 MHz duplex gap between the uplink (832-862 MHz) and downlink (791-821 MHz) segments to protect mobile services from interference, while also serving as a buffer adjacent to the UHF television band ending at 790 MHz. This arrangement, harmonized under CEPT Report 31, facilitates coexistence between mobile broadband and digital terrestrial television. In 5G millimeter-wave (mmWave) deployments, guard bands varying from tens to hundreds of MHz, depending on allocations, are utilized in frequency ranges like 24.25-40 GHz to enable coexistence with incumbent services, such as fixed satellite and radar systems, by accommodating wide channel bandwidths up to 400 MHz while maintaining isolation. As of 2025, 3GPP Release 18 specifies enhanced guard band configurations for 5G-Advanced in mmWave bands to support integrated sensing and communication (ISAC). These larger guards account for the high-frequency propagation characteristics and help mitigate inter-system interference in dense urban environments. Spectrum auctions and licensing practices often treat guard bands as distinct assets. The FCC conducted Auction 33 in 2000 for upper 700 MHz guard band licenses, issuing eight nationwide licenses to guard band managers who could lease spectrum for services while ensuring public safety protection. These licenses, covering 746-757 MHz and 776-787 MHz paired with guards, generated $519.9 million in gross bids and enabled shared use models for commercial . Looking ahead, as of 2025, discussions for networks propose adaptive guard bands leveraging for dynamic spectrum sharing, allowing real-time adjustment of separation based on usage patterns to optimize coexistence between mobile, , and sensing applications. Regulatory bodies like the FCC are evaluating AI-driven models to manage such adaptive allocations, potentially reducing fixed guard band needs in future terahertz bands while enhancing efficiency.

References

  1. https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/f/R-REC-F.1191-3-201105-I!!PDF-E.pdf
  2. https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/f/R-REC-F.746-11-202312-I!!PDF-E.pdf
  3. https://www.fcc.gov/wireless/bureau-divisions/mobility-division/700-mhz-guard-bands
  4. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10015636
  5. https://wuj.hosted.uark.edu/teaching/eleg5663/ELEG5663_ch11_multiplexing.pdf
  6. https://www.eng.auburn.edu/~troppel/courses/TIMS-manuals-r5/TIMS%20Experiment%20Manuals/Student_Text/Vol-A2/A2-07.pdf
  7. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/136100_136199/136104/15.08.00_60/ts_136104v150800p.pdf
  8. https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/rep/R-REP-M.2480-1-2022-PDF-E.pdf
  9. https://www.ntia.gov/files/ntia/publications/interference-dynamic_spectrum_access_subcommittee.pdf
  10. https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/tsg_ran/tsg_ran/tsgr_02/docs/pdfs/RP-99120.pdf
  11. https://www.telecomhall.net/t/lte-band-channel-bandwidth/9958
  12. https://taylorandfrancis.com/knowledge/Engineering_and_technology/Electrical_%2526_electronic_engineering/Guard_band/
  13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/frequency-division-multiplexing
  14. https://www.allaboutelectronics.org/frequency-division-multiplexing-fdm-explained/
  15. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA239527.pdf
  16. https://electronicscoach.com/frequency-division-multiplexing-fdm.html
  17. https://users.ece.utexas.edu/~bevans/courses/realtime/lectures/21_Spread_Spectrum/CDMA_4up.pdf
  18. https://ethw.org/Telephone_Transmission
  19. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/136100_136199/136101/15.11.00_60/ts_136101v151100p.pdf
  20. https://www.5gamericas.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Mid-Band-Spectrum-and-the-Co-Existence-with-Radio-Altimeters.pdf
  21. https://www.extremenetworks.com/resources/blogs/ofdm-and-ofdma-subcarriers-what-are-the-differences
  22. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/136100_136199/136104/13.04.00_60/ts_136104v130400p.pdf
  23. https://www.3gpp.org/images/presentations/3gpp_standards_for_iot.pdf
  24. https://www.fcc.gov/media/radio/fm-frequencies-end-odd-decimal
  25. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Audio/radio.html
  26. http://tviv.org/NTSC
  27. https://www.isobudgets.com/guard-banding-how-to-take-uncertainty-into-account/
  28. https://www.transcat.com/guard-banding-101
  29. https://www.keysight.com/us/en/assets/7018-02998/technical-overviews/5990-8121.pdf
  30. https://www.paripath.com/blog/variation-blog/connecting-dots-between-pvt-variation-and-timing
  31. https://past.date-conference.com/proceedings-archive/2007/DATE07/PDFFILES/11.4_1.PDF
  32. https://anysilicon.com/design-challenges-in-single-digit-technology-nodes/
  33. https://www.synopsys.com/content/dam/synopsys/implementation&signoff/white-papers/PrimeTime_AdvancedOCV_WP.pdf
  34. https://semiengineering.com/pinpointing-timing-delays-in-complex-socs/
  35. https://picture.iczhiku.com/resource/eetop/wYkddifjjPrgOvMb.pdf
  36. https://past.date-conference.com/proceedings-archive/2013/PDFFILES/11.7_3.PDF
  37. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/physics-and-astronomy/frequency-division-multiple-access
  38. https://www.ntia.gov/files/ntia/publications/ntia00-40.pdf
  39. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-2
  40. https://www.qualcomm.com/content/dam/qcomm-martech/dm-assets/documents/the_lte_standard_whitepaper_-_april_2014.pdf
  41. https://www.edn.com/is-chip-design-different-after-90-nm/
  42. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1997-07-09/html/97-17869.htm
  43. https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/rep/R-REP-BT.2302-2014-PDF-E.pdf
  44. https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/136100_136199/136101/11.03.00_60/ts_136101v110300p.pdf
  45. https://docdb.cept.org/download/43
  46. https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/38_series/38.104/
  47. https://www.fcc.gov/auction/33
  48. https://www.fcc.gov/auctions-summary
  49. https://www.etisalat.ae/content/dam/eand/assets/img/general/6g-whitepaper-report.pdf
  50. https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/08-05-2025-FCC-TAC-Meeting-Slides-Merged.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.