Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A TC
illion M
arly Ye
www.greenpacket.com
WHITEPAPER
Abstract
Of late, network congestion is one of the most talked about topic in the telecoms industry has is attributed to the overwhelming growth in data consumption. According to Cisco, all around the world, mobile data trafc is expected to double every year through 2014. With such massive demands for data, industry stakeholders are looking at various measures to cope with the increase and mitigate congestion issues. There is an assortment of solutions to combat congestion, ranging from high investment to cost-effective and short-term to long-term. In this paper, Greenpacket puts forth a cost-effective, immediate and long-term solution to network congestion data ofoading. We examine a typical cellular operators network structure, congestion points and total cost of ownership (TCO) and next, outline a calculation model (based on an Asia Pacic cellular operator) to demonstrate how much operators can save by ofoading data to a secondary network such as WiFi. Data ofoading directly impacts 36.5% of a networks TCO. As such, operators can potentially* save USD 14.4 million/year or USD 72 million over 5 years through data ofoading.
*Cost savings suggested in this paper are based on a network of 7,000 Node Bs.
WHITEPAPER
Contents
Can Somebody Dene Network Congestion? Where Network Congestion Occurs? Network Upgrade: Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Breakdown Data Ofoading: TCO Study and Calculation Cost (OPEX) Savings Find Out How Much You Can Save Through Data Ofoading! 01 04 11 13 20 22
WHITEPAPER
WHITEPAPER
01
As such, Operators need to continuously re-design and optimize their infrastructure to handle different trafc patterns for example a college area would generate high trafc as gaming, video streaming and social networking are associated with students lifestyle. On the contrary, an industrial area demands less trafc as the internet would be used primarily for email correspondence and web browsing.
Maximum Users/cell
60**
*Estimated to be about 60% of theoretical speed in view of environmental conditions and interference that affects network speed. **Infrastructure vendors define a range of 48-64 users/cell as bottleneck of an HSxPA base station.
WHITEPAPER
02
Hence, depending on the intended bandwidth operators wish to extend to their subscribers, the network deployment has to be planned accordingly. For example, if an operator intends to offer a bandwidth of 256Kbps/user, a HSPA+ 21.1Mbps site has to be deployed (on assumption that the cell hosts a maximum capacity of 60 users). Alternatively, i. Operators can reduce the forecast of intended active users/cell to 30 and ii. Double the number of cells to cater for that trafc or iii. Increase the number of sectors per base station for similar throughput. Theoretically, this means that the operator can deploy either method: a. HSPA+ 21.1Mbps via S1/1/1 b. HSPA 14.4Mbps via S2/2/2 c. HSDPA 7.2Mbps via S2/2/2/2/2/2
WHITEPAPER
03
RAN
E1
CN
PSTN ISDN
Node B
E1
Node B
E1
Node B
E1
MSC/VLR
GMSC
Node B
HLR/AUC
E1
Node B
RNC SS7
E1
Node B
SCP
SCE SMS
E1
Node B
E1
RNC
Node B
E1
Internet, Intranet
E1
Node B
Node B
E1
Node B
Other PLMN
E1
Node B
Source: Greenpacket
Figure 1: A typical HSxPA network diagram
WHITEPAPER
04
17% 33% 16% Currently a restraint on mobile services Will be a restraint on mobile services in the next 12 months Won't be a restraint on mobile services for the foreseeable future Don't know 34%
Core Network
SGSN
Iu-PS
MSC
Iu-CS
RNS RNC
Iub Iub
Iur
RNS RNC
Iub Iub
Node B
Node B
Node B
Node B
Figure 3 depicts a simplied HSxPA network diagram emphasizing transmission paths. A typical transmission can appear more complicated than shown here (possible looping from one Node B to another in a star, tree or ring topology, conversion from TDM to IP, going through aggregation points or hub base station). However, for the purpose of examining congestion at transmission level, we will consider transmission from an interface point of view, encompassing Iub, Iur, Iu-CS and Iu-PS.
WHITEPAPER
05
The routing of voice using Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) ows from Iub to Iu-CS, accessing the Media Gateway (MGW/MSC) and possibly terminates at a PSTN or another mobile network. Since voice service is measured at 12.2kbps and does not consume much bandwidth (in comparison to data), we can easily discard the routing of lu-CS in this TCO calculation. The primary concern is focused on data that routes from Iub, Iu-PS and possibly Iur. While data travels predominantly on the Iu-PS interface, most Iu-PS channels today are equipped with STM-1, STM-4 or FE/GE which are well able to support the capacity of hundreds of Mbps. Unfortunately, this is not the case with Iub as a signicant number of Node Bs today still uses E1 or T1 (in US) and STM-1, whereas less than 5% of operators have migrated to a full FE conguration. E1/T1 channels emerge as bottlenecks when the HSPA network grows from 3.6Mbps to 14.4Mbps onwards, resulting in congestion issues.
Transmission Cost
It is common for a HSxPA operator to initially embark deployment using E1/T1 with a 2Mbps/line. In rural areas, two to three E1s are needed in a 3.6Mbps per cell, three cell conguration site. On the other hand, an urban location with a similar cell setup would require four to ve E1s per site. As the network matures with more active users, operators are required to add more E1/T1 of their own or rent them. Transmission rental differs signicantly from one country to another and normally can consume as much as 20-30% of total cost of ownership. Today, base stations support a maximum of 8E1 IMA, which has a capacity of 16Mbps. If this is insufcient, an upgrade to ber transmission (STM-1) is necessary. As the network gets upgraded to HSPA+ network using IP, operators may then need to convert their Iub transmission to Ethernet (FE/GE) as similar approach done by operators such as Etisalat, E-Mobile and Starhub.
15% 28% Currently a restraint on mobile services Will be a restraint on mobile services in the next 12 months Won't be a restraint on mobile services for the foreseeable future Don't know 36%
21%
WHITEPAPER
06
During the early stages of network planning, the task of forecasting CAPEX on Node B based on the number of sites is straightforward. However, the actual cost of Node B does not end here, instead it will undergo constant upgrades and over the next 5 years, the cost spent on upgrades might exceed the cost of purchasing the Node B itself. The prime reasons for these upgrades are contributed by an increase in capacity requirements and in some extreme situations, congestion. When does a Node B experience congestion and demand an upgrade? Network upgrades can be conducted using two methods: i. Base station capacity upgrade (involves channel element, power transmit, multi-carrier and HSPA codes) ii. Network upgrade (by increasing sites)
3.6Mbps
Assuming this is a HSDPA S1/1/1 network site Bandwidth capacity = 3.6 Mbps (practically, ~ 2 Mbps/sector)
3.6Mbps
Node B
3.6Mbps
Result = Congestion
WHITEPAPER
07
A base station upgrade generally involves several areas channel element, code, power, and multi carrier as shown in Figure 6.
NODE B
Carrier
Transmission Code
Figure 7 shows the Orthogonal Variable Spreading Factor (OVSF) code tree. At SF=16, 15 HS=PDSCH codes can be used for HSDPA purposes. As HS-PDSCH codes can range from 1 to 15, the remaining codes will be utilized by R99 and AMR. Different applications will accept different spreading, for example for voice AMR, the codes can be further spread to SF=256.
SF = 1 SF = 2 SF = 4 SF = 8
15 HS-PDSCH Codes
SF = 16 SF = 32 SF = 64 SF = 128
AMR 12.2kbps
SF = 256
X - blocked by lower code in tree Figure 7: Orthogonal Variable Spreading Factor (OVSR) code tree
WHITEPAPER
08
When code congestion occurs, a typical HSDPA solution is to increase the speed from 3.6Mbps to 7.2Mbps or 14.4Mbps (or in other words increase the HSDPA codes). Table below shows the corresponding code to speed. *Today, all HSPA Node Bs support 16QAM modulation. HSPA+ requires 64QAM modulation. Modulation
QPSK 16QAM
Table 1: Correspoding code rates to speed Note: Adding codes come at a price as a trade off of lesser codes occurs for R99 and AMR. This will create a problem in locations where voice and R99 are still dominant, leading to other congestion issues. Code upgrades are purely done via software licenses from infrastructure vendors, with typical license prices based on ve codes per base station.
Multi Carrier
Solving code congestion may lead to congestion on the carrier level. With more codes dedicated to HSDPA, there will be lesser codes available for R99. Instead of allowing the trade off, a popular strategy for operators is to add an additional carrier per cell (from S1/1/1 to S2/2/2 of S3/3/3). This carrier overlaying strategy means that technically each cell can have up to 15 + 15 codes for HSDPA and R99. Depending on the operators deployment strategy, they may use both cells for HSPA (each with 10 codes) or employ 15 codes on the rst carrier, while the second carrier is used solely for R99. Carrier upgrading mainly involves software, however sometimes hardware changes are required depending on limitations on the base station. Older versions of base stations support transmit receive unit (TRU) modules, where each TRU only holds a single carrier. Todays technology allows multiple TRUs to be embedded within a single module, which is also known as multi radio unit (MRU). Each MRU consists of multiple power ampliers (PA) that can support up to two or sometimes even four or six carriers per hardware module.
Power
Once code and carrier congestion are resolved, operators might face insufcient power problems. As more users are allowed to to connect to a single cell, each cell would then need more power to transmit and overcome interference. As coverage and capacity are co-related and often compensates one another, the natural outcome will be a shrinking cell coverage. Users at the cell edge will need more power, leading to insufcient power at the base station. Depending on the MRU power transmit capacity, operators may choose to use the power allocation differently. For example, with a MRU of 2 PA capability and maximum power of 40W per MRU, an operator may opt to transmit at 20W + 20W to cater for two carriers per cell. This may not be applicable to another operator who prefers to transmit at 40W per cell to achieve a further cell edge. Therefore, two MRU modules are required. Infrastructure vendors charge for upgrades in terms of MRU boards and a possible license fee to operate the carrier splitting.
WHITEPAPER
09
WHITEPAPER
10
WHITEPAPER
11
NETWORK TCO
CAPEX (27%)
OPEX (73%)
Purchasing (14%)
Equipment Transmission Equipment Accessory Antenna 5.4% 1.4% 5.4% 1.4%
Deployment (13%)
Site Acquisition Installation Civil Works 2.7% 2.7% 8.1%
Operations (60%)
Site Rental Power Consumption Leased Line Hardware & Software 21.9% 7.3% 21.9% 7.3%
Maintainance (13%)
Maintenance Man Power 11.0% 3.7%
Systems
WHITEPAPER
12
WHITEPAPER
13
NETWORK TCO
CAPEX (27%)
OPEX (73%)
Purchasing (14%)
Equipment Transmission Equipment Accessory Antenna
100
Deployment (13%)
Site Acquisition Installation Civil Works 2.7% 2.7% 8.1%
Operations (60%)
Site Rental Power Consumption Leased Line Hardware & Software 21.9% 7.3% 21.9% 7.3%
Maintainance (13%)
Maintenance Man Power 11.0% 3.7%
~60%
~13%
80
60
40
20
~13% ~14%
Purchasing
Deployment
Operation
Maintenance
TOTAL
Source: Greenpacket
Figure 11: TCO breakdown of an Asia Pacific 3G Operator
Network Dimensioning
In this study, the following areas are considered for costs calculation. Transmission will have an impact on Iub, Iu-PS and Iur, but to simplify the calculation, only Iub transmission savings will be considered. RAN upgrades will have an impact on both Node B and RNC, but again for handling simpler illustration, we will calculate Node Bs cost only. Our dimensioning tools were used to study an operator in Asia Pacic and these data were obtained: i. The operators network scale (migration path from HSPA to HSPA+) over the next 5 years ii. Trafc proles such as user habits and peak hours iii. Total number of Node Bs expected over ve years iv. Equipment vendor (as equipment dimensioning from one vendor to another differs)* From the dimensioning tools, trafc that will occur during peak hours and its cost over the next ve years is generated. Monetary savings are then calculated comparing the trafc and costs against ofoading to a WiFi network. *Name and details of infrastructure vendor withheld to protect its interests
WHITEPAPER
14
Input
HSPA Evolution Network Scale & Node B Distribution Traf c Pro le Subscriber Pro le WiFi Network Price of Upgrade Equipment Vendor Assumptions
Iu-CS
UTRAN RNC
Output
Transmission
Node B
BG, DNS, DHCP, Firewall, Router...
Output
SGSN CS CN GGSN CG
PS Signaling PS Traf c
CS Signalling CS Traf c
PS CN
HLR
Source: Greenpacket
Figure 12: Network factors considered by Greenpacket for data offloading calculation
Source: Greenpacket
Figure 13: Input parameters for data offloading calculation
HSPA Evolution
The selected cellular operator has a ve year network evolution plan, moving from 3G (3.6Mbps) to HSPA (7.2Mbps) and eventually to HSPA+ as shown in Figure 14.
WHITEPAPER
15
Initial Deployment
Phase 1 Node B 3.6Mbps with priority on R99 (10 codes)
HSPA Stage
7.2Mbps on Hotspots, migration to STM-1, 3.6Mbps on less congested area
HSPA+ Stage
Maintain old Node B to support HSPA, new Node B deploy on HSPA+
7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Dense Urban Urban Rural Total Sites 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Figure 15: Distribution of sites by dense urban, urban and rural areas
Traffic Profile
Site Conguration
Site Configuration
HSDPA 3.6Mbps/cell Single Carrier HSDPA 7.2Mbps/cell Single Carrier HSDPA 14.4Mbps Dual Carrier HSPA+ 21Mbps Dual Carrier Figure 16: Site configuration over 5 years
2008
100% 0% 0% 0%
2009
60% 40% 0% 0%
2010
20% 80% 0% 0%
2011
0% 20% 30% 50%
2012
0% 0% 0% 100%
WHITEPAPER
16
Population Breakdown
Figure 17: Breakdown of population in dense urban, urban and rural areas
Subscriber Profile
Current and Projected 3G Active Subscribers
3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 Dense Urban Urban Rural Total 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2008
75% 10% 15%
2009
60% 10% 30%
2010
50% 10% 40%
2011
40% 5% 55%
2012
30% 5% 65%
WHITEPAPER
17
WiFi Network
12%
53%
35%
Figure 20: WiFi networks in dense urban, urban and rural areas
Price of Upgrade
Transmission cost in Asia Cost of New Codes, Carriers and Sites
$1,600 $1,400 $1,200 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 $0 E1 (2Mbps) STM-1 (10Mbps) GE (2Mbps) GE (4Mbps) GE (10Mbps) 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 5 codes 1 carrier New Site
Network Assumptions
For this TCO study and calculation, the following network assumptions are made: 1. Transmission is rented, hence it falls under OPEX. 2. Site increment is based on 1,000 sites/year to improve coverage and capacity (90% coverage of 300,000km2 area). 3. Subscriber growthis projected at 50% per year. 4. Network is based on UMTS2100.
WHITEPAPER
18
E1 is used to provide 3.6Mbps; STM-1 for 7.2Mbps, FE for 14.4Mbps and 21.1Mbps. All Node Bs can support 2 IMA groups (16E1) and capacity is ready. All Node Bs comprises 3 sectors. 7.2Mbps is single carrier (1 HSPA+ and 1 R99), 14.4Mbps dual carrier (1 HSPA, 1 for R99) Maximum deployment of 2 carriers. Transmission is calculated based on DL trafc only. 20% transmission buffer is allowed for Capacity Planning. WiFi ofoad for HSPA + R99 PS only. All Node Bs are upgradable to HSPA 14.4Mbps (15 codes, 64QAM, 2 carrier) but not upgradeable to HSPA+ (which requires Enhanced CELL_FACH, CPC (Continues Packet Connectivity). 14. MBMS and HSUPA are not considered within 5 years roadmap (to simplify calculation of CE). 15. All Node Bs purchased supports HSPA+ Phase I 21.1Mbps (not HSPA+ Phase II 28.8Mbps). 16. HSDPA does not consume CE.
WHITEPAPER
19
Savings
Node B Savings
For Node B, Greenpacket calculated the price difference for SF Codes, Transmission Power and Channel Element (CE). Price Difference for Code and Power Upgrade
USD (mil) $45 $40 $35 $30 $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 USD (mil) $7 $6 $5 $4 $3 $2 $1 $0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Total Savings (Code, Power & CE) of ~43.78 mil over 5 years for 7000 Node Bs
WHITEPAPER
20
Total Savings
NETWORK TCO
CAPEX (27%)
OPEX (73%)
Purchasing (14%)
Equipment Transmission Equipment Accessory Antenna 5.4% 1.4% 5.4% 1.4%
Deployment (13%)
Site Acquisition Installation Civil Works 2.7% 2.7% 8.1%
Operations (60%)
Site Rental Power Consumption Leased Line Hardware & Software 21.9% 7.3% 21.9% 7.3%
Maintainance (13%)
Maintenance Man Power 11.0% 3.7%
Node B (Codes, Power & CE) Savings of 4% (of OPEX) or 0.3% (of TCO)
WHITEPAPER
21
Find Out How Much You Can Save Through Data Offloading!
Greenpacket welcomes you to embark on the ofoading journey today and enjoy tremendous cost savings on your network operations. At Greenpacket, we understand the demands placed on Operators like you. That is why our solutions are designed to give you the capacity to constantly deliver cutting-edge offerings without exhausting your capital and operating expenditures. With Greenpacket, limitless freedom begins now!
Free Consultation
If you would like a free consultation on how you can start saving network cost through data ofoading, feel free to contact us at marketing.gp@greenpacket.com kindly quote the reference code, WP0710DL when you contact us. As part of the consultation, we will be happy to walk-through your networks TCO and determine how much savings you would gain by ofoading data.
WHITEPAPER
22
References
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Telecoms: At the starting line The race to mobile broadband by Gareth Jenkins and Jussi Uskola, Deutsche Bank. Towards a Protable Mobile Data Business Model by Bridgewater Systems Sharing the Load by Bridgewater Systems Mobile Broadband: Still Growing But Realism Sinks In by Telecom Asia (January/February 2010) Mobile Communications 2008: Green Thinking Beyond TCO Consideration, Kevin Li, In-Stat
WHITEPAPER
23
San Francisco Kuala Lumpur Singapore Shanghai Taiwan Sydney Bahrain Bangkok Hong Kong
Associate Member
Copyright 2001-2010 Green Packet Berhad. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed, stored in a retrieval system, or translated into any language, in any form by any means, without the written permission of Green Packet Berhad. Green Packet Berhad reserves the right to modify or discontinue any product or piece of literature at anytime without prior notice.