NS-3 Simulation and Management of WiMAX and LTE Networks with NSDL

Eduardo M.D. Marques, Jorge J.F. Sousa, Paulo N.M. Sampaio Madeira Interactive Technologies Institute (M-ITI) University of Madeira (UMa) 9000-390 Funchal/Madeira, Portugal emails: emarques@uma.pt,jose.jorge.sousa@gmail.com, psampaio@uma.pt

KEYWORDS Network description, WiMAX, LTE, simulation, ns-3 ABSTRACT The WiMAX and LTE technologies promise some new possibilities to the interconnection of computers. The large bandwidth, distances supported and the use of wireless channels are important characteristics to new networks environments. The tools to the simulation and test of these technologies are still limited and, most of the times, are not simple to use. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the NSDL framework, proposed for the integration of dierent modeling, monitoring and simulation tools which can be applied for types of network scenarios and technologies. In particular, this paper also aims at describing all the process and steps for applying the NSDL Framework in order to carry out simulations with WiMAX and LTE wireless networks. INTRODUCTION The design and management of communication networks are related to dierent activities including the denition of network requirements, network planning, deployment, operation, maintenance, and, at last, monitoring and optimization. These activities are carried out within the network life cycle, and they can be further rened into more specic tasks. Due the heterogeneity of tasks and skills required within each activity there are several tools and platforms to support network management and its life cycle. This limitation in the network management increases the redundant work and, for each people within the process, there is a dierent perspective for the same network scenario. A particular scenario can be addressed such as the modeling, simulation and deployment of broadband technologies for providing mobile communication using the IEEE 802.16 - Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX) and the 3GPP Third Generation Partnership Project Long term Evolution (LTE). These technologies aim at providing mobile voice, video and data services by promoting low cost deployment and service models through Internet friendly architectures and

protocols. The IEEE 802.16 standard - Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX) - contains the specication of Physical (PHY) and Medium Access Control (MAC) layer for Broadband Wireless Access (BWA). This standard species the air interface for xed BWA systems supporting multimedia services in licensee and licensed exempt spectrum (IEEE802.16 (2004), Hasan (2007)). The current WiMAX release supports transfer rates up to 46 Mbps in downlink and 4 Mbps in uplink using 10MHz system bandwidth. The WiMAX system supports scalable system bandwidth using time division duplex (TDD). So it can use 3.5, 5, 7, 8.75 and 10 MHz as system bandwidth. Maximum coverage with the technology is 50 km for xed usage and up to 5 km for mobile usage. WiMAX focuses on nomadic mobility but it supports also vehicular speeds up to 120 kmph. WiMAX is a at, all IP-based architecture. The recent increase of mobile data usage and emergence of new applications such as MMOG (Multimedia Online Gaming), mobile TV, Web 2.0, streaming contents have motivated the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) to work on the Long-Term Evolution (LTE). LTE is a standard in the mobile network technology tree that previously realized the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSxPA network technologies that account for over 85% of all mobile subscribers. LTE is supposed to ensure 3GPPs competitive edge over other cellular technologies (Motorola (2007)). LTE has been set aggressive performance requirements that rely on physical layer technologies, such as, Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) and Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO) systems, Smart Antennas to achieve these targets. LTE supports peak data rates of 100 Mbps in downlink and 50 Mbps in uplink, both reached with 20 MHz spectrum (Erbele (2011)). When using MIMO techniques LTE can even reach up to 300 Mbit/s downlink data rates. It has a variable spectrum, which can be used with 1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 15 and 20 MHz. A cell can cover up to 100 km area [14] with slight degradation after 30 km and reach over 200 users per cell (with 5 MHz spectrum). LTE is optimized for low speeds like 0 - 15 kmph but it supports also speeds up to 350 kmph. Round-trip times below 10

Figure 1: NSDL Framework layered architecture ms can be accomplished [15]. In this case, dierent models, approaches and tools have been proposed in order to optimize and exploit the advantages of these technologies through the simulation (Piro et al. (2010), Erbele (2011) and Ball et al. (????)). Some of the existing solutions for the design and implementation of WiMAX and LTE technologies provide an approach for some specic issues and problems, limited to some specic domains, and, most of the times, having a scarce or incomplete documentation. It is also important to consider the functionalities provided by these solutions. Some of them are very limited in terms of number of functionalities available and have a very specic application. Others are based on a large set of models and provide a more complex analysis over a network. If all these solutions could be applied jointly in a coordinated way, they could provide a solid and helpful environment for optimizing the management of WiMAX/LTE networks. Nevertheless, the data formats used in general by these existing solutions are very distinct and, most of the times, incompatible. In order to provide a generic solution for promoting interoperability among dierent WiMAX/LTE network management tools, this paper presents a framework relying on the Network Scenarios Description Language (NSDL), which has been proposed as a common solution that can be applied to assist network managers with the optimization of the network during its life cycle. Figure 1 illustrates the layered organization of several components of the NSDL framework. The top and bottom layers represent the existing networks tools. The top layer represents the management tools to provide the modeling, monitoring and visualization of networks (e.g., GUIs such as, topology generators, operation and failures monitoring, statistics and results, etc). The bottom layer represents the network analysis tools, such as network simulators, management tools, security evaluation, etc. Actually, some of the existing management platforms support both bottom and upper layers; however, most of them are purpose-oriented and are present only in one of the layers. The NSDL representation represents a middleware layer to connect either layers or dierent networks tools. The GUIs may read and write the created network scenarios and, through specialized Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), the bottom layer tools are invoked to execute some operations over the network. In this paper we illustrate the uti-

lization of the NSDL framework to provide the network modeling and simulation of WiMAX/LTE networks. The remainder of paper is organized as follows: NSDL is introduced in Section 2. Section 3 introduces the concept of prole in NSDL, called an NS-3 prole. Section 4 demonstrates how a translation from an NSDL description to an NS-3 script can be obtained. Section 5 addresses a brief case study related to the existing WiMAX and LTE modules for NS-3. At last, Section 6 presents the main conclusions of this work. NETWORK SCENARIOS LANGUAGE DESCRIPTION

The purpose of the Network Scenario Description Language (NSDL) is to provide a vocabulary and a set of rules, both able to support the description of wired and wireless data networks and the information of the contexts, or domains, where those networks are used or evaluated. In NSDL not only the network topology with its objects and characteristics are described, but also the dierent context of use or evaluation that may occur over that network. This separation is a new approach to networks description. NSDL allows rst the description of the objects (and components) of the network, their relations and properties, and it also allows the separate description of the network concerning dierent utilization contexts, such as simulation, management, etc. The principles applied to the design of NSDL were (1) simplicity, which means the language has to be simple and clear not only to be manipulated by an application or tool, but also possible to be edited by a human user with a simple text editor; (2) denition of multiple abstraction levels, allowing to specify not only simple high level descriptions of a network scenario, but also, if needed, to have the possibility to create a very detailed description of all network scenario objects and its parameters; and (3) extensibilFigure 2: NSDL ity, implying that new objects le structure and parameters can always be incorporated in future descriptions. The use of a single language description in several moments of a network life cycle could be very advantageous. If the users responsible for the network are familiar with that language, they can easily understand the current state of the network, thus the management of the network is optimized. Further integration capabilities can also be achieved since developers of a network tool are able to add import and export capabilities from and

to NSDL, making their work interoperable with NSDL networks. Interoperability is indeed one important advantage of NSDL. If a user deploys several NSDL compliant tools, he can easily analyze a network using each one of them, thus obtaining integrated results. For instance, NSDL can be useful when the user needs to execute two similar simulations of the same network, with two dierent simulators. Also, we can consider the case where the user needs to make use of a particular function of a tool, normally not easily available due to the dierent network description languages applied by the tool, making the user to learn another language in order to implement his code in a dierent format. NSDL can be extended by adding new parameters and by the creation new objects over the already dened basic objects. For instance, NSDL can be extended to support the description of wireless sensor networks. From the basic object Node, we can dene a new node, designated Wireless Sensor Node, which will receive all node characteristics, and will add its components, such as, special interfaces and sensor networks protocols. The main goal of NSDL is to provide a rich description of the network objects and their parameters and also a description of the several network scenarios throughout the network life cycle. In this sense, the dened NSDL structure and parameters should also be rich enough to describe any type of data network and allow incorporating in its denition data to support future objects and new data networks. The technology underlying NSDL is XML (XML (2011)) due its richness and exibility. Indeed, XML provides the specication of clear denitions and has a set of available tools. Also, XML assures the validity of the NSDL principles: simplicity, abstraction and extensibility. An NSDL representation is an XML le with two basic elements (Figure 2): Network and Scenarios. The Network element contains the description of a network identifying its objects and its parameters. The Scenarios element may contain several descriptions, each one referring to a specic use, or context, to that network. The Network element is composed of Templates, Objects and Views. Since the Objects element contains the description of the network topology, it is the main component of the language. This element is composed of nodes, links and domains. Some other important, but not mandatory elements are Templates and Views. The Templates element is important to simplify the description of similar objects. The Views element is a mechanism applied to group network objects to be used in the scenarios. In the Scenarios element, two elements are introduced: Visualization and Simulation. The Visualization element provides additional information to enrich the network description, such as objects positioning in the GUIs and graphical data. All the parameters needed

to implement a particular simulation over the network using a generic or particular simulation tool is dened in the Simulation element. A last organization element present in the NSDL language is the prole. Briey, an NSDL prole is a set of NSDL objects and/or scenarios with some relation among them. Proles were dened in order to simplify the management of the several objects already dened, and the other objects still to be dened in the future, and; to make clearer the use of NSDL, providing a standard mechanism to select only the needed objects in a particular network domain scope. A last important advantage of the proles is the strengthening of the interoperability purpose of NSDL. The existence of proles will guide users to the use of the same objects, promoting the re-use or improvement of already dened elements, as an alternative to the denition of new network elements. The types of proles dened for NSDL were the Objects Proles and the Tools Proles. The rst type of prole enables the user to create groups of network elements, of any kind. As example, consider the Basic Objects Prole, the simpler prole in NSDL, with six basic objects. Another example is the Wireless prole containing all the wireless related network elements. It is also possible to dene a prole by the combination of other objects proles, besides the prole network elements. The second type of proles, the Tools Proles, adds to the network elements, the scenarios supported by a particular tool. An example is the NS-3 prole with its network elements and the visualization and simulation scenarios. Figure 3 illustrates the denition of several proles, including some of the proles stated as examples. In the next section a case study is presented to illustrate the utilization of the NSDL framework focusing in some wireless scenarios. DESCRIBING WITH NSDL WIMAX/LTE NETWORKS

As introduced in the previous section, an NSDL tool prole consists of a set of objects and scenarios with specic lexical and semantic rules in order to accommodate the language specication for a network tool. The tool proles already dened for NSDL are related to two simulation platforms: Network Simulator 2 (ns-2) (ns (2011)) and Network Simulator 3 (NS-3) (Henderson et al. (2008)). When a network scenario is described using NSDL, it is possible to translate these xml descriptions to a specic output script (e.g., OTcl (Wetherall et al. (1995)) for ns-2 and C++ (Stroustrup (1980)) for NS-3) and, consequently, that allow researchers to execute that scenario on the respective tool related to the dened NSDL prole. The illustration of the mapping process is detailed in Section 6. The NSDL prole for NS-3 includes the objects and the scenarios presented in Figure 3. A set of objects is illustrated as Network Ob-

Figure 3: Several examples of NSDL proles, both Network Objects proles and Tool prole (this last includes the scenarios) jects, composed of Generic Objects, Base TCP/IP Objects and Wireless Objects. The following NSDL Object proles were dened: Generic Objects Holds the highest level of abstraction for the various objects that are typically present in common network scenarios; Base TCP/IP Objects contains the well-known TCP/IP object, such as, Internet protocol, TCP and UDP transport protocols, along with other network elements, and; Wireless Objects - this group contains the specied wireless network domains: Wireless Fidelity (WiFi), WiMAX and LTE. An NSDL tool prole to be complete needs, besides the objects proles, one or more scenarios and, in the case of NS-3, the selected and dened scenarios were Visualization and Simulation. Notice that a special focus was given to the wireless approach when dening an NS-3 prole for NSDL, since NS-3 developers have been focusing their attention on these network solutions as well (Farooq and Turletti (2009), Piro et al. (2010), Krill and Boyko (2010)). Therefore, this case illustrates how NSDL describes specically the WiMAX and LTE objects. In a WiMAX environment the Base Station (BS) and Subscribed Station (SS) roles determine that a BS function is to transmit and manage exchanged ows between SSs and a SS is either a source or a destination of ows, so, the NSDL description should reect those characteristics. Figure 4 illustrates an NSDL description for both Base Station (BS) and Subscriber Station (SS) used in a WiMAX environment. The BS and SSs in our scenarios are simple nodes. The distinction between them occurs in the interface element (<wlan802.16>) and more precisely the <type> attribute. The BS <ipv4> element holds the IPv4 specications to congure a LAN Network, using the attributes <net.address/> and <net.mask/>. The <interface.id/> references the interface (<wlan802.16/>), which is optional if there is only one, but mandatory in case of having several interfaces. Thus, this ipv4 conguration will be performed by the BS, assigning IPv4 and the respective mask to the remaining nodes (i.e. the SS), as required by the NS-3 simulator. Optionally, a modulation type Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) 16/12 (<modulation.type/>) for signal is set on SSs. Similarly, Figure 5 describes Enhanced NodeB (eNB) and User Equipment (UE) congurations used in LTE networks. Herein it is possible to observe the similarity between both BS/eNB and SS/UE specications in terms of NSDL structure. Again for eNB, IPv4 is set for LAN purposes and <lte/> element only needs to know which kind of station has been dealt with (cong-

Figure 4: BS (node4) and SS (node5) sample conguration

Figure 6: NSDL to NS-3 Mapping process NSDL NS-3 prole). The rst two steps are the validations that will occur to verify the correctness of the Input File and they are Lexical and Semantic validation. The Lexical will verify if all objects and properties are correct. The Semantic will test if some dependencies and rules are fullled. These validations steps are performed with a set XML Schemas, each one with some particular validations. The last step is the File generation where an output le is created, making use of sequential template calls by an eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformation (XSLT) (XSLT (2011)) le that helps to carry out this action; The purpose of the template calls is to generate a correct sequence for a typical NS-3 script which is given by the following structure: 1. Inclusion of main NS-3 libraries; 2. Denition of eventual global variables (Realtime and CheckSum, for example); 3. Instantiation of Helpers to cover a set of possible scenarios (LteHelper, WimaxHelper, MeshHelper, etc.); 4. Denition of typical ports to be used by applications (UDPport = 9, TCPport = 50000); 5. Node(s) instantiation(s) and its specications (i.e. Computer for an instance); 6. Internet installation and global scenario routing (AODV, OLSR, DSDV, etc.); 7. Link(s) creation and parameterization set

Figure 5: eNB (node4) and UE (node5) sample conguration ured with parameter <type/>). In the case of UE cell (node5), a reference to the associated eNB is mandatory in order to register this UE cell to its corresponding eNB. This section presented the very basic conguration to the main nodes that will be object of study in the following Sections. The next section demonstrates how an NSDL conguration (as the ones depicted in Figures 4 and 5) can result in an NS-3 codication. MAPPING NSDL TO NS-3 The main goal of this section is to demonstrate how NSDL structures are successfully and correctly translated to the correspondent language behind the underlying NSDL tool prole. Figure 6 depicts the process of this translation, showing step by step which operations are used to handle the input le (i.e. an XML structure with existing NSDL tags of a certain prole, in this case,

8.

9. 10.

11. 12.

13.

14.

(P2PChannel, OfdmSimpleWimaxChannel, SpectrumChannel, etc.); Interface(s) denition (main devices that NS-3 script will include BaseStationNetDevice, EnbNetDevice, etc.); Node(s) Addressing (IPv4, IPv6); Application(s) denition along with its parameters (Servers) and respective schedule events (Start time, Stop time); PacketSink denition and its schedule events (Start time, Stop time); Simulation main attributes conguration (Simulation Start time, Stop time, simulator destructor, etc.); Visualization setting (allowed area for simulation existing node(s) and its (their) specication(s) concerning mobility model (denes typically spatial position and velocity), and; Output le(s) creation (Trace les (.tr), Pcap les (.pcap), etc.).

Exceptional cases are not included in this sequence in order to keep it minimally generic. For instance, Service Flows and Radio Bearers used in WiMAX and LTE environments respectively are called after step 11, following the structure provided by NS-3 examples (can be found in folder /src/<model>/examples of NS-3 installation folder). An NSDL le that includes specication(s) presented in Figures 4 and 5 will have the following output, when handled by the process described in Figure 6. Some considerations needed to be highlighted in this output code: IPv4 and IPv6 containers are instantiated to cover both kinds of addressing; According to Figures 7 and 8, IPv4 is only specied on BS/eNB for LAN sub netting; Inclusion of () token between excerpts of code is intended to make allusion to the eventual generated code omitted, due to presented NS-3 structure previously explained, and; In the current NSDL NS-3 prole, only ConstantPositionMobilityModel is foreseen to attach on scenario node(s). The next section will provide an example of an wireless scenario created in a graphical user interface and tested over the NSDL framework. CASE STUDY In order to provide a clear example of application of NSDL framework to the wireless domain, two network scenarios were dened with dierent types of nodes using the congurations depicted in both Figures 7 and

Figure 7: BS (node4) and SS (node5) translation to C++ 8 to reect WiMAX and LTE environments, respectively. Figure 9 illustrates the adopted topology, which was the same for both scenarios. These Figures also present which applications were used and their respective role (i.e. if server or client). Note that in Figure 9, the topology consists of 9 nodes where the central node plays a role of BS/eNB and the remaining nodes represent SSs/UEs to generate and receive data ows. Specically for WiMAX scenario, links are implemented using Orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) simple data access (NS-3 class SimpleOfdmWimaxChannel) with default denition (i.e. without propagation loss model). Contrarily, links used in the LTE scenario consist in a Single Spectrum model using a single frequency for data transmission (using class SingleModelSpectrumChannel) with default conguration as well. Flows generated consist in 2 FTP, 1 CBR and 1 Pareto. FTP and CBR ows use ConstantVariable seed whereas Pareto ow uses ParetoVariable with 1 as mean value and value 2 for shape. Each ow is managed either by a Service Flow (on WiMAX) or a Radio Bearer (on LTE). Due the NS-3 limitations presented in both WiMAX and LTE modules (Farooq and Turletti (2009), Piro et al. (2010)) there are some aspects needed to be highlighted as well: For WiMAX scenario, only 1 Service Flow (ow manager) peer SS is allowed;

 For LTE scenario, currently only downlink scheduler is implemented which means no uplink ows to eNB is possible with the present module. Since the main focus of this paper is to introduce the NSDL description and the NS-3 implementation for WiMAX and LTE, the results of the simulation are not further exploited. Moreover, according to previous limitations, no viable comparison between both technologies can be achieved with the current NS-3 modules, but some useful data can be obtained as shown in Table 1. Data presented in this table is obtained using Flow Monitor module (Carneiro et al. (2009)) integrated in the existing NS-3 ocial version. The only variable not directly extracted from Flow Monitor is Throughput, in Mbps, which is calculated with the formula (1).

T hroughput = RxB 4 8/1024/1024/time

(1)

Figure 8: eNB (node4) and UE (node5) translation to C++

Where RxB represents the amount of bytes received by a destination node, value recorded by Flow Monitor. Note that ows 1 to 4 are the current ows generated by explicit OnOApplications used in the NS-3 scripts. Flows 1 and 2 work under TCP protocol (2 FTP applications) while ows 3 and 4 are transmitted over UDP protocol (CBR and Pareto applications). Flows 5 and 6 are Acknowledgement signals for source node, derived from ows 1 and 2. The results obtained show that observed delay values are acceptable for both technologies, with a slightly better performance for LTE. Jitter values in WiMAX scenario are unacceptable, in particular when considering that ows 3 and 4 may represent Video conferences, VoIP transmission which is impossible to establish a good performance. Once again LTE presents better jitter values than WiMAX. Calculated throughput is higher for LTE in all ows comparatively to WiMAX. These results reect the fact that uplink for LTE environment is not available yet which means WiMAX ows are transmitted twice while LTE ows are transmitted directly from eNB to UEs. Although, other studies which tested both technologies gave advantage for LTE, the observed differences were minimal (Ball et al. (????), Erbele (2011), Motorola (2007) and Raut (2009)). CONCLUSION The purpose of this work was to illustrate the deployment of the NSDL framework in order to support the life cycle of wireless network scenarios (modeling, simulation and analysis) based on existing simulators, such as NS-3. The process of obtaining the C++ script respecting the structure of an NS-3 simulation was introduced which illustrated the translation of an XML network description to a specic C++ simulation code.

Figure 9: WiMAX and LTE network scenario topology and its applications

Flow ID 1 2 3 4 5 6

First Trans. Packet (s) LTE WiMax 0,200 0,200 0,200 0,200 0,208 0,208 0,826 0,730 0,203 3,216 0,204 3,216

Table 1: Simulation results of a WiMAX and LTE NS-3 scenario Last Received Delay Sum Jitter Sum Last Packet Packet (s) (ms) (ms) Delay (ms) LTE WiMax LTE WiMax LTE WiMax LTE WiMax 7,993 3,216 2379 16 296 0 2 16 7,994 3,590 3331 1479 298 68 3 41 7,992 7,998 1426 10267 298 2837 1 8 6,701 7,422 628 6457 87 1850 4 12 7,994 0,000 479 0 2 0 1 0 7,995 3,812 479 916 2 306 1 22

Throughput (Mbps) LTE WiMax 16,023 0,001 16,023 1,374 15,672 14,815 4,482 9,245 0,582 0,000 0,582 0,044

The simulation process used the NSDL framework, and, although many of the characteristics of the simulation were not described, the example presented some new tools provided by the NSDL framework: a new application to the modeling of NS-3 scenarios and, more important, the automated generation of NS-3 simulation code. A rst advantage of the framework is the simpler modeling environment for the construction of wireless network scenarios. Either using a Graphical User Interface or through the edition of an XML le, a user can achieve a description of a network simulation scenario and, in the case of NS-3 simulator used in this work, a user does not need to write C++ code for many scenarios. Another important advantage of this framework is its interoperability capabilities that are enabled by the possibility of execution of simulation scenarios in dierent tools. Some initial scenarios are already generated for both ns-2 and NS-3. As future works, the NSDL Framework is growing to accommodate the translation other network scenarios and to interoperate with other tools. A new network domain considered to extend NSDL is the Wireless Sensor Networks. At last, an on-going work is the development of a Virtualization scenario, making possible to execute simulations through the utilization of a virtual environment and virtual machines. REFERENCES Ball C.; Hindelang T.; Kambourov I.; and Eder S., ???? Spectral eciency assessment and radio performance comparison between LTE and WiMAX. In PIMRC. IEEE, 16. Carneiro G.; Ricardo M.; and Fortuna P., 2009. FlowMonitor - a network monitoring framework for the Network Simulator 3 (NS-3). In Proceedings of ICST NSTools 2009. Pisa, Italy. Erbele D., 2011. LTE vs. WiMAX 4th generation telecommunication networks. Farooq J. and Turletti T., 2009. An IEEE 802.16 WiMAX module for the NS-3 simulator. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Simula-

tion Tools and Techniques. Simutools 09. ISBN 978963-9799-45-5, 8:18:11. Hasan M.A., 2007. Performance Evaluation of WiMAX/IEEE 802.16 OFDM Physical Layer. Masters thesis. Henderson T.R.; Lacage M.; Riley G.F.; Dowell C.; and Kopena J.B., 2008. Network Simulations with the ns3 Simulator. SIGCOMM08 Demos. Code available: http://www.nsnam.org/releases/ns-3.1.tar.bz2. IEEE802.16, 2004. IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems. IEEE Std 80216-2004 (Revision of IEEE Std 80216-2001). doi:10.1109/IEEESTD.2004.226664. Krill A. and Boyko P., 2010. IEEE 802.11s Mesh Networking NS-3 Model. http://www.nsnam.org/ workshops/wns3-2010/dot11s.pdf. Motorola, 2007. Long Term Evolution (LTE): A Technical Overview. ns, 2011. The Network Simulator NS-2. http://www. isi.edu/nsnam/ns/. Piro G.; Member S.; Boggia G.; Boggia G.; and Camarda P., 2010. Simulating LTE Cellular Systems: an Open Source Framework. System, 60, no. 2, 116. Raut S., 2009. WiMAX or LTE: Which Technology to Adopt? A Comprehensive Comparative Study. Communications of the IBIMA, vol. 9, 264269. Stroustrup B., 1980. The C++ Programming Language. http://www.cplusplus.com/. Wetherall D.; Wetherall D.; Lindblad C.J.; and Lindblad C.J., 1995. Extending Tcl for Dynamic ObjectOriented Programming. In In Proceedings of the Tcl/Tk Workshop. XML, 2011. Extensible Markup Language. http://www. w3.org/XML/. XSLT, 2011. eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformation. http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt/.