‘Proximity Marketing’ and ‘Location Based Services’ (LBS) using ‘Small Cells’

‘Proximity Marketing’ and ‘Location Based Services’ (LBS) using ‘Small Cells’ from Zahid Ghadialy

Quick summary of the 'Operator Mindshare' session from Small Cells Global Congress

We had quite a few interesting discussions in the Small Cells Global Congress, Operator Mindshare session. Here are some of the things that were discussed:

Licensed v/s Unlicensed deployments:

Many operators are now deploying WiFi in the unlicensed spectrum. This can help in the short term to alleviate the capacity problems but as more and more of this unlicensed spectrum nodes get deployed, they create interference between each other and make them unusable for anyone. An example was provided about Tokyo where in some areas, too many free WiFi hotspots means its unusable for anyone. One solution is to have one operator do all the logistics for the deployment and other operators can pay to use the service. Who (operator) would be the first one to go through the process of deploying everything first? Everyone would prefer wait and watch approach.

Providing free WiFi: 

The consensus was that the free WiFi provided by operators don't give any additional benefit to them and there isn't much of a business case. 

Consumer awareness for residential Femtocells:

Globally, not much effort is being done by the operator to make the end users aware of residential Femtocells and this is hampering the take-up  A point was made about when Vodafone launched their product, Vodafone Access Gateway (VAG), it was perceived as negative thing because the ads show that if the coverage was poor you can install this to improve coverage. From a users perspective, it showed that the network had poor coverage. Still consumer awareness is important, how to do it?

Placement of Small Cells:

Where should the public small cells (metrocells) be placed. The Biggest challenges are:

* Site Acquisition is the biggest problem. - This is a bigger problem if lap posts are sought to deploy on public locations

* Rent

* Planning

* Installation

* Power - Lamp posts are centrally switched off, so small cells on laamp posts may need alternative sources

* Power meter if used in a shared location

* Bullet proof (especially in the US)

* Backhaul - especially is non line of sight case.

* Health concerns (if visible)

* Visual appearance

* Opex

Backhaul:

Operators should be clearer in what they want. Right now the vendors are pushing the solutions that operators not necessarily need and not giving what the operators want. The Backhaul should be more flexible and future proof. It should be able to cater for upcoming technologies like Carrier Aggregation, CoMP, etc.

Shared v/s Dedicated carrier for 3G Small Cells:

Dedicated carrier is ideal but is not easily possible for most operators. When shared carrier is used it causes interference and handovers are not easy. 

Interoperability in the new hardware equipment for support of small cells:

Certain vendors are still not creating the the networks that can interwork with other vendors equipment. As we are moving towards LTE, this seems to be a much bigger problem. Sprint for example has 3 completely different networks in the US with no interoperability between them. Standards are not helping either as they do not dictate implementation. 

Some Interesting discussions on Case studies, Business Cases, etc.

Mosaic Telecom:
* Deployed residential Femtocells
* Deployed for coverage purpose
* Dont have handover capability yet
* Want to be able to deploy Microcells/Small Cells on Highways, around 1-2Km radius
* Their typical Microcells use 40W output power
* The cost of deployment if Macro using cabinet, antenna, etc is roughly 100K per site.

Telefonica, O2 trials in UK
* To get access to council lamp posts, it was required that the bidder offer free WiFi
* O2 set a high bar by paying lot of money to the councils in London, but this is not a sustainable model

A Business case for carrier neutral WiFi on light pole in Lima, Peru
* Each light pole can have 3 different locations
* The retail business case is to get the user to usse the offering and maybe offer the operator services, tempting to move to this operator from current one
* There can be a wholesale case of selling the WiFi capacity in bulk to companies, organisations

Some interesting statistics thrown up:

* WiFi cell radius is 30m in South America

* 83% of people in US think that operators should provide free WiFi because of lousy coverage of the mobile network.

* The first 4000 customers of a WiMax operator were using an average of 750 MB per day, 22.5GB per month.

* Some fixed Internet operators are now thinking of putting a cap on unlimited offering at 350GB per month.

There were no consensus and conclusions for many items so feel free to write your opinion in the comments.

Whats inside a Picocell?

Interesting pic from Public wireless:

• Intelligent Cell Control & Management Boards
  – Evolved OA&M for remote system management and monitoring
• Single/Multi Baseband Boards
• Digital Carrier Boards
• RF Chains / Power Amplifiers
• Various WAN Backhaul Modules
  – Wireline
    – Fiber, DOCSIS, Ethernet
  – Wireless
    – Satellite, NLOS, Microwave
• Power Supply + Battery Backup
• IP67 Outdoor thermal design

The presentation is available from Small Cell Forum website here.

Developing and Integrating a High Performance HetNet

I have seen on Twitter some people think that HetNets (Heterogeneous Networks) is just a new name for the Hierarchical Cell Structures (HCS). The main difference between then is that while HCS requires all layers to have different frequencies, HetNets can use the same or the different frequency. In case the same frequency is used, there needs to be a way to manage interference between the different layers. In fact the term 'layers' is hardly used with HetNets as there is nothing strictly hierarchical with different types of cells that co-exist in a HetNet. Typically a HetNet comprises of Macro cells, Micro/Pico cells, other Small Cells (including Femtocells) and WiFi as well (if used to offload traffic).

This recent whitepaper from 4G Americas is an excellent source to understand more about HetNets

Available to download from Slideshare here.

Humour: 5 Stages of Bug Fixing

The above Dilbert strip is a reality for a lot of us, everyday. There are many bugs in each product and we only have a limited amount of time and resources that can be dedicated to fixing bugs. The '5 stages of bug fixing' was presented in one of the Cambridge Wireless events not long ago. I am not sure if allowed to mention by whom, so here it is anonymously.

The five stages of Bug Fixing

If you think about it from the Tester's point of view, this is what he prays for everyday. See the old post here.

Intelligent Devices and Smart Journeys

Couple of days back, I posted some videos that show technology advancements for the mobile phones. Here is a presentation by Peter Whale from Qualcomm in a recent Cambridge Wireless event about how Sensors and Context-engine will make the future devices much more intelligent then they already are.

Intelligent Devices and Smart Journeys from Zahid Ghadialy

A shameless plug for my presentation on the similar topic from the LTE World Summit 2012, that has now crossed 6000 views, available here.

M2M and the 'Big Data'

Couple of months back, there was this Dilbert strip on the big data.

Apparently, Social networks, M2M devices and many other sources of data, keeps on generating data all the time. This data can provide us with a lot of useful information if proper analytics can be done on it. This is a real challenge in guess. There will also be security and privacy implications that may decide how and what can be used and by whom.

Here is a simple introductory video by Intel explaining what Big Data is:

5 videos showing futuristic technologies that can be used with Mobiles

IPv6 in Mobile Environments

An interesting presentation from Alcatel-Lucent

IPv6 IN MOBILE ENVIRONMENTS from Zahid Ghadialy

Related Post

• LTE and IPv6

Extended Access Barring (EAB) in Release 11 to avoid MTC overload

M2M is going to be big. With the promise of 50 Billion devices by 2020, the networks are already worried about the overloading due to signalling by millions of devices occurring at any given time. To counter this, they have been working on avoiding overloading of the network for quite some time as blogged about here.

The feature to avoid this overload is known as Extended Access Barring (EAB). For E-UTRAN, in Rel-10, a partial solution was implemented and a much better solution has been implemented in Rel-11. For GERAN a solution was implemented in Rel-10. The following presentation gives a high level overview of EAB for E-UTRAN and GERAN.

3GPP Enhancements for Machine Type Communications Overview from Zahid Ghadialy

In Rel-11, a new System Information Block (SIB 14) has been added that is used specifically for EAB. Whereas in Rel-10, the UE would still send the RRCConnectionRequest, in Rel-11, the UE does not even need to do that, thereby congesting the Random Access messages.

The following is from RRC 36.331 (2012-09)
***

–                SystemInformationBlockType14

The IE SystemInformationBlockType14 contains the EAB parameters.

SystemInformationBlockType14 information element

-- ASN1START

SystemInformationBlockType14-r11 ::= SEQUENCE {

    eab-Param-r11                        CHOICE {

       eab-Common-r11                       EAB-Config-r11,

       eab-PerPLMN-List-r11                 SEQUENCE (SIZE (1..6)) OF EAB-ConfigPLMN-r11

    }                                                  OPTIONAL, -- Need OR

    lateNonCriticalExtension             OCTET STRING          OPTIONAL, -- Need OP

    ...

}

EAB-ConfigPLMN-r11 ::=               SEQUENCE {

    eab-Config-r11                   EAB-Config-r11            OPTIONAL -- Need OR

}

EAB-Config-r11 ::=               SEQUENCE {

    eab-Category-r11                 ENUMERATED {a, b, c, spare},

    eab-BarringBitmap-r11            BIT STRING (SIZE (10))

}

-- ASN1STOP

SystemInformationBlockType14 field descriptions
eab-BarringBitmap Extended access class barring for AC 0-9. The first/ leftmost bit is for AC 0, the second bit is for AC 1, and so on.
eab-Category Indicates the category of UEs for which EAB applies. Value a corresponds to all UEs, value b corresponds to the UEs that are neither in their HPLMN nor in a PLMN that is equivalent to it, and value c corresponds to the UEs that are neither in the PLMN listed as most preferred PLMN of the country where the UEs are roaming in the operator-defined PLMN selector list on the USIM, nor in their HPLMN nor in a PLMN that is equivalent to their HPLMN, see TS 22.011 [10].
eab-Common The EAB parameters applicable for all PLMN(s).
eab-PerPLMN-List The EAB parameters per PLMN, listed in the same order as the PLMN(s) occur in plmn-IdentityList in SystemInformationBlockType1.

***

Here is my attempt to explain the difference in overload control mechanism in Rel-8, Rel-10 and Rel-11. Please note that not actual message names are used.

As usual, happy to receive feedback, comments, suggestions, etc.

Machine Type Communications (MTC): Architecture, Features, Standards in 3GPP Rel-10

The following 14 MTC Features have been identified during the 3GPP Release-10 timelines:

• Low Mobility
• Time Controlled
• Time Tolerant
• Packet Switched (PS) Only
• Small Data Transmissions
• Mobile Originated Only
• Infrequent Mobile Terminated
• MTC Monitoring
• Priority Alarm Message (PAM)
• Secure Connection
• Location Specific Trigger
• Network Provided Destination for Uplink Data
• Infrequent Transmission
• Group Based MTC Features

In Rel 10, 3GPP will focus on the general functionality required to support these features:

• Overload control (Radio Network Congestion use case, Signalling Network Congestion use case and Core Network Congestion use case)
• Addressing
• Identifiers
• Subscription control
• Security

The following specifications are associated with the MTC work

Spec   - Specifications associated with or affected by MTC work
22.011 - Service accessibility
22.368 - Service requirements for Machine-Type Communications (MTC); Stage 1
23.008 - Organization of subscriber data
23.012 - Location management procedures
23.060 - General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service description; Stage 2
23.122 - Non-Access-Stratum (NAS) functions related to Mobile Station (MS) in idle mode
23.203 - Policy and charging control architecture
23.401 - General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) access
23.402 - Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP accesses
23.888 - System improvements for Machine-Type Communications (MTC)
24.008 - Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification; Core network protocols; Stage 3
24.301 - Non-Access-Stratum (NAS) protocol for Evolved Packet System (EPS); Stage 3
24.368 - Non-Access Stratum (NAS) configuration Management Object (MO)
25.331 - Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification
29.002 - Mobile Application Part (MAP) specification
29.018 - General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Serving GPRS Support Node (SGSN) - Visitors Location Register (VLR); Gs interface layer 3 specification
29.060 - General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS Tunnelling Protocol (GTP) across the Gn and Gp interface
29.118 - Mobility Management Entity (MME) - Visitor Location Register (VLR) SGs interface specification
29.274 - 3GPP Evolved Packet System (EPS); Evolved General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol for Control plane (GTPv2-C); Stage 3
29.275 - Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) based Mobility and Tunnelling protocols; Stage 3
29.282 - Mobile IPv6 vendor specific option format and usage within 3GPP
31.102 - Characteristics of the Universal Subscriber Identity Module (USIM) application
33.868 - Security aspects of Machine-Type Communications
36.331 - Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification
37.868 - RAN Improvements for Machine-type Communications
43.868 - GERAN Improvements for Machine-type Communications
44.018 - Mobile radio interface layer 3 specification; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol
44.060 - General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Mobile Station (MS) - Base Station System (BSS) interface; Radio Link Control / Medium Access Control (RLC/MAC) protocol
45.002 - Multiplexing and multiple access on the radio path

Here are couple of presentations I have extracted the above information from:

• 3GPP Enhancements for Machine Type Communications Overview
• Understanding how 3GPP Standards Updates affect LTE Roll-Out

Imagine the Future - by Cisco

Here is a video from Cisco from the last year, that I think is still relevant to help put in perspective where the future is going:




There is also a slide cast worth watching on the same topic from last month:

Radio Challenges and Opportunities for Large Scale Small Cell Deployments

Here is another presentation by Keima at our Small Cells Event. Their last presentation on "Twitter et al. for Small Cell Planning" was a hit and has racked up over 9000 views on slideshare.

Radio Challenges and Opportunities for Large Scale Small Cell Deployments from 3G4G

Building the World’s Largest Residential Small-Cell network

Presentation by Nick Johnson, CTO of IP.Access in Cambridge Wireless Small Cells event.

Building the World’s Largest Residential Small-Cell network from Zahid Ghadialy

Small Cell Backhaul Solution Types

This is from a presentation by Julius Robson of CBNL, representing NGMN in the Cambridge Wireless Small Cells SIG event.

Interesting to see all possible options for Backhaul for small cells.

The presentation is available to view and download from here.

Related blog posts:

• Two interesting NGMN papers on Backhaul
• Couple of presentations on Backhaul

Small Cells as a Service - SCaaS

Last year I blogged about Femtocell as a Service (FaaS) but since we are talking in terms of Small Cell, we can use the term SCaaS that can form a superset to FaaS. This is from a presentation by Prof. Simon Saunders, in the Cambridge Wireless event.

Available to download from slideshare.

Summary of Cambridge Wireless Event on Small Cells, 3rd Oct. 2012

We had another successful Small Cells SIG Event (jointly powered by the Radio Technology SIG) in Cambridge Wireless on the theme “Radio Challenges and Opportunities for Large Scale Small Cell Deployments”. I will be looking at the presentations in detail in separate blog posts as there are interesting bits and pieces from each of them that can easily be overlooked. Here is a high level summary of this event.

We had over a hundred delegates in this event and as one of the speakers admitted privately, they were expecting to see around a dozen people and were a bit overwhelmed by the number and caliber of the people. The delegates included small cell vendors, chipset vendors, test & measurement vendors, operators, industry analysts, regulators, etc. It was a lovely day to be in Cambridge with the sun shining the whole of morning and the afternoon to show us the best of the Downing college.

The event was kicked off by Prof. Simon Saunders, formerly the founding chairman of Small Cell Forum who talked about the long journey the small cells (or Femtocells as they were then known) have gone through, the benefits and the road ahead.

This was followed by a talk from Julius Robson of CBNL, who was also representing NGMN. The focus of the talk was on backhaul.

Nick Johnson, CTO of ip.access was the next speaker who started his presentation with humorous note. His presentation was titled "Building the World’s Largest Residential Small-Cell network" but as he said he was very tempted to change the title to “How to Screw Up the World’s Largest Residential Small Cell Deployment”. His talk had lots of real life examples on where and how things can go wrong and how to make sure they dont. If they do, what lessons should be learnt. Some of these problems have been faced by me too in various test scenarios. It was a very interesting talk.

After the break we heard a presentation from Steve Brown of Telefonica O2 UK. The talk was a bit familiar for me (and my blog readers) as I have already blogged on similar information in the past. It was though new information for the audience and could see that they were enjoying this information. A lot of questions were asked after the presentation and also in the panel discussion at the end. There is some interesting new information that I will blog later on.

The final talk was by Iris Barcia of Keima who talked about "Small Cell Network Design".

Finally we had a panel discussion with lots of interesting questions. Once the discussions finished there were people discussing and debating issues among themselves for a long time. I am looking forward to the next event in January in London on the topic "Lets get real!" where we are hoping to be able to hear from some more operators/vendors on the deployment and rollout issues. More details available on the Cambridge Wireless page here.

'Hypervoice': The Future of voice - via @martingeddes

Interesting thought provoking presentation!

3D-Beamforming and 3D-MIMO

When I did the summary from Rel-12 workshop, one of the feature proposed by many companies was the feature on 3D MIMO/Beamforming. Here is a quick introduction from different presentations.

A presentation by China mobile lists the motivations and Challenges is embedded below:

LTE Evolution — Rel-12 and Beyond from Zahid Ghadialy

#LTEAsia 2012 Highlights - via Alan Quayle

A summary of LTE Asia 2012, slides and highlights via Alan Quayle blog.



Some of the interesting findings from the conference include:

• TD-LTE is gaining momentum, and its beyond WiMAX operators and China mobile, many APAC operators are considering it for unpaired spectrum and to efficiently meet the asymmetric capacity requirements of mobile broadband which is mainly download
• Software defined radio and self-organizing networks are proving critical to manage operational costs
• Single RAN is proving the best way to manage network performance
• Signaling is in a mess - what is the good of standards when it creates such a mess?
• IMS gaps continue - what is the good of standards when it doesn't meet basic migration needs?
• The SS7 guys have reinvented themselves as the Diameter guys
• Business model innovation - LTE is not just for mobile devices, LTE is for quad play and an interesting array of business applications
• The 3G network of many operators is congested - forcing the move to LTE
• CSFB (Circuit Switched Fall Back) works
• VoLTE testing / roaming / network issues remain - given voice remains by revenue the core service, our industry should be ashamed we're having so many problems with VoLTE
• A belief on OTT partnering, but not quantification on the OTT's willingness to pay for QoS (Quality of Service)
• Many operators have a question mark on the use of WiFi off-load - its not a technology issue rather one of economics and customer experience, LTE-A and small cells in hotspots appears to be the focus.

Briefly reviewing the slides shown below:

• LTE Data Points
• 96 Commercial LTE deployments mainly in the 1.8 and 2.8GHz bands
• APAC has 40% of LTE subscribers, likely to be the high growth region
• Drivers for LTE: Throughput, efficiency and low latency
• TD-LTE: 12 commercial deployments, 24 contracts and 53 Trials
• Streaming video dominates traffic on handheld devices, with YouTube being the top traffic generator at 27% of peak traffic
• South Korea Data Explosion
• South Korea has seen OTT explode, Kakao Talk 51 mins of usage per day
• 20 times smartphone growth in 2 years (28M in June 2012, 53% penetration)
• 60 times mobile data growth to 37TB per month in 2 years, 32% is from LTE devices
• LTE subs use 2.9GB per month compared to 3G sub on average use 1.2GB
• LTE subs reached 10M, 141% monthly growth
• Customer drive for LTE is speed (37%) and latest device (31%)
• Challenge Jan 2010 and Jan 2012 ARPU fallen from $48-$35 while data use risen from 180MB to 992MB
• Focus beyond voice, messaging and data into VAS: virtual goods (Korean thing), ICT (Information and Communication Technology) and cloud services / solutions (focus on enterprise)
• HK CSL Migration to LTE
• 3G is congested, LTE is not
• Key is LTE devices available, unlike the early 3G days
• Migrating customers away from unlimited plans to family and shared plans that deliver value
• LTE sub uses 2-5 times the data of 3G subs
• CSFB works
• Average speed seen is 20 Mbps
• Using Software Defined Radio, Single vendor RAN, Self-Organizing Networks
• Migration to LTE-A, small cells and WiFi where appropriate
• Starhub's migration to LTE (they launched LTE at the event)
• 50% of voice traffic is still on 2G
• Using AMR to re-farm 2G spectrum to LTE
• Site access is critical - drive to software defined radio to avoid site visits
• NTT DoCoMo's VoLTE Evolution
• 70% devices in portfolio are now LTE
• All smartphones support CSFB
• Drive to VoLTE is simply to switch off 3G voice (2G already off)
• BUT IMS has missing functionality / standards - migration from 3G to VoLTE is not easy - example of failing in standards on basic issues
• Yes: Example of innovative converged 4G operator in an developing market that uses web principles for service delivery
• Role of Mobile Identity in BYOD (Bring Your Own Device)
• BYOD is as significant a trend if APAC as any other market
• Provides a nice review of the approaches in managing BYOD
• LTE Quad-Play in Emerging Markets: TD-LTE case study
• Smartphone growth implications: Review of the signaling problem and mitigation strategies across 3G and LTE.  Highlights challenge current standards process 

Read the complete post here.

LTE: What is a Tracking Area

Even though I have known tracking area for a long time, the other day I struggled to explain exactly what it is. I found a good explanation in this new book 'An Introduction to LTE: LTE, LTE-Advanced, SAE and 4G Mobile Communications By Christopher Cox'. An extract from the book and Google embed is as follows:

The EPC is divided into three different types of geographical area, which are illustrated in Figure 2.6. (see Embed below).

An MME pool area is an area through which the mobile can move without a change of serving MME. Every pool area is controlled by one or more MMEs, while every base station is connected to all the MMEs in a pool area by means of the S1-MME interface. Pool areas can also overlap. Typically, a network operator might configure a pool area to cover a large region of the network such as a major city and might add MMEs to the pool as the signalling load in that city increases.

Similarly, an S-GW service area is an area served by one or more serving gateways, through which the mobile can move without a change of serving gateway. Every base station is connected to all the serving gateways in a service area by means of the S1-U interface. S-GW service areas do not necessarily correspond to MME pool areas.

MME pool areas and S-GW service areas are both made from smaller, non-overlapping units known as tracking areas (TAs). These are used to track the locations of mobiles that are on standby and are similar to the location and routing areas from UMTS and GSM.