One of the important aspects to consider is that carrier aggregation should allow aggregation of not only the existing bands, but also bands that are introduced in future, e.g., 3.5 GHz band, etc. While existing bands already have certain deployments, new deployments can be considered for new bands that are introduced. Since introduction of new bands is done in a release independent fashion, considerations for such future bands are essential already in Rel-10. When higher frequencies such as 3.5 GHz are considered, path loss can be significant (e.g., 4-10 dB difference in link budget) when compared to 2 GHz. Hence, the most efficient deployment may not be to stick with the traditional macro-overlaying approach. Carrier aggregation should allow more flexible use of such new bands, since coverage and mobility can be ascertained by the existing band deployments, e.g., 2 GHz.
Picture below shows some of the potential deployment scenarios for carrier aggregation. Note that the scenarios listed are non-exhaustive. For example, other scenarios using repeaters and femto cells may be considered. Also note that F2 > F1.
Scenario 1
* F1 and F2 cells are co-located and overlaid, providing nearly the same coverage
* Both layers provide sufficient coverage and mobility can be supported on both layers.
* Likely scenario when F1 and F2 are of the same band, e.g., 2 GHz, 800 MHz, etc.
* It is expected that aggregation is possible between overlaid F1 and F2 cells.
Scenario 2
* F1 and F2 cells are co-located and overlaid, but F2 has smaller coverage due to larger path loss
* Only F1 provides sufficient coverage and F2 is used to provide throughput. Mobility is performed based on F1 coverage.
* Likely scenario when F1 and F2 are of different bands, e.g., F1 = {800 MHz, 2 GHz} and F2 = {3.5 GHz}, etc.
* It is expected that aggregation is possible between overlaid F1 and F2 cells.
Scenario 3
* F1 and F2 cells are co-located but F2 antennas are directed to the cell boundaries of F1 so that cell edge throughput is increased
* F1 provides sufficient coverage but F2 potentially has holes, e.g., due to larger path loss. Mobility is based on F1 coverage.
* Likely scenario when F1 and F2 are of different bands, e.g., F1 = {800 MHz, 2 GHz} and F2 = {3.5 GHz}, etc.
* It is expected that F1 and F2 cells of the same eNB can be aggregated where coverage overlap.
Scenario 4
* F1 provides macro coverage and on F2 Remote Radio Heads (RRHs) are used to provide throughput at hot spots
* Mobility is performed based on F1 coverage.
* Likely scenario when F1 and F2 are of different bands, e.g., F1 = {800 MHz, 2 GHz} and F2 = {3.5 GHz}, etc.
* It is expected that F2 RRE cells can be aggregated with the underlying F1 macro cells.
Scenario 5
* Similar to scenario #2, but frequency selective repeaters are deployed so that coverage is extended for one of the carrier frequencies
Scenarios supported in Rel-10 time frame
* For DL, all scenarios are supported in Rel-10
* For UL, scenario 4 and 5 are not supported in Rel-10
Source: R2-100531 CA deployment scenario NTT DOCOMO
