Transcript International Telecommunication Union

Global Standards Collaboration (GSC) 14
DOCUMENT #:
GSC14-GRSC-012
FOR:
Presentation
SOURCE:
Huawei Technologies Co., LTD
AGENDA ITEM:
GRSC-7 4.1
CONTACT(S):
[email protected]
Mobile network technology trends
CCSA-Huawei technologies Co., LTD
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Fostering worldwide interoperability
Mobile －overall trend
How to provide voice continuity
over LTE is still very hot and
Services
& Applications
being discussed
with the major
difference being which is to
control, IMS or CS?
Unified Database
Data/Services
HSS HLR
M2M is a
hotspot of
the
Q
Session control industry
and its
O
standards
started in
S
a number
of SDOs MSC
MGCF
CSCF
BOSS
O
S
S
MSC
server
Network Resource Management (PCRF)
GMSC
Mobile Core
CSN
SGSN
PDN-GW
MME
MGW
PDSN
CDMA/EPS interworking
in
different scenarios is
considered by some
operators in 3GPP/2.
CS domain
Mobile Access
AAA
GGSN
S-GW
BTS
PS domain
eNodeB
Wimax
USI/PCC in Wimax Forum
may bring new business
Terminal model; IEEE 802.16m
activities shrank down.
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Wifi
CDMA
AP
NodeB
H(e)NB Rel8 which can satisfy
business deployment has been
completed. Rel9 is also
attracting much attention with
some new features.
eNodeB＋
B
S
S
LTE-Advanced standards
work started. Asymmetric
Carrier Aggregation may
bring revolution
C to spectrum
and TDD/FDD
R model.
M
HSPA+ enhancement technologies
(MC-HSPA,etc) improve the
performance greatly, which may
delay LTE.
Fostering worldwide interoperability
2
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
telcos：VDF, Orange, TIM and AT&T
vendors：Huawei, 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
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Fostering worldwide interoperability
3
Network evolution
Vodafone?
LTE-A
LTE
HSPA+
HSPA
2G/UMTS
T-Mobile
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,
DC+MIMO 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.
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Fostering worldwide interoperability
4
LTE-Advanced -
Complete Final
Technologysubmission
Early
Proposal
Mar 08
Jun 08
Sep 08
UL scheme
Mar 09
Dec 08
Jun 09
Decoder complexity
Detection complexity
Sep 09
10000
TR v1.0.0
TR v9.1.0
TR v9.0.0
UL Multiple
access
：SC-FDMA--for information for approval
to update
capture
backward compatible withand
LTE.
evaluation
RAN1 discussions
QPSK addition
2x22X2QPSK
Addition
12000
8000
6000
results
4000
UL scheme
Bandwidth
CoMP
Carrier Aggregation ： Asymmetric
&Non-contiguous CA utilize
asymmetric & discrete spectrum
for IMT-A
Rel/Rep
MIMO
Other
Self eval.
2000
0
1/3 QRM
1/3 QRM
1/3 Turbo SIC
1/3 Turbo
1/2 QRM
1/2 QRM
SIC
1/21/2
TurboTurbo
SIC
SIC
2/3 QRM
2/3 QRM
2/3 Turbo SIC
2/3 Turbo
SIC
Comparison of the number of additions with QPSK
and 2x2 antenna configuration
QPSK, 2x2 SCM-C channel,3km/h
20
18
SC-FDMA have the similar
performance to OFDMA, with similar
computational complexity.
16
1/3
1/2
2/3
1/3
1/2
2/3
Throughput(Mbit/s)
14
QRD-ML,OFDMA,
QRD-ML,OFDMA
QRD-ML,OFDMA
Turbo-SIC,SC-FDMA
Turbo-SIC,SC-FDMA
Turbo-SIC,SC-FDMA
12
10
Considering backward compatibility
with LTE, most tier1 carriers and
vendors prefer SC-FDMA for UL.
8
6
4
2
0
2
4
6
SNR(dB)
8
10
12
Performances comparison with QPSK and 2x2
antennae configuration
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Fostering worldwide interoperability
5
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.
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Fostering worldwide interoperability
6
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。
CSG
ListSrv
NonCSG
UE
C1 (OMA DM)
S6a
S1-MME
CSG
UE
H(e)NB
(AP)
H(e)NB GW
MME
S11
S1-U
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
HSS
S-GW
Fostering worldwide interoperability
7
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/Softban IMS based HNB
k
Vodafone
local IP access & LBO（
including idle and active）；
CSG management (hybrid
access)
Telefonica
Basic feature
TIM
local IP access & LBO
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
• 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.
Fostering worldwide interoperability
8
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
IMS
CS
CSFB
EPS
CSoPS
Long term solution
Temporary solution
Temporary solution (depend on
operator’s 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.
Property
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Fostering worldwide interoperability
9
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
Non-real-time data
services
- LTE/eHRPD bi-direction
non-optimized handover
eHRPD cdma 1x
phase2
phase3
Real-time data services
(non-VoIP)
All services including
VoIP
- LTE/eHRPD bi-direction nonoptimized handover
- LTE/eHRPD bi-direction
optimized handover
- CSFB
- LTE/eHRPD bi-direction nonoptimized handover
- LTE/eHRPD bi-direction
optimized handover
- SRVCC
EPS
3GPP Release
standard
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Rel8
Fostering worldwide interoperability
10
Supplementary Slides
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Fostering worldwide interoperability
11
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：

Solution2: Add HUA （ Home User
Agent，modeling UE access CS
procedure） in HNB, pushed by AT&T；
The main difference is: solution1
reduces AP complexity and causes
less modification, but needs upgrade
MSC; solution2 needs fewer CN
changes, but upgrade AP.
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
I2
IMS CSCF
AT&T solution

Solution1: Upgrade MSC Server,
adopt current ICS procedure, pushed
by Vodafone.
ISC
MSC Server enhanced for ICS
& SRVCC
Vodafone solution

SCC AS
HSS
Gi
CS Core
3G PS Core
Iu-cs
Iu-ps
3G HNB GW
Iuh
BSS/RNS
3G HNB
HUA
UE
Fostering worldwide interoperability
12
Voice continuity on LTE
IMS
SC
CS
CS
EP
S
CS domain
MSC
EPS
EPS
HO
UE
MSC
HO
FB
UE
UE
UE
UE
UE
SRVCC
CSFB
Solutio
n
introdu
ce
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.
CSFB：UE 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.
Deploy
ment
and
evolutio
n
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 don’t 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.
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
CSoPS
Fostering worldwide interoperability
13
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
Industry：The 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.
Standards：M2M communication has influence on almost every layer of the network. A
couple of SDOs are trying to develop global specifications for the time being.
Positive
NTT DoCoMo, KPN, CMCC, Telenor:
Already have some applications;
Eager to see solution from vendors
Geneva, 13-16 July 2009
Prudential
Orange：chair of ETSI M2M TC, not enthusiast
TIM：mainly in 3GPP and Zigbee Alliance;
questioning the role of operators in the value chain;
not expecting considerable revenue in short-term
Indifferent
T-Mobile questioning the business mode; no
need for network improvement
Vodafone closely monitoring in SDOs to avoid
any big change in their network
Fostering worldwide interoperability
14