Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Fostering worldwide interoperabilityGeneva, 13-16 July 2009 Mobile network technology trends CCSA-Huawei technologies Co., LTD Global Standards Collaboration.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Fostering worldwide interoperabilityGeneva, 13-16 July 2009 Mobile network technology trends CCSA-Huawei technologies Co., LTD Global Standards Collaboration."— Presentation transcript:

1 Fostering worldwide interoperabilityGeneva, July 2009 Mobile network technology trends CCSA-Huawei technologies Co., LTD Global Standards Collaboration (GSC) 14 DOCUMENT #:GSC14-GRSC-012 FOR:Presentation SOURCE:Huawei Technologies Co., LTD AGENDA ITEM:GRSC

2 Fostering worldwide interoperability 2 Geneva, July 2009 Mobile Access BTS GGSN MSC SGSN MGW Network Resource Management (PCRF) MSC server CSCFMGCF Services & Applications HLR AAA HSS Unified Database NodeB eNodeB CDMA Wimax AP Wifi Terminal GMSC S-GW PDN-GW MME Mobile Core Session control Data/Services QOSQOS OSSOSS CRMCRM BSSBSS BOSS CSN PDSN CS domainPS domain eNodeB CDMA/EPS interworking in different scenarios is considered by some operators in 3GPP/2. H(e)NB Rel8 which can satisfy business deployment has been completed. Rel9 is also attracting much attention with some new features. How to provide voice continuity over LTE is still very hot and being discussed with the major difference being which is to control, IMS or CS? HSPA+ enhancement technologies (MC-HSPA,etc) improve the performance greatly, which may delay LTE. LTE-Advanced standards work started. Asymmetric Carrier Aggregation may bring revolution to spectrum and TDD/FDD model. USI/PCC in Wimax Forum may bring new business model; IEEE m activities shrank down. M2M is a hotspot of the industry and its standards started in a number of SDOs Mobile overall trend

3 Fostering worldwide interoperability 3 Geneva, July 2009 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 LTEHSPA+ 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 neededSoftware upgrade based on HSPA Using IMS to support CS, still immatureGives better support to CS based on HSPA LTE vs HSPA+

4 Fostering worldwide interoperability 4 Geneva, July 2009 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. 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. HSPA HSPA+ LTE LTE-A2G/UMTS T-Mobile Vodafone? Network evolution

5 Fostering worldwide interoperability 5 Geneva, July 2009 Comparison of the number of additions with QPSK and 2x2 antenna configuration 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. Jun 08 Dec 08 Jun 09 Mar 08 Sep 08 Mar 09 Early Proposal RAN1 discussions TR v1.0.0 for information Sep 09 UL scheme CoMP Rel/Rep Bandwidth Other Complete Technology Final submission TR v9.0.0 for approval Self eval. TR v9.1.0 to update and capture evaluation results MIMO UL Multiple access SC-FDMA--- backward compatible with LTE. Carrier Aggregation Asymmetric &Non-contiguous CA utilize asymmetric & discrete spectrum for IMT-A 2x2 QPSK Addition 1/3 QRM 1/3 Turbo SIC 1/2 QRM 2/3 QRM 2/3 Turbo SIC 1/2 Turbo SIC Performances comparison with QPSK and 2x2 antennae configuration LTE-Advanced - UL scheme

6 Fostering worldwide interoperability 6 Geneva, July 2009 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. LTE-Advanced - Asymmetric Carrier Aggregation

7 Fostering worldwide interoperability 7 Geneva, July 2009 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 UE H(e)NB (AP) H(e)NB GW MME S - GW HSS CSG ListSrv S6a S1-MME S1-U S11 C1 (OMA DM) Non- CSG UE Home NB & Home eNB

8 Fostering worldwide interoperability 8 Geneva, July 2009 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. OperatorsFocus T-MobileAll except IMS HNB ATT/Softban k IMS based HNB Vodafone local IP access & LBO including idle and active CSG management (hybrid access) TelefonicaBasic feature TIMlocal 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. Feature selection Home NB & Home eNB

9 Fostering worldwide interoperability 9 Geneva, July 2009 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. CS EPS IMS SRVCCCSFBCSoPS Property Long term solutionTemporary solutionTemporary solution (depend on operators strategy) Time Standard completed in rel8; network will be mature in Standard is completed in rel8; network will be mature in Standard in VOLGA will be completed in network will be mature in Operator support Nearly all operators and vendors support NTT Docomo/KDDI push itOnly TMO support and push it as operator. Focus VoIP controlled by IMS No VoIP controlVoIP 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. Voice continuity on LTE

10 Fostering worldwide interoperability 10 Geneva, July 2009 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. 3GPP Release standard Rel8 phase1phase2phase3 Real-time data services (non-VoIP) - LTE/eHRPD bi-direction non- optimized handover - LTE/eHRPD bi-direction optimized handover - CSFB 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 cdma 1x eHRPD EPS EPS/CDMA interworking

11 Fostering worldwide interoperability 11 Geneva, July 2009 Supplementary Slides

12 Fostering worldwide interoperability 12 Geneva, July 2009 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 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. UE Iu-cs CS Core BSS/RNS Iuh ISC MSC Server enhanced for ICS & SRVCC I2 3G PS Core 3G HNB 3G HNB GW Iu-ps SCC AS HSS HUA IMS CSCF Gi Vodafone solution AT&T solution IMS based HNB

13 Fostering worldwide interoperability 13 Geneva, July 2009 CS domain UE MSC EPS UE HO CS EP S UE FB IMS CS UE EPS UE HO SC SRVCCCSFBCSoPS 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 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. Voice continuity on LTE

14 Fostering worldwide interoperability 14 Geneva, July 2009 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. Machine to Machine communication Prudential Positive NTT DoCoMo, KPN, CMCC, Telenor: Already have some applications; Eager to see solution from vendors 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

Download ppt "Fostering worldwide interoperabilityGeneva, 13-16 July 2009 Mobile network technology trends CCSA-Huawei technologies Co., LTD Global Standards Collaboration."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google