Ajit Pai19:53
Yeah, this is a question I've been spending a lot of time about, especially before I came. And there are two different aspects of the question. One, I would put in the category of building blocks. The FCC has done a really good job, I would think, putting some of the building blocks in place for 5G innovation. We've made available already more spectrum in the past couple of years than was held by all mobile broadband providers in the United States combined.
For 5G, we finished an auction at the 28 and 24 gigahertz bands, an auction of the 37, 39, 47 gigahertz bands, starting an auction of the 3.5 gigahertz band later this summer, an auction of the C-band, the 3.7 band, at the end of the year. We've also got outstanding proceedings in the 2.5 gigahertz band, the 4.9 gigahertz band, and a few others. That's just on the licensed side. On the Wi-Fi side, I mentioned the 6 gigahertz spectrum. We've also proposed opening up the 5.9 gigahertz band as well. We have a few other initiatives in the pipeline.
On infrastructure, we really modernized the rules and enabled hundreds of thousands more small cells than we had in 2017 to be installed. So in terms of the building blocks from a policy perspective, we're in good shape.
One of the difficulties that Andy identified, however, is the supply chain. The supply chain is relatively consolidated. There's no American player in that supply chain for the full-stack network equipment solutions, essentially Huawei, Ericsson, and Nokia, with Samsung and ZTE playing smaller roles. That's going to challenge us, obviously, not just from a policy perspective, but of course from a global geopolitical perspective.
So we've tried to address that in two ways. Number one, ensuring supply chain integrity. Here in the United States, for example, no telecommunications provider who gets funding from the FCC is allowed to use that on problematic equipment, initially designated based on consultation with the intelligence community and the National Security Agency, specifically Huawei and ZTE.
Additionally, I was going abroad to talk to some of our allies, from Bahrain to Germany to Malaysia, to share our views on security and to encourage them to think about a risk-based framework for evaluating network equipment. But more generally, we realize that this is a very difficult market to address based on the current status quo. So we're looking forward to virtualized radio access networks.
Unfortunately, because of the pandemic, we had to cancel on March 26 a forum the FCC was going to hold on virtualized RAN, because we think that virtualizing—essentially moving from a hardware-based to a software-based 5G network management solution—is ultimately where we're going to go. And there are some great American companies, some of them you've heard like Cisco and Intel, others that you might have not, like Mavenir, Parallel Wireless, and others, who are doing great things here to essentially bypass some of the chokehold that Huawei has in certain markets by creating a software-based solution. And software, of course, is something the U.S. has traditionally done very well in.
So exciting things still to come. Hopefully, once we open up, we'll be able to reschedule that forum, and you'll be able to see for yourself some of the great virtualized and open architecture that's out there for America's 5G entrepreneurs.