[HN Gopher] DECT NR+: A technical dive into non-cellular 5G
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       DECT NR+: A technical dive into non-cellular 5G
        
       Author : teleforce
       Score  : 61 points
       Date   : 2024-04-02 13:40 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (devzone.nordicsemi.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (devzone.nordicsemi.com)
        
       | throw0101b wrote:
       | From a few days ago, "What is DECT-2020 New Radio (NR), and how
       | big a deal is it?":
       | 
       | * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39849335
        
         | martinky24 wrote:
         | Same OP, same linked domain. Interesting. This blog post is
         | significantly more thorough than the last one they posted.
        
           | p_l wrote:
           | Nordic Semi is a vendor in this space - many hardware vendors
           | will make similar posts on different levels of technical
           | depth in order to both drum up interest and build awareness
           | of their products.
           | 
           | Note that the article has links to two modem chips that
           | handle IIoT 5G radio links, including DECT NR+, that are made
           | by Nordic Semi.
           | 
           | Content marketing at its best.
        
       | jschveibinz wrote:
       | This can be a game-changer for certain low bandwidth unlicensed
       | applications where the ongoing cost of cellular or satellite
       | service makes the application economically infeasible. I could
       | envision a whole layer of startup opportunities based on this
       | technology from commercial applications like pets, construction,
       | fleet management, security, and agriculture to a gazillion
       | defense and intel applications. If I were younger, I would
       | definitely dig into this further and compare it to LoRA and other
       | existing radio technologies. Cheers!
        
         | thijson wrote:
         | This seems to be an order of magnitude better than LoRa
         | (https://lora-alliance.org/ not
         | https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.09685). LoRa doesn't have all the
         | features this one does like OFDM, TDM, FDM, and HARQ. I didn't
         | know there's spectrum dedicated for DECT use.
        
           | ianburrell wrote:
           | DECT-NR competition is 802.11ah and BLE Long Range. They all
           | provide moderate bandwidth and moderate range, up to 1-2km. I
           | bet they aren't low enough for battery-powered sensors, but
           | probably good for battery-powered devices like Wifi or LTE.
           | 
           | My guess is that winner will be whoever get cheap devices
           | out, and leverages their ecosystem.
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | Why limit mesh topologies to cluster-trees? There are plenty of
       | more efficient ways to route data...
       | 
       | I'd design it having message flooding for peer discovery (no hop
       | limit, but a bandwidth limit - never use more than 0.1% of the
       | total throughput for flooded messages).
       | 
       | Then, once connections are established, pick a few best routes,
       | and send some proportion of data down each. Weight the paths via
       | a cost function that takes into account load of each node, power
       | use/availability of each node, impact of each flow on other flows
       | (prefer getting nodes to transmit who cause least interference to
       | other flows), etc.
       | 
       | Over time, adjust proportions of data down different routes to
       | minimize the cost function.
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | Smart move calling what is effectively an entirely new standard
       | "DECT" to get free use of DECT's old frequency bands that are
       | barely used by their original use for cordless phones anymore...
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | The bands themselves are unlicensed; anyone can use them. You
         | don't have to be specifically called "DECT" to use them.
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | You do in some countries...
        
             | zettabomb wrote:
             | What countries require licensing for ISM bands?
        
               | b3orn wrote:
               | DECT uses 1880-1900 MHz in Europe, other countries use
               | similar frequencies, that's not an ISM band.
        
         | _trampeltier wrote:
         | DECT is still used a lot in factorys even today. It's way
         | faster to type a short number, usually between 100 .. 999. The
         | often used contacts you know anyway and you don't have to
         | search in contacts. If the phone drops, nobody does care. DECT
         | phones on work are great.
         | 
         | Ask HN: Why no mobile phone can also be used as a DECT phone?
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20909535
        
       | londons_explore wrote:
       | Is this an unauthenticated mesh? Ie. might my neighbours device
       | be forwarding data for my device and vice versa?
        
         | londons_explore wrote:
         | I want to see _more_ unauthenticated mesh protocols.
         | 
         | By allowing 'unauthenticated' meshing, the total radio
         | throughput in a typical urban environment is dramatically
         | increased. By 2x or more often. Typical packets will take more
         | hops at much reduced transmit powers each time.
         | 
         | The main reason not to do so is "what if my neighbour has
         | crappy devices and black holes all my packets".
         | 
         | But your neighbour can _already_ jam the whole spectrum and
         | block all your packets. We design devices to meet
         | specifications for a reason - and if the spec says  "you must
         | forward all packets according to this spec", and you mod your
         | device to blackhole your neighbours packets, then the FCC will
         | consider that jamming and treat it the same.
        
           | dmd wrote:
           | > FCC will consider that jamming and treat it the same
           | 
           | So... they'll do nothing?
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | yes.
             | 
             | But companies will be scared into only releasing devices
             | that meet the spec if there is a decent risk that non-spec
             | compliance leads to the whole company having their imports
             | blocked.
             | 
             | Besides, forwarding packets for another wifi user will
             | likely all be handled in the wifi chipset, so there will
             | probably only be ~10 implementations by the ~10 companies
             | worldwide who design wifi silicon. And if you're splashing
             | out tens of millions of dollars on a wifi silicon design,
             | you probably are going to make some effort to getting it
             | sufficiently spec compliant to not be banned.
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Who administers the network? How is it monitored? This has the
       | complexity of a small cellular network.
        
       | sargun wrote:
       | Does there exist DECT NR+ equipment yet? I imagine you can use
       | the same RANs for this as "5G", but those are ridiculously
       | expensive. What about mobile devices?
        
         | aidenn0 wrote:
         | TFA mentions this[1], but it's not IoT cheap.
         | 
         | 1: https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Nordic-
         | Semiconductor/NR...
        
           | p_l wrote:
           | Not that expensive for the space it's used in.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-04-02 23:01 UTC)