Re: [5gangip] Launching 6G Talk

[John Grant <[e-mail]>]

On 20/05/2020 14:55, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
> that message was
> saying something like Wuhan got the virus because of the 5G deployment
> there; I am not sure whether Wuhan 5G is at 3.5GHz, because that is the
> only differentiating aspect of 5G compared to 4G that might impact
> chemistry/biology
In UK the fear is about 26GHz, and predates covid-19. ITU doesn't help 
by saying there is an absence of evidence of harm, conspicuously not 
saying there is evidence of absence.

[snip]

> In building a hypothetical list of answers to the question of what is
> 6G, what are its distinctive characteristics, like huge bandwidth,
> almost-zero latency, quasi-universal coverage,
Those were all supposed to be features of 5G, yet so far only eMBB has 
been delivered.


> I would definitely add an
> answer telling that 6G uses IPv6 natively
Or maybe it'll use something completely different. Mobile operators 
think IPv4 has too much overhead, and IPv6 headers are bigger; they also 
think fixed addresses are a security risk, so changing to IPv6 doesn't 
even eliminate NAT.

[snip]

> PPS: Administratively, one might think to rename this list to something
> like "6GANGIP" or?  Renaming a list has been traditionally a difficult
> task at IETF
Well, 3GPP still has 3G in its name, so sticking with 5G should be fine.

-- 
John Grant
Nine Tiles, Cambridge, England
[phone] and [phone]
http://www.ninetiles.com