Mobile network technology trends

1
Mobile network technology trends
Global Standards Collaboration (GSC) 14
DOCUMENT GSC14-GRSC-012
FOR Presentation
SOURCE Huawei Technologies Co., LTD
AGENDA ITEM GRSC-7 4.1
CONTACT(S) Wang.xuemin_at_huawei.com

• CCSA-Huawei technologies Co., LTD

2
Mobile -overall trend
Services Applications
Data/Services
MSC server
CSCF
MGCF
Q O S
Session control
PDN-GW
MSC
SGSN
GMSC
CSN
Mobile Core
MME
GGSN
MGW
S-GW
PDSN
CS domain
PS domain
BTS
Mobile Access
eNodeB
Wimax
eNodeB
NodeB
CDMA
AP
Wifi
Terminal
3
LTE vs HSPA

• Tier1 telcos and vendors are making more efforts
  on HSPA even than LTE in 3GPP Rel-9. (Following
  table gives a simple comparison between HSPA and
  LTE from a standards perspective)
• Almost all operators in favor of LTE have HSPA
  networks, hence the latest standards progress on
  HSPA will cause big impacts on the commercial
  deployment of LTE.
• The major operators in Europe like Vodafone, FT,
  TIM etc., declared LTE launch may be delayed by 2
  or 3 years until at least 2011.

LTE HSPA
Tier1 telcos focusing on LTE NTT DCM, KDDI, Verizon and TMO One foot, two boats telcosVDF, Orange, TIM and ATT vendorsHuawei, E///, NSN, ALU and QC
Small corrections or enhancements New features,e.g. DC-HSUPA, DC-HSDPA MIMO
Hardware upgrade needed Software upgrade based on HSPA
Using IMS to support CS, still immature Gives better support to CS based on HSPA
4
Network evolution
Operators will select network evolution based on
current network, spectrum, financing, policy,
competitions They have pushed some new features
to improve HSPA performances although keeping
attention for LTE.

• MC-HSPA enhancement (DC-HSPA, including Dual
  carrier for HSUPA, DCMIMO and DC for
  non-contiguous carriers) is pushed by Vodafone,
  Telefonica, which will improve HSPA
  downlink/uplink peak rate (84Mbps/ 4 carrier). It
  will be close to LTE level in order to satisfy
  service application for great requirement in
  uplink.
• This feature may bring negative impacts on LTE
  commercial deployment if it is accepted by most
  operators. HSPA operators will go on evolving
  their HSPA networks and wait for LTE-A to be
  mature.

5
LTE-Advanced - UL scheme
Complete Technology
Final submission
Early Proposal
2x2 QPSK Addition
Mar 08
Sep 09
Jun 08
Dec 08
Jun 09
Sep 08
Mar 09
UL Multiple access SC-FDMA--- backward
compatible with LTE.
TR v1.0.0 for information
TR v9.1.0 to update and capture evaluation results
TR v9.0.0 for approval
RAN1 discussions
UL scheme
Carrier Aggregation Asymmetric Non-contiguous
CA utilize asymmetric discrete spectrum for
IMT-A
Bandwidth
CoMP
Rel/Rep
1/3 Turbo SIC
2/3 Turbo SIC
1/2 Turbo SIC
1/3 QRM
1/2 QRM
2/3 QRM
MIMO
Comparison of the number of additions with QPSK
and 2x2 antenna configuration
Other
Self eval.

• SC-FDMA have the similar performance to OFDMA,
  with similar computational complexity.
• Considering backward compatibility with LTE, most
  tier1 carriers and vendors prefer SC-FDMA for UL.

Performances comparison with QPSK and 2x2
antennae configuration
6
LTE-Advanced - Asymmetric Carrier Aggregation

• FDD system used to be deployed in unpaired bands
  while TDD system in paired bands. However, there
  is not enough paired spectrum for the LTE-A
  broadband requirements. So the FDD Industry try
  to utilize unpaired spectrum for FDD deployment.
• Harmonization of TDD and FDD may be realized
  based on asymmetric carrier aggregation
  technology.
• Asymmetric Carrier Aggregation will occupy TDD
  bands for FDD deployment to challenge exclusive
  advantages for TDD in unpaired bands.

7
Home NB Home eNB

• H(e)NB Rel8 was completed with architecture and
  features confirmed in 3GPP, especially OAM
  interfaces data model.
• T-mobile/Vodafone/ATT Huawei/ALU/NEC are main
  drivers in standards activities. But small
  companies (Airvana, Kineto, IP access) also
  actively involved, indicating H(e)NB market
  competition not limited to big vendors.
• Rel9 work started, including performance
  enhancements CSG management and roaming?Inbound
  mobility?Local IP access to the Internet?IMS
  based HNB?Managed Remote Access to Home Network?

8
Home NB Home eNB

• AP behave more and more like small-NB with
  features added, such as Inbound mobility and
  local IP access will increase cost inevitably.
  Each vendor will have to choose between
  performances and costs.
• Increasing application scenarios may bring the
  breakthroughs in business model.

Feature selection
Operators Focus
T-Mobile All except IMS HNB
ATT/Softbank IMS based HNB
Vodafone local IP access LBO(including idle and active)CSG management (hybrid access)
Telefonica Basic feature
TIM local IP access LBO

• There are controversies for feature selection
  based on each benefit. (Short Rel9 will NOT
  include all features)
• CSG related features will be in Rel9, which
  indicated operators focus on special users to get
  more ARPU.

9
Voice continuity on LTE

• The continuity of CS voice service will become
  one of the key issues after EPS deployment. It
  will have heavy impact on the implementation of
  future network.
• 3 solutions SRVCC, CSFB and CSoPS. Based on IMS,
  SRVCC is considered as the natural selection for
  the voice continuity solution to the future
  network.

SRVCC CSFB CSoPS
Property Long term solution Temporary solution Temporary solution (depend on operators strategy)
Time Standard completed in rel8 network will be mature in 2011. Standard is completed in rel8 network will be mature in 2010. Standard in VOLGA will be completed in 2009. network will be mature in 2012.
Operator support Nearly all operators and vendors support NTT Docomo/KDDI push it Only TMO support and push it as operator.
Focus VoIP controlled by IMS No VoIP control VoIP controlled by CS
cost Cost is high but it is a final solution. Initialization cost is low but the investment will not be protected when update to IMS. Network cost is acceptable but handset cost will be a problem due to the particular chips.
10
EPS/CDMA interworking

• Verizon pushed LTE/eHRPD non-optimized handover
  in 3GPP/2 actively. For optimized handover, they
  only focus on the direction from LTE to HRPD.
• CDMA operators will select different network
  deployments based on their service strategy,
  current EPS Rel8 specifications can support most
  contents in phase2.
• LTE and CDMA dual-mode chips may be a key factor
  for feature application, especially single radio.

phase1
phase2
phase3

• All services including
• VoIP
• LTE/eHRPD bi-direction non-optimized handover
• LTE/eHRPD bi-direction optimized handover
• SRVCC

Non-real-time data services - LTE/eHRPD
bi-direction non-optimized handover

• Real-time data services (non-VoIP)
• LTE/eHRPD bi-direction non-optimized handover
• LTE/eHRPD bi-direction optimized handover
• CSFB

cdma 1x
eHRPD
EPS
3GPP Release standard

Rel8
11
Supplementary Slides
12
IMS based HNB

• This feature is mainly pushed by ATT, because ATT
  want IMS to be unique service control plane and
  to not upgrade current CS network. They prefer
  HUA solution supported by NEC.
• Vodafone expects to upgrade current MSC server to
  adopt ICS architecture supported by NSN.

Technical progress

• IMS controls HNB access, two main solutions
• Solution1 Upgrade MSC Server, adopt current ICS
  procedure, pushed by Vodafone.
• Solution2 Add HUA ( Home User Agent,modeling UE
  access CS procedure) in HNB, pushed by ATT
• The main difference is solution1 reduces AP
  complexity and causes less modification, but
  needs upgrade MSC solution2 needs fewer CN
  changes, but upgrade AP.

Vodafone solution
ATT solution
13
Voice continuity on LTE
SRVCC CSFB CSoPS
Solution introduce SRVCC is based on IMS. Voice continue include two procedures, PS handover and service continue in IMS domain. IMS is considered as the future central network so SRVCC will combine CS and future voice service smoothly. CSFBUE register on EPS network in IDLE mode. When it initiates a voice service it will re-register to CS domain. This solution will not modify the current CS network so it is easy to be implement. CSoPS,UE connect to CS through PS domain. So the handover procedure is similar with CS handover only add some PS signaling.
Deployment and evolution Route one for the operators which think LTE must support voice service it can implement IMS before LTE and use SRVCC to voice continue in the border of LTE network. Route two LTE will be used for data service only first, so LTE can be implement before IMS. Operator can wait for the proper time to implement IMS and then support voice and use SRVCC for voice continue. Operators choose CSFB when they implement LTE in a small size area. But if they want to enlarge the LTE deployment the signaling for CSFB is too much to the network it need to implement IMS for voice service. Some operators think that they must implement voice service in the LTE netowrk. But they dont think IMS is mature enough to be commercial deployed. To make LTE deploy independent on IMS, CSoPS is bring out and it gives operator a chance to deploy LTE with voice service before IMS implementation.
14
Machine to Machine communication

• M2M is defined as a solution of data
  communication which involves one or more entities
  that do not necessarily need human interaction.
  Some applications on M2M are also considered as a
  way of promoting power saving.
• M2M is promising to bring benefits for both
  mobile operators and vendors
• Possibly become mobile operators blue ocean
  because M2M is not overlapped with the current
  H2H network
• Vendors are expecting to make profit from selling
  the M2M-capable device or from potential
  requirements on network expansion brought by
  increased throughput.
• Analysis Unclear business mode may prevent M2M
  from large-scale deployment in short term
• IndustryThe causality dilemma between the
  voluminous market and the cost down of the
  chipset on the end device makes it the chicken
  or egg first question.
• StandardsM2M communication has influence on
  almost every layer of the network. A couple of
  SDOs are trying to develop global specifications
  for the time being.

Indifferent
Positive
T-Mobile questioning the business mode no need
for network improvement Vodafone closely
monitoring in SDOs to avoid any big change in
their network
Orangechair of ETSI M2M TC, not
enthusiast TIMmainly in 3GPP and Zigbee
Alliance questioning the role of operators in
the value chain not expecting considerable
revenue in short-term
NTT DoCoMo, KPN, CMCC, Telenor Already have some
applications Eager to see solution from vendors