130 likes | 263 Views
Operator configurable traffic handling in multi layer WCDMA network based on capability, service and load. Presentation date: 19.01.2010 Jari Kiirla. Supervisor: Prof. Riku Jäntti Instructor: M.Sc. Tarja Hiltunen. Outline. Background Objectives Layering in multi layer WCDMA network
E N D
Operator configurable traffic handling in multi layer WCDMA network based on capability, service and load Presentation date: 19.01.2010 Jari Kiirla Supervisor: Prof. Riku Jäntti Instructor: M.Sc. Tarja Hiltunen
Outline • Background • Objectives • Layering in multi layer WCDMA network • Capabilities, services and loads in WCDMA • Proposed alternative solutions • Analysis of alternatives • Conclusions
Background • Traffic amount is rapidly growing in WCDMA networks (especially packet data traffic) and operators need more spectrum. • Operators get new frequency bands for WCDMA usage (i.e. old GSM frequency band). • The amount of multi layer and multi band WCDMA networks is increasing • Simultaneously new packet data features are introduced which increase data rates, increase spectral efficiency and reduce UE battery usage. • Only new UEs support new features. • New features require new HW and SW in NodeB. • New features cannot be introduced to all frequency layers. • Traffic needs to be directed to “correct” layer to maximize the capacity. • “Correct” layer can be defined based on capability, service and load.
Objectives • To define operator configurable traffic handling for multi layer WCDMA networks which is based on capability, service and load. • Two main requirements are: • To have a flexible because different operators have different needs: • Number of frequency layers and frequency bands • Different features are utilized • To have a easy to use operator interface for configuring work. • Operator needs to understand easily how to configure the system to get the desired results. • Amount of configuration work should be minimized.
Layering in multi layer WCDMA network • UE is from Radio Resource Control (RRC) point of view in some state. • In different states the layer change mechanisms are different. • Initial camping • Cell reselection • Handover
Capabilities in WCDMA • There are lots of different capabilities. • UE indicates it capability to network in RRC connection request and RRC connection complete messages. • Most important capabilities are related to HSPA and its evolution features. • 7 most important capabilities were selected. • Band capability is also important due to new bands which are taken into use.
Service in WCDMA • There are lots of different parameter related to services that UE is using. • Here the most interesting ones: • Traffic class • RAB asymmetry indicator • Maximum bit rate (separately for UL and DL) • Guaranteed bit rate (separately for UL and DL) • Traffic handling priority (valid only for interactive traffic class) • Allocation/Retention priority • Only traffic class was chosen. It contains: • Conversational • Streaming • Interactive • Background.
Load in WCDMA • We have UL and DL load. • UL load is noise rise in NodeB antenna. • DL load is transmission power. • Many different methods to define load -> out of the scope of this thesis. • However, effect of load has been taken into account in decision making algorithm.
Proposed alternative solutions • Three different alternatives are made based on initial analysis. They basic principles: • Basic principle of alternative A: • Selected capability based HOs are activated in cell level and decision is based on actual capability • Basic principle of alternative B: • Capability based HO is activated in cell level and RNC decides the need for capability based HO based on actual capability • Basic principle of alternative C: • Capability based HO is activated in cell level and decision for capability based HO is done based on preferred layer definition and not based on actual capability.
Analysis of alternatives • Do they satisfy the operators needs well enough? Use case analysis is used. • How simply it is to understand the needed configuration work in use cases? • The amount of configuration work?
F5 (DC-HSDPA) F3 (HSPA) F1 (R99) F6 (R99) F4 (DC-HSDPA&MIMO) F2 (HSPA&CS voice over HSPA) 1.5GHz 2GHz Use cases • Example of use case: • 4 different use cases are used. • 2 are based on current plans of operators
Results • All alternatives fulfill the operator requirements in needed level • Configuration work in alternatives A and B is big. • Also alternatives A and B started to become complex when number of different capabilities increased. • This also increases possibility for faulty configuration . • Alternative C was chosen.
Conclusions • There are many different alternative ways to satisfy operators requirements. • It is good to avoid complexity. • Part of the quality comes when needed configuration work is easily understood. • Further work is needed to evaluate how the load should be defined.