Nokia Networks

Nokia Outdoor 3G/LTE Small

Cells Deployment Strategy:
The Race to the Pole

Contents

1. Introduction

2.

Drivers, Needs and Market Expectations

3.

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Opportunities

4.

Driving and Managing Value of Small Cells

10

5. Deployment considerations
for Outdoor Small Cells

13

6.

 fficient Radio & Management Solutions

E
for Outdoor Small Cells

15

6.1 Integration of Small Cells and Macro;

Distibuted or centralized RAN

16

7.

 fficient Transport Solutions

E
for Outdoor Small Cells

18

7.1 Wired transport

20

7.2 Wireless transport

22

8.

Conclusion

26

9.

Abbreviations

Page 2

27

networks.nokia.com

1. Introduction
Within this paper we examine how outdoor small cells can contribute,
as part of a carefully coordinated deployment strategy, to meeting the
growing data traffic demand in telecommunications while facilitating
a 25x reduction in the total cost of ownership for each carried bit
(TCO/bit). A combination of macro cell upgrades complemented
by 3G and LTE small cells, both indoors and outdoors, is capable of
fulfilling anticipated future capacity and service quality demands.
Outdoor small cells are required for deployment primarily in dense
urban areas, with their deployment levels depending significantly on
the service level that operators need to provide to their customers
at given locations. While indoor larger locations such as malls, tube/
train stations and enterprises would require a dedicated indoor small
cell deployment, an outdoor street level small cell network can also
help operators provide indoor penetration through up to three interior
walls in the customer trading floor area of the shops, restaurants and
cafes in that street. In effect, deploying small cell at street level would
be faster, cheaper and much simpler compared to using a small cell for
every indoor location.
In summary, viewing outdoor small cell sites simply as slimmeddown macro cell sites does not provide a commercially feasible
approach for new deployments. Instead, operators need to adopt a
solution-focused, holistic network deployment mindset. They need
to make use of opportunities for cost reduction within all areas of
network deployment, from professional services through to radio
and transport technology optimization. In all scenarios however, the
macro site remains the key asset for operators, with outdoor small
cells complementing these main sites to ensure required coverage,
capacity and service targets can be achieved cost-effectively.

Page 3

networks.nokia.com

2. Drivers, Needs and Market

Expectations
Outdoor small cells are low power 3G or LTE base stations which
operate in pico class (typically 1-2 W per antenna) or micro class
(typically 5-10 W per antenna). Outdoor small cells complement both
macro-level wide-area solutions for coverage and capacity, and are
cost-effective in-building wireless solutions. Outdoor small cells are
particularly useful in hot zone/hot spot areas with high traffic and
QoS demands, where users are located outdoors or near an outside
wall indoors and where local street topologies or building structures
prevent operators from making full use of roof-top high-power radio
solutions. Nokia and Networks predicts that by 2016, 80-90% of
outdoor small cells will be deployed in urban areas, with the remaining
locations being primarily suburban deployments - rural deployments
are expected to constitute a negligible percentage.
Nokia Networks has found that in several operator cases, and in
urban areas, high busy hour traffic densities can be cost-effectively
addressed via macro sites, while still maintaining high throughput and
QoS targets - for example, 300-600 GB/km2/day with 3G only, and
over 1 TB/km2/day with a combined 3G and LTE offering.
Urban studies with several leading operators with limited spectrum
options have concluded that a macro-only upgrade can typically
offer up to four times the traffic and QoS growth compared to 2012
volumes. The most critical areas are the densest urban hotspots
and outdoor small cells are being deployed in the busiest of these
hotspots globally.

Page 4

networks.nokia.com

For most operators, extending the existing macro network can sustain
traffic growth for another two to three years. From 2014-2015, a
typical mobile broadband network will, in high traffic locations, need
to be complemented with outdoor small cells. The added capacity of
outdoor small cells should ensure sufficient overall capacity for an
additional couple of years (up to ~10x traffic growth compared
to 2012).
Adding further capacity using indoor small cells seems to be inevitable
beyond a tenfold traffic increase. Although outdoor small cells are
important for hot spot and hot zone areas, they may be insufficient as
a stand-alone solution for provisioning very high capacity and QoS to
indoor users, especially when deep in-building penetration is needed.
The outdoor solution would in such cases need to be complemented
by a significant amount of in-building wireless installations as traffic
grows much beyond ten times the base value. When indoor traffic in
dense areas is well-defined and fully-confined, operators may in some
cases be able to progress directly to deploying in-building wireless
systems, supplemented only by macro-level outdoor upgrades and
later, outdoor small cells.
While this paper takes a look at the outdoor small cell case, we expect
many operators to probably address both the busiest indoor and
outdoor hot zones simultaneously where these are most required.
For even higher traffic growth scenarios, a significant enhancement of
spectrum will also be needed on top of a densification of the deployed
small cell layer. Figure 1 shows such a phased deployment, based on a
typical network scenario.
1000

Fig. 1. Typical deployment phases

for small cells (based on Nokia
Networks studies).

Traffic forecast - typical

Traffic forecast - aggressive

100

10

Page 5

Macro
Evol.

2012

2014

Pico/
Micro

2016

Indoor small
cells incl. WiFi

2018

2020

networks.nokia.com

3. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)

Opportunities
Operators are today planning how to deploy heterogeneous networks for
sufficient capacity, end-user-experience and lowest TCO.
Figure 2 provides some example deployment costs from an operators
perspective. The 100% baseline is represented by a 3-sector macro
cell deployment on a pre-existing macro site (brownfield site). We dont
consider here a new macro site because the most considered alternative
to installing an outdoor small cell is typically an incremental upgrade of
an existing macro site and because in busy urban areas, finding a new
site is extremely difficult, costly and very time consuming. Macro sites are
in many cases a highly valuable operator asset for growing capacity and
data rates further. The micro and pico cell deployment costs represent
favorable cases as they can be deployed on less traditional sites and
indeed require much less space - much higher costs can be envisaged but
these would typically argue against the deployment of a small cell site as
a viable alternative to a macro cell upgrade, particularly considering the
typically low number of subscribers within the coverage area.

120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0

New 3-sector
macro on
existing site
Transport

New micro site

(2012)
5-year OpEx
(minus transport)

New micro site

(2016)
CapEx
(minus transport)

New pico site

(2016)

Professional services
(minus transport)

Fig. 2. Example TCO values and predicted cost indicator development

(LTE, European operator reference case, 2012).

Page 6

networks.nokia.com

As can be seen, key challenges of small cells are site acquisition and
installation costs (professional services), constituting today up to
30% of typical outdoor small cell TCO when related OpEx is also
considered. Transport in this case constitutes up to 20% of the TCO.
The CapEx of small cell RF and baseband is typically less than 2030%. This is a relatively small part of overall TCO but represents a
significant contribution in driving the value of an outdoor small cell
site. Thus, to minimize TCO per subscriber, the overall focus should
be on maximizing the number of subscribers successfully served by
each deployed small cell solution (individual cell or cell cluster) and on
lowering the OpEx of optimization, care and maintenance.
Figure 2 reflects the costs of micro and pico sites over a four
year period. Nokia Networks believes that, compared to today, an
average cost reduction of between two and three times is achievable
for outdoor small cells. This paper discusses the various related
enablers. In fact, where operators take a holistic approach to small
cell deployment, Nokia believes that reduction of the TCO per bit
by up to 25-50 times is possible, enabling a more favorable balance
between network upgrade costs and the revenue generated from
Mobile Broadband. To achieve these cost levels, benefits need to be
exploited from all possible domains, including:
optimized delivery of radio capacity and high data rate coverage
a focused strategy considering radio access technology and
spectrum in combined macro and small cell deployments
technology improvements addressing macro and small cell
efficiency, energy efficiency and transport efficiency
automation and cost-optimized management
new business options for transport enabled by e.g.
fiber initiatives

Page 7

streamlining of site acquisition processes, etc.

networks.nokia.com

We show in Figure 3 TCO per GByte assessments for various network

upgrade scenarios using three different traffic growth ratios (against
a 2012 reference). The Y-axis denotes the percentage of users that
do not receive the targeted QoS level for the given network upgrade
step (lower is better). The X-axis shows the normalized TCO per GByte
(lower is better). The different upgrade steps assume different QoS
targets for the network as specified in the figure. It can be seen that
the x50 and x100 traffic growth scenarios can be managed only with
macro and outdoor small cell upgrades but in these scenarios a large
percentage of end-users are likely not to achieve the assumed QoS
targets. To reduce the percentage of users receiving services below
the assumed targets, indoor solutions are also needed for both the
x50 and x100 traffic growth scenarios.
Figure 3 shows therefore that the need and timing for small cell
deployment depends significantly on traffic growth patterns, with
the x4 ratios typically seen in the 2015-2016 time-frame calling for
outdoor small cells.

Users not achieving QoS target

35.0%
30.0%
25.0%

x50 traffic
QoS @ 4 Mbps

20.0%
15.0%
x100 traffic
QoS @
10 Mbps

10.0%

x4 traffic
QoS @ 4 Mbps

5.0%
0.0%
0.1

10

1
TCO/Gbyte
Macro +
Outdoor Pico

Macro + Outdoor Pico

+ Indoor Femto

Macro + Outdoor Pico

+ Indoor WiFi

Fig. 3. TCO per carried Gbyte evolution versus traffic and QoS growth
rate (versus 2012 reference) for different network realizations (dense
urban environment, European operator example).

Page 8

networks.nokia.com

However, it is equally important to consider the required data rate and

QoS that an operator aims to provide to attract or retain customers
at a given location. If the target service level is intended to be, for
example, at 1 Mbps a pretty low target in mature markets - Nokia
Networks studies indicate that upgrading macro sites with more
spectrum and improved sectorization/antennas can be the most
attractive solution, which would then significantly reduce the need
for small cells before 2020. If, alternatively, the aim is to provide 4-10
Mbps HD video services for all users a more likely scenario for most
advanced markets - significant deployments of small cells will be
needed during the same time-frame. As such, small cells are expected
to be deployed at different rates in different geographical regions and
based on the operators strategy.
In the studies referred to, the downlink traffic growth ratio is
considered to be the main driver for cell densification. Operator
network measurements have shown that uplink user throughput
is significantly lower in comparison to downlink, often by a ratio of
1:6 but even as much as 1:10 for streaming-dominated networks.
However, for cases where there is a more balanced uplink and
downlink traffic and QoS requirement (e.g. seen today during dense
mass events see the Nokia Networks paper on Mass Event networks
support), the situation will call for a faster adoption of small cells, as
this cannot be tackled as efficiently by, for example, simply adding
more spectrum to the existing wide area network. This is particularly
true for deep indoor coverage, especially where combined with
propagation losses at, for example, 2.6 or 3.5 GHz.

Page 9

networks.nokia.com

4. Driving and Managing Value of

Small Cell Sites
Site acquisition strategy and planning is a very important factor in
optimizing the value-to-cost ratio of outdoor small cells. A first key
element in effective site acquisition is to ensure that the optimum
number of subscribers benefit from the service delivered by the small
cell. Very efficient installations of outdoor small cells deployed in larger
cities today are able to capture similar amounts of traffic to a highpowered macrocell.
Nokia Networks envisages the need for a new and integrated network
management framework for small cells that includes tools for
automated and intelligent prediction of capacity growth (where, how
much, and when). This would provide a toolbox that exceeds the
capabilities of traditional RF Planning by incorporating site design
and deployment features seamlessly. Market-specific demand masks
could be generated showing capacity hot-zones and hotspots based
on user activity and network statistics at the required high resolutions
necessary to plan small cells networks and prioritize network resource
deployments. All available small cell solutions could be evaluated
together, with due consideration given to factors such as site
accessibility and backhaul options.
An example of how such a framework could be applied for a specific
network is shown in Figure 4. In studies Nokia Networks has conducted
with operators, TCO savings in the order of 20% have been calculated
where automated and intelligent tools and methods are used to
pin-point exactly where small cells should be deployed this is
combined also with a 20% increase in delivered performance thanks
to subscribers being closer to the cell center. This gives operators a
clearer understanding of the value of a specific site within their radio
network when making longer term, cost-conscious decisions about
where and how to deploy small cell sites.
Fig. 4. Illustration of automated
traffic predictions with (1)
demand prediction, (2) served
demand mask, (3) un-served
demand mask, and (4) proposed
small cell design.

Page 10

networks.nokia.com

Once an area has been identified that needs boosting via a small
cell solution, an operator can choose to use a blanket approach (a
cluster of small cells that together meet area capacity and coverage
demands) or to surgically insert individual small cells exactly where
additional coverage and capacity is needed. Generally speaking, a
blanket approach can offer orders of magnitude lower costs and
faster deployment per site by using municipal assets such as street
poles and bus stops. However, as these assets may be in less optimal
locations from a radio planning perspective, the blanket approach
generally calls for a larger number of small cell sites in order to meet
area capacity demand; therefore a tradeoff needs to be investigated.
The comparison is not trivial however, as deployment of low numbers
of outdoor small cells will need to be in spectrum shared with the
macro layer. Accordingly, the eventual migration of the small cells
to a dedicated carrier must be planned at the outset. While initially
expensive, the blanket approach may nevertheless be chosen for
providing overall the best end-user experience, the lowest planning
effort and the best solution from the perspective of indoor users.
Also, over time, we see hot spots growing into larger and denser hot
zones, where a blanket approach is the only solution.
As a related consideration, street assets, for example traffic/light
poles, electric signs and bus stops may be used in a number of ways,
allowing costs to be shared between different stakeholders. When
viewing radio as a secondary application for an outdoor street asset,
Nokia Networks foresees various approaches through which cost per
site can be reduced by even four to ten times. Some relevant enablers
are summarized in Table 1, and include more efficient supply chain
management, permitting processes, transport options, etc. Additional
options may be enabled via new designs and form-factors (including
high levels of integration), allowing small cells to blend effectively and
pleasingly into the urban environment by improving their ability to be
installed on poles, signs, bus stops and other street furniture.

Table. 1. Comparison between

two small cell site deployments,
contrasting options for radio
as either the primary or the
secondary use-case.

Site selected primarily for

radio deployment

Site where radio deployment is

a secondary consideration

Site acquisition and permitting

Single site (often), can be slow and expensive

Mass approval, faster deployment

Deployment method

Individual, lower roll-out efficiency,

telecom or subcontractor driven

Batch deployment, cost-efficient

management, possibly via existing
company managing the site

Site works

Telecom installs all assets including

power and transport

Re-use of e.g. AC power, possibly

transport solution, etc.

TCO advantages

Fewer sites needed for certain capacity

and QoS requirements

Investments per small cell site minimized

(examples 4-10x)

Expected use-cases

Clearly identified hotspots, less dense urban

areas, when no other options exist

Dense urban areas, areas with high

indoor capacity needs

Cost factor

Page 11

networks.nokia.com

An issue closely related to maximizing the value of site investments

is adoption of a combined Wi-Fi and LTE deployment strategy. With
improved interworking and admission control capabilities emerging
between 3GPP and Wi-Fi (e.g. Nokia Smart Wi-Fi inter Wi-Fi 3GPP RAT
traffic steering, ANDSF, Hotspot 2.0), the addition of carrier Wi-Fi to
an outdoor small cell site can increase the number of QoS-satisfied
users by typically 20-25%. It simultaneously offers a service to new
Wi-Fi-only customers and functions as an effective bridge to support
the traffic of most 3G and LTE smartphones. Conversely, an existing
Wi-Fi outdoor site could be an effective inflection point to add 3GPP
small cell technology; although a direct alignment to the Wi-Fi access
point (AP) grid would need to be studied. Using a different deployment
grid for the 3GPP small cells may provide better overall performance,
given that Wi-Fi and 3GPP technologies can be efficiently integrated
for consistent end-user QoS provisioning. However, the applicability
of Wi-Fi needs to be considered separately for each deployment case.
In low-growth scenarios, using Wi-Fi may be relatively expensive, and
in very high-growth scenarios, the performance and QoS capability of
Wi-Fi for outdoors must be carefully considered.
Similar to some macro networks where cell site grids are aligned
between various operators, small cell deployments may also be highly
correlated (e.g. the same hot zones and town centers). However, for
macro sites, the installation of equipment from multiple operators
is highly feasible. For small cells with limited street level assets and
space, the installation of multiple operators equipment will likely be
prohibited. Therefore, operators should to some extent look at small
cell site locations as strategically important real estate and consider
the timing of their investments the earlier the better. The first
operator to acquire suitable small cell locations may be in a strong
position to offer competitive differentiating services. However, it
needs to be noted that an optimal site location for one operator may
not always be consistent with what is seen as suitable by another, as
this will depend very much on spectrum allocation, macro site grids,
etc. Such strategies may be clearer for certain indoor centers with
large capacity and coverage requirements.
Restrictions on access to small cell sites and potential municipal
requirements for equal service access for all residents may entice
operators to pursue site sharing arrangements. Such sharing may be
at site level or may even entice the use of active RAN sharing options.
For this reason, Nokias small cell solution supports sharing of network
resources between different operators, including multi-operator radio
access network (MORAN) and multi-operator core network (MOCN)
sharing. The solution also supports hybrid cases, for instance involving
a shared small cell network and non-shared macro networks.

Page 12

networks.nokia.com

5. Deployment considerations for

Outdoor Small Cells
Within this paper we examine how outdoor small cells can contribute,
as part of a carefully coordinated deployment strategy, to meeting the
growing data traffic demand in telecommunications while facilitating
a 25x reduction in the total cost of ownership for each carried bit
(TCO/bit). A combination of macro cell upgrades complemented
by 3G and LTE small cells, both indoors and outdoors, is capable of
fulfilling anticipated future capacity and service quality demands.
Outdoor small cells are required for deployment primarily in dense
urban areas, with their deployment levels depending significantly on
the service level that operators need to provide to their customers
at given locations. While indoor larger locations such as malls, tube/
train stations and enterprises would require a dedicated indoor small
cell deployment, an outdoor street level small cell network can also
help operators provide indoor penetration through up to three interior
walls in the customer trading floor area of the shops, restaurants and
cafes in that street. In effect, deploying small cell at street level would
be faster, cheaper and much simpler compared to using a small cell for
every indoor location.
In summary, viewing outdoor small cell sites simply as slimmeddown macro cell sites does not provide a commercially feasible
approach for new deployments. Instead, operators need to adopt a
solution-focused, holistic network deployment mindset. They need
to make use of opportunities for cost reduction within all areas of
network deployment, from professional services through to radio
and transport technology optimization. In all scenarios however, the
macro site remains the key asset for operators, with outdoor small
cells complementing these main sites to ensure required coverage,
capacity and service targets can be achieved cost-effectively.

Page 13

networks.nokia.com

Selecting the spectrum for the small cells is a key parameter. Nokia
Networks recommends using lower frequency spectrum for macro
cells. For optimum TCO performance, a few outdoor small cells should
initially be deployed using spectrum shared with the macrocells.
Eventually, as small cell density increases to meet increased service
demands, the total spectrum capacity can be maximized by moving
to a dedicated spectrum deployment. The aim of dedicating spectrum
to small cells depends on a number of factors, including proportion
of macro cells, QoS requirements, planned numbers of pico cells and
planned locations of small cells relative to the macro sites. In studies
with operators, Nokia has found that a typical TCO break-even may be
achievable with anything from 4-6 small cell sites per macro site (3-6
sectors) to even 10-12 for certain street level deployments. If a fast
capacity build-out of the small cell layer is planned with high reliability,
an operator should chose to move earlier (even immediately) to a
dedicated frequency deployment, as this suits a denser deployment
and means that fast macro roll-out/upgrades on the particular carrier
are not so critical.
If small cell densities are not expected to be sufficient in the medium
term to justify a deployment in dedicated spectrum, the operator
is recommended to opt for an in-band solution deployment. Then,
when applicable, it should use smart radio solutions that dynamically
balance radio resources between the macro layer and the small cell
layer. Operators should deploy 3G outdoor small cells in the last
remaining band they expect to provide 3G service on, so as to most
effectively migrate 3G spectrum to LTE over time. New spectrum will
typically be made available in the 3.5 GHz band and is attractive for
dense small cell deployments in dedicated spectrum, addressing both
wireless access and backhaul transport needs.
Detailed 3G and LTE deployment studies indicate that using a fairly
high output power for outdoor small cells (5W per antenna, or the
highest levels below rooftop power levels) yields improved TCO
in sparse deployments, e.g. where many indoor users need to be
reached effectively from outdoors. For small cell blanket deployments,
or where capacity is needed mainly for outdoor users, 1-2 W
deployments appear to be the most cost-efficient, generating slightly
lower OpEx and CapEx. In early deployments based on 3G, Nokia
Networks generally recommends a 5W solution.

Page 14

networks.nokia.com

6.

E fficient Radio & Management

Solutions for Outdoor Small Cells

Outdoor small cells will most often need to deliver tightly controlled
end-user experience and reliability, thus Nokia Networks generally
recommends using a full-featured management approach that is
tightly integrated to the wide area solution; e.g. with high support
for fault-management, configuration, accounting, performance, and
security (FCAPS). For current 3G outdoor small cell deployments, Nokia
Networks has observed significant benefits from adopting an Iubbased solution, fully integrated with the overlay macro management
system, to ensure high mobility experience (key for outdoor), capacity
and end-user experience. Furthermore, when building highly dense
networks, the ability to analyze, trouble-shoot and debug the network
becomes very important. An integrated solution allows the same set
of familiar tools to be used across the macro and the small cell layers.
Nokia Networks generally also recommends a fully integrated solution
for LTE deployments, in particular when small cells operate in the
same frequency spectrum as macro but also for dedicated spectrum
deployments to maximize the benefit from current and upcoming
HetNet features. In LTE, for instance, an integrated macro and small
cell framework allows for a better exploitation of system options such
as common Self Organized Network (SON) functionalities including
Mobility Robustness Optimization (MRO) and Mobility Load Balancing
(MLB), Enhanced Inter-Cell Interference Coordination (eICIC), and cell
range biasing schemes, etc.
That being said, Nokia Networks field trials have also successfully
demonstrated deployment of LTE Flexi Zone small cell clusters in a
challenging multi-vendor scenario where both the macro solution
and the O&M/SON system were from another vendor, and residing
on the same frequency carrier. The trials showed that both capacity
improvements and improved end-user experience could be achieved,
provided that certain practices are followed and the small cell solution
has sufficient intelligence to adapt itself to its surroundings.
In the uncoordinated in-band case or in the case of 3G, the small cells
should ideally have some degree of RF isolation relative to the macro
network and should not be placed in locations where the user devices
to be served by the small cells will be within Line Of Sight (LOS) to the
macro cell. Buildings and the use of directional antennas can often
provide this additional layer of isolation between the macro and small
cell network. In the cell selection areas where the downlink signals
from the macro cell and the small cells are at about the same level at
the user device, an advanced biasing capability of the LTE small cell
solution can provide zone stickiness to ensure maximum value for the
small cell solution, thus avoiding ping pong handover effects and
radio link failures.
Page 15

networks.nokia.com

6.1 Integration of Small Cells and

Macro; Distributed or
Centralized RAN?
LTE and LTE-A offer extended options through which a macro cell can
optimize the total multi-layer network performance, including small
cells. To this end, there is a trend towards a centralization of some
SON and Radio Resource Management (RRM) functions to optimize
performance of heterogeneous networks. 3GPP Release 10 introduces
a semi-centralized approach wherein some RRM control for small cells
resides within the overlay macro base station.
Semi-centralized features are fully supported by the default
distributed base station architecture and are enabled via X2
transport. In 3GPP Release 10, one such feature is eICIC, where a
range extension for the in-band small cells, combined with selected
muting of the macro cell can be tuned to improve both data rate
coverage and capacity in the whole macro cell area. Via proprietary
enhancements, the benefits of eICIC can also be at least partially
extended to legacy terminals. The feature is further enhanced in
3GPP Release 11, with advanced device capabilities providing effective
interference cancellation, allowing a higher degree of service area
extension. Combining benefits from a common SON and integrated
RRM framework with eICIC can achieve up to 100% more value from
each small cell site, reflecting both the total network capacity and
the number of subscribers served by the small cell installation. Such
features contribute favorably to lowering TCO per subscriber.
Some examples of performance results obtained with eICIC
coordination alone are shown in Table 2, showing significant benefit
from tight coordination between the macro and the small cell layers.
A full integration step is possible with outdoor small cells by sharing
(or pooling) baseband functions with macro cells and deploying
the outdoor small cell RF as a low-power Remote Radio Head (RRH)
with a dedicated fronthaul transport solution. This corresponds to
a centralized baseband approach as seen from the small cell layers
perspective and may be combined with a complete centralized RAN
approach. In this case, the RRM functionality is shared between macro
and small cells.
Many advantages exist, a particular one being the capability to
perform inter-site carrier aggregation for higher peak rates and
capacity performance between macro sites and small cell sites,
allowing the macro carrier to provide robustness while the small cells
deliver high capacity and peak rates. Other benefits when deployed
in the same carrier include tightly coordinated scheduling gains,
improvements to handover robustness and efficiency-boosting
performance gains per small cell beyond the aforementioned eICIC
Page 16

networks.nokia.com

gains this can be up to 80-100% total gain over the non-eICIC case.
The gain will depend on whether or not the user device can perform
advanced interference cancellation (capability scheduled for 3GPP
Release 11), as shown in the simulation results in Table 2. Current
studies indicate that an RRH deployment offers only minor gains over
what can be achieved with a very fast X2 (1-5 ms range) connection
between macro and small cells.
As demonstrated with Flexi Zone in February 2013 with a number of
patented innovative algorithms and using the Flexi Zone architecture,
operators can expect additional benefits from these coordination and
interference management techniques. For example, operators can
expect innovative algorithms that balance subscriber performance
between Macro and Small Cells or even Liquid Capacity capability,
where the Flexi Zone small cells layer could request an unfair share
of resources to better serve subscribers within the zone during peak
time and release it during off-peak times.
For the scenario where small cells are deployed as RRHs, Nokia
Networks has demonstrated a Dense RAN approach based on RRHs
boosting end-user performance during mass events. This is suitable
for very dense deployments with extreme peak traffic load in both
uplink and downlink, such as at stadiums. However, for most operators
and for general outdoor small cell deployments, these functionality
and performance advantages cannot alone justify the added cost
required to provision dedicated high data-rate and low-jitter fronthaul
transport. We recommend that even operators that have adopted
macro BTS hotelling/Centralized RAN approaches in rich fiber areas
consider the pros and cons for the outdoor small cell layer as a
separate exercise.
Uncoordinated pico and
macro (no eICIC and cell
range ext.)

Table. 2. Preliminary results

regarding gains of small cell
and macro coordination,
including eICIC (3GPP R10/
R11), and maintaining enduser QoS requirements. (4 pico
cells per macro cell, co-channel
deployment, in dense urban
conditions).

X2 coordinated pico
and macro with full
eICIC

Common RRM for

pico and macro with
full eICIC

Scenario illustration
Pico
Pico
Macro RRMMacroRRM
RRM
RRM

Macro
RRM
No
eICIC

Pico
Macro
RRM
RRM

No Pico No Pico
RRM
RRM
eICIC
eICIC
X2
X2
X2

Pico
RRM

Pico
RRM

Pico
Pico
RRM
RRM

Pico
Pico
Macro RRMMacroRRM
RRM
RRM

Pico
Macro
RRM & Macro &
Pico RRM Pico RRM

Fronthaul
Fronthaul
Pico
RRM
to
RRHs to RRHs
(or fast (or fast
X2)
X2)
PicoPico Pico
Pico
RRMRRM RRM
RRM

Pico
eICIC
eICIC Pico eICICPico
RRM
RRM
RRM
(R10) X2(R10) X2 (R10) X2
~20ms ~20ms
~20ms
Pico
RRM

Pico
Pico
RRM
RRM

Pico
RRM

Macro &
Pico RRM
Fronthaul
to RRHs
(or fast
X2)

Micro

Micro

Micro

Micro

Micro

Micro

Micro

Micro

Micro

Macro

Macro

Macro

Macro

Macro

Macro

Macro

Macro

Macro

Capacity gain with

R10 terminals

Reference

~60%

~70%

Capacity gain with

R11 terminals

Reference

~80%

~100%

Page 17

networks.nokia.com

Nokia Networks drives standardization and product initiatives that

allow operators to acquire most of these benefits (both functionality
and performance) with low-cost and carrier grade IP backhauling.
This is believed to offer a better overall TCO/GByte situation for many
operators and outdoor small cell deployment scenarios. With very
fast x2 (sub-ms range) interfaces, similar eICIC performance gains as
reported in Table 2 can be achieved with traditional and distributed
deployments. In 3GPP Release 12, the Small Cell Enhancements
work item considers improvements including mobility robustness,
better interference management and inter-site multi-flow and carrier
aggregation concepts.
In products, Nokias innovative and award-winning Flexi Zone
small cell radio concept combines the benefits of distributed and
centralized RAN, leading to an overall lower TCO of small cell clusters
of up to 30%. The underlying principle behind the architecture is
that future capacity demand will surface in Zones or Clusters
which cannot be effectively served by deploying traditional small
cells which are designed for Hot-Spots. Flexi Zone distributes the
base station architecture across two types of node, distributed APs
and a centralized controller, the latter being located in a convenient,
centralized location, aggregating the APs. The solution is scalable so
that APs can initially be deployed as all-in-one pico cells and later
upgraded by software to participate in a cluster.
Once a cluster is deployed, the operator can further densify its
cluster with new APs when extra capacity is required, as all APs
appear to the rest of the network as a single entity. The concept
addresses many of the topics discussed in this paper, including ease
of deployment with low-cost transport, enhanced capacity and enduser experience via centralized functions, ease of integration to the
wide area network and support for enhanced IP services and offload
mechanisms suitable for local area deployments. This leads to overall
reduced TCO compared to stand-alone small cell deployments.

7. E fficient Transport Solutions for

Outdoor Small Cells
Small cell transport is a key area to address to ensure a viable
small cell deployment. All operators and vendors agree that mass
deployment of small cells will be influenced by the availability of costeffective backhaul solutions. Nokia Networks estimates that the typical
maximum cost indicator for stand-alone outdoor small cell transport
should be <2-3,000 per site (TCO over 5 years). Given such required
cost indicators, traditional macro backhaul solutions do not readily
meet the needs of outdoor small cell deployments. However, with

Page 18

networks.nokia.com

new options and markets emerging in both owned/leased fiber and

wireless domains, such cost levels will gradually become feasible for
operators. There is no single transport technology, wireless or wired,
that fits all deployment needs and cost constraints. The transport
solution has to be considered an integral part of each outdoor small
cell sites overall proposition.
While debate continues on the best small cell backhaul and fronthaul
transport options, Nokia Networks believes that small cells will
require several flexible transport options for very diverse deployment
scenarios, given that the usability, availability and cost of each
option may vary by country, operator and area. As one example, the
suitability of wired and wireless backhaul in a given country will depend
significantly on both technology and market evolution and operators
are strongly recommended to carefully and continually exploit their
options in both spaces.
The transport solution requirements for each small cell deployment
should be considered separately. For example, backhaul reliability
requirements may be down-scaled provided that the overlay macro
can fulfill emergency service requirements and baseline capacity. Form
factor, on the other hand, may be a stricter requirement in order to
be able to access attractive assets such as lamps, poles, shop walls,
etc and backhaul in some cases may even need to be integrated in the
small cell to provide a one box solution.
Given that outdoor small cells are deployed where there is high traffic
demand and that user-experience needs to be similar to that of wide
area, it is expected that requirements for transport speed and latency
will remain similar to that of a macro cell. Transport capacity should
be dimensioned according to peak service rates provided to users, to
ensure that the TCO/value relationship is maintained for the small cell
solution. This cannot benefit from statistical under-dimensioning as
well as that achievable for a large macro site. An important decision
criterion for the mobile operator is the choice of whether to lease
backhaul transport infrastructure or build its own. In particular,
backhaul over the last mile can turn out to be a serious challenge for
operators, as the target TCO level only allows a (leasing) budget in
the order of 50 per month. Synchronization requirements of small
cells have to be considered as part of the overall transport solution
decision. When using advanced schemes such as eICIC and future TDD
bands, additional requirements must be considered, and achieving
time synchronization/alignment will incur a premium compared to
cases which require frequency-only synchronization.
When deploying small cells as low-powered RRHs, the available
functionality and performance improvements will support a somewhat
higher transport TCO, but likely not to the point where very different
transport technologies can be accepted compared to those used

Page 19

networks.nokia.com

in outdoor small cell backhauling. It is believed that the primary

choice for fronthaul to outdoor small cells will be to use a dedicated
fiber solution towards an aggregation point comprising baseband
equipment. Therefore, RRH implementation of small cells is expected
to be limited to fiber-rich areas, but even then, fiber rarely goes
to all light poles, walls and street furniture where small cells will be
mounted, so some costly digging will be required. It is noted that due
to tight latency, jitter and rate requirements, the cost indicators for
fiber fronthaul can be several orders of magnitude higher than the 23,000 5-year TCO target for fiber backhaul, even in urban areas with a
rich fiber infrastructure.

7.1 Wired transport

When exploring options for wired transport solutions, it is important
to recall the typical deployment scenario for outdoor small cells, i.e.
densely populated urban areas. In these areas, the conditions for
wired backhauling are progressively improving as fiber to the x
(FTTx) becomes available. In particular, municipalities benefitting from
national (funded) broadband initiatives can offer innovative business
propositions, attacking incumbent lease line service providers on
pricing for the last mile and using their local assets to offer bundled
solutions beyond mere connectivity services. While focusing on fiber
in the following, we recommend that operators additionally consider
using other wired options in the small cell area that may be more
accessible in the short- to mid-term. One such example is Hybrid
Fiber-Coaxial (HFC) installations, which can support suitable speeds
and which are common in areas with high cable TV penetration.
A conceptual diagram of connecting small cell sites to a fiber
infrastructure is shown in Figure 5.
Assuming that a fiber network is available, an operator has different
choices depending on whether a fiber access network is owned, or
alternatively whether fiber services can be leased from a third party
provider. The total CapEx required for fiber is fairly negligible for an
outdoor small cell site, even when some proportional spending on
passive components in the fiber graph is needed. The real challenge
is to get the small cell connected to the fiber network. The final fiber
run to, for example, a pole, can be very costly due to labor intensive
work, especially when it comes with street disruptions. For instance,
it may be very relevant on which side of a street a small cell is being
deployed, which means that transport decisions have to be conducted
in combination with other considerations for optimizing site assets
and costs.
Table 3 outlines five different fiber deployment models, sorted
according to their attractiveness from a TCO perspective. Option 1
is the leanest option, where a site switch is already attached to an

Page 20

Fig. 5. Small cell sites connected

to FTTx network.

networks.nokia.com

access fiber backbone and can be re-used. Very short reach and lowcost optical interfaces can be used and, even when a capacity upgrade
of the backbone link is needed to support the additional small cell
traffic, CapEx figures are within an attractive range. In option 2, the
new small cell is attached to an FTTx network which is owned and
managed directly by the operator, usually in combination with fixed
residential services. Connecting new small cells close to the fiber
networks access points generally results in low fiber ImpEx and CapEx.
Actual non-recurring and recurring cost levels depend on the usage
model (dark fiber or share lit fiber) as well as the operators internal
accounting policies, but can be expected to be in the lower range.

Fiber backhaul TCO

Indicator*
Deployment
scenario

Deployment
conditions

Small Cell
conditions

Technology

CAPEX/
IMPEX

OPEX

1. Intra-site cabling

Site switch is FTTx

connected

Re-use of site or building

ducts, or cabling infra

Ethernet CAT7,
VSR multi-mode

2. Use own FTTx

Use dark fiber,

share lit fiber

Own access infra,

reuse access infra

Agnostic, xPON,
CWDM

2-3

3. Leased dark fiber

From 3rd party

provider, usually as
bundled contracts
for e.g. district

Build own access infra

Agnostic

4. Leased
managed fiber

From 3rd party

provider, usually as
bundled contracts
for e.g. district

Leased access infra

with basic e2e O&M

EFM, xPON

2-3

5. Leased line service

3rd party leased

contract

Leased line service

with SLA

100M, 1GbE
nx2/nx155M

3-5

6. Build own FTTx

network

Deploy FTTx infra

New FTTx rollout

build own access infra

Agnostic

Table. 3. Different FTTx scenarios and their TCO indicators* (0=lowest, 6=highest) for outdoor small cell
transport in dense urban scenarios. (Options 1-4 will under favorable conditions fit within the expected
target TCO level of 3k over 5 years.)
The subsequent options apply to mobile operators without directly
owned fiber access infrastructure, but within an area where FTTx
services from third party providers are available. In this context,
more and more bundled offerings are becoming available from local
municipalities or utility providers with attractive leasing conditions.
Such offerings include not only fiber connectivity, but also power
supply and permission to deploy small cell equipment, for example,

Page 21

networks.nokia.com

on street furniture. The backhauling models range from leasing dark

fiber (option 3) to managed fiber (option 4), or more expensive leased
line services (option 5). Following discussions with different suppliers
in dense urban areas, Nokia Networks has found that for some regions
and countries, there is a growing availability of options 3 and 4 fitting to
the TCO frame for small cell transport. Option 5 may in special cases be
acceptable, while option 6, roll-out of new fiber, is not attractive.
Fiber connectivity is superior in terms of scalability, as fiber capacity
upgrades are cheap and in terms of OpEx, for example passive optical
networks. For outdoor small cells with wired transport, we expect the
same fast shift towards fiber as has been seen with macro cells. Due to
their almost unlimited transmission capacity, fiber solutions also allow
sharing of the FTTx access infrastructure, which can drive down overall
backhauling TCO still further. Assuming that an operator has long-term
investment plans associated with outdoor small cell sites, the associated
costs can be depreciated over a longer time (10-12 years typically, 20
years in some viewpoints) thus offering an attractively low OpEx.

7.2 Wireless transport

As discussed earlier, wired backhaul cannot always be an option if good
fiber access conditions are not present in the small cell deployment
area. For such cases, wireless transport is the only solution for
deployment of outdoor small cells. Additionally, even in cases where
both transport options may be viable, wireless backhaul may be
preferable due to its higher flexibility for small cell installations and
elimination of time-consuming construction, digging or planning work.
Even a change of the site location will not lead to big changes in costs
for relocation of wireless hops. Wireless technologies are nowadays
under constant development and innovations are constantly being
introduced that will help to bring 5-year TCO levels down to and
eventually below the 2-3,000 requirement. However, the low absolute
TCO requirements will prevent many macro-suitable wireless transport
options from becoming successful in the small cell landscape. Nokia
expects that hybrid architectures will also emerge, for example, clusters
with mixed transport options between elements.
For small cell sites below rooftop level, LOS approaches will become
challenging, especially as small cells become densely deployed and
given a high presence of dynamic obstacles such as trucks, vegetation,
etc. Nokia Networks expects new transport topologies to emerge to
support deployment of outdoor small cells. In many cases, near LOS
(nLOS) or non-LOS (NLOS) wireless backhaul solutions below 7 GHz will
be required. Such technologies may be deployed as point to point (P2P)
wireless interworking from, for example, pole to pole (referred to as
Street Haul). Alternatively, small cell connectivity may be provided to a
street cluster from a high roof top site (referred to as Street-Egress) as
either P2P or point to multi-point (P2MP).
Page 22

networks.nokia.com

Street Egress deployments may be suitable for higher frequency LOS

transport technologies. In addition, mesh topologies can be used
to provide path protection and as a way to circumvent obstacles for
LOS wireless technologies, essentially providing a NLOS path even
where there is no LOS from end-to-end. Mesh systems are not yet
common in transport, but they constitute one promising future smallcell technique in particular associated with mmW (millimeter waves)
spectrum and technology. A typical break-down of wireless transport
technologies is considered in Table 4. Frequency licenses are typically
granted for a hop or for a certain geographical area.
Frequency

Type

Typical
Max
Capacity

Considerations for Outdoor Small Cells

MWR < 7 GHz

 2P, P2MP,
P
Mesh, LOS,
nLOS, NLOS

200 Mbps,
maybe
extended
with more
spectrum
in 3GPP

Licensed band (WIMAX, LTE) is expensive and limited, calling for a balance
between access and backhaul. Solutions need design for directionality (e.g.
beam-forming), high modulation and interference mitigation to get to a suitable
target of 3-4 bits/Hz to support small cell access and street topologies.
Unlicensed band provides very low cost. QoS is harder to control due to
interference from e.g. Wi-Fi, Wireless ISPs, wireless Ethernet bridges. Some
availability challenges due to regulatory issues (e.g. radar detection).
Cost indicators: can be feasible for outdoor small cells but opportunity cost of
spectrum (licensed) and QoS issues (unlicensed) need to be carefully considered.

MWR 6-50 GHz

P2P, P2MP,
LOS

1-2
Gbps

Licensed LOS, some bands are congested in urban areas and adoption of new
bands not global. Only higher microwave bands offer attractive form factors for
small cells.
Cost indicators: can be acceptable but generally the solutions using the highest
microwave bands and with less advanced feature sets appear plausible for
outdoor small cells.

mmWave

P2P, LOS

Multi-Gbps

57-66 GHz

E-Band

Cost indicators: are on the high side today but expected to evolve closer
towards a feasible range for outdoor small cells.
P2P, LOS

Multi-Gbps

71-95 GHz

Free Space
Optics

Street acceptable antenna size, tight beam-width requirements (3 degrees) to

be considered related to e.g. pole sway and twist. Unlicensed band.

Same as 60 GHz but is lightly-licensed.

Cost indicators: are on the high side today but expected to evolve closer
towards a feasible range for outdoor small cells. Very directional making it not
suitable today for street level would need mean to beam steer to stay in focus
and compensate for pole sway/vibrations.

P2P, LOS

2.5 Gbps

Unlicensed but needs very strict antenna alignment, high sensitivity to

environmental factors (like pole sway).
Cost indicators: are not expected to become feasible for outdoor small cells in
the next 5 years

Satellite

P2MP, LOS

<1 Gbps

Expensive solution, only for selected dispersed small cell deployments in rural
areas. Shared capacity means low suitability for outdoor small cell capacity sites.
Cost indicators: not generally feasible for outdoor small cells, and link speeds
limited to <100 Mbp

Table. 4. Wireless transport types and their key characteristics in relation to outdoor small cells.

Page 23

networks.nokia.com

The operation of wireless backhaul below 7 GHz presents its own set
of challenges. Licensed operation at below 7GHz can be restricted by
spectrum availability, as the same frequencies can be used for mobile
access, so balancing between access and backhaul is a key issue. To
get sufficient performance, the technology solution must provide a
high bitrate/Hz and will typically require designs supporting directional
adjustability, beam-forming, high modulation and interference
mitigation. Most operators deploying outdoor small cells before 2016
are likely to do so due to capacity needs and spectrum shortage, and
so using licensed LTE spectrum is challenging. LTE relaying techniques
have been studied to find a more dynamic tradeoff between access
and transport resource allocation. In general however, it is found that
in-band relaying provides limited benefits over dedicating spectrum
for transport for capacity sites. For low-capacity sites with very
difficult transport access or cost factors, relaying (or even dedicated
LTE backhauling) may however offer a convenient solution for
the operator.
The use of unlicensed spectrum below 7 GHz provides both low cost
and relatively wide spectrum bandwidth but is crowded and highly
changeable given the presence of various fixed and mobile devices.
Strict regulations on operations, such as radar detection and dynamic
frequency selection (DFS), requires the ceasing of usage of a particular
channel for a prolonged time, for example 30 minutes, when a radar
signal is detected. These concerns have caused many operators
to avoid the use of the spectrum. However, a continued desire for
wireless backhaul and spectrum is forcing operators to reconsider
using unlicensed spectrum. Nokia Networks has been assessing
operational aspects related to backhaul performance in unlicensed
spectrum and currently sees unlicensed spectrum at 5 GHz as viable,
but that it must be operated within a set of constraints and
limitations which Nokia Networks feels are quite manageable for
outdoor small cells
Nokia Networks believes that solutions beyond 60 GHz offer attractive
prospects for outdoor small cells, with both promising cost indicators
and form factors. When using these frequencies together with
advanced antenna technologies like electrically-steerable, very narrow
beams, it is possible to achieve no touch installation and automatic
re-alignment, maximizing backhaul performance and enabling low
installation cost. These technologies, combined with directional
mesh concepts, will enable high-capacity and low-cost, holistic, selforganized backhaul in the future and represent a key topic in Nokia
Networks research portfolio as shown in February 2013 as part of the
Flexi Zone demonstration.

Page 24

networks.nokia.com

In terms of TCO, wireless solutions have different challenges compared

to wired transport, where establishing the physical connection is the
key aspect. Among key requirements to enable low-cost backhaul
installations are features supporting zero-touch installation, that is,
minimizing human intervention. Additionally, any site required for
wireless transmission needs to be carefully considered. With wireless
backhaul, multiple sites may be needed for each outdoor small cell
site in order to reach the first common transport hub or, if available,
the high capacity backhaul of the nearest macro site. Thus cost
aspects need to be carefully considered and thus planned together as
part of the overall radio solution, also taking into account the density
of the small cells. To enable the right flexibility for operators to reduce
their costs, a wireless backhaul solution must support various wireless
backhaul topologies, such as P2P, P2MP and daisy-chaining or mesh.
Combined radio and transport solutions may further offer increased
deployment flexibility and improved performance. One example is the
delay tolerant Flexi Zone architecture that allows for delay variance
in mobile backhaul, enabling the use of lower cost transport using
low-cost NLOS technologies. An indicative comparison of different
wireless transport solutions applicable for outdoor small cells is shown
in Figure 6.
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

NLOS P2P
(2012)

LOS P2P
(2012)

CapEx

LOS P2MP
(2012)

ImpEx

NLOS LTE
(2015)

NLOS
WIMAX
(2015)

NLOS WIFI
(2015)

LOS
(2015)

OpEx (5 years)

Fig. 6. Indicative and relative cost indicators for current and expected
wireless backhaul types, seen in an outdoor small cell context. (CapEx
relates to equipment cost. ImpEx relates to installation and planning.
OpEx includes maintenance, transport energy, and spectrum
licensing costs. Note that the performance of the different schemes
is not identical.)

Page 25

networks.nokia.com

8. Conclusion
Throughout this paper we have taken care to stress that all factors
related to the selection and deployment of an outdoor small cell
site need to be considered with a fully holistic mindset. Small cells
cannot simply be considered as low-powered macro cells or else
the business case for outdoor small cells will be challenged, despite
the fact they will be essential for operators to support future traffic
growth. In effect, outdoor small cells bring many unique factors which
strongly influence the selection of an appropriate small cell solution
for a specific location, including what types of small cell will best
meet the planned and anticipated service coverage, what options and
implications exist for physical deployment and what the possibilities
are for good performance, low cost transport.
An important factor is to establish the value of an outdoor small cell
(or small cell cluster), that is, ensuring that a sufficiently high number
of end-users served by the small cell site will depend on the provided
service, thus justifying the investment this is done by getting a clear
and precise understanding of where the operators traffic is, requiring
a new set of tools for hotspot/hotzone identification and planning.
Transport is a key part of the outdoor small cell solution. The most
feasible transport options need to be assessed on a case-by-case
basis, with consideration given to local usability, availability and cost
factors. The optimal solution may be fiber-, copper- or wirelessbased, or a hybrid of these. We have discussed within this paper new
enablers for lower transport costs, which will help make outdoor small
cells an attractive deployment option.
As also discussed within this paper, choices within different cost areas
closely interact, resulting in an almost unique mix of requirements
for each small cell site. Consequently, for deployment of outdoor
small cells, solutions are needed rather than boxes. A good solution
integrates all processes, from planning, installation, effective
technology and smart site solutions and optimization, among others.
Nokia takes a holistic approach to small cells over the complete
life-cycle of the solution. This goes beyond product specification
and features, and includes professional services and the
establishment of key partners to reduce the TCO for small cells.
Nokia Networks leadership within macro networks, innovative small
cell solutions such as Flexi Zone and a life-cycle focus, including our
unique Services for HetNet, positions us as the leading strategic
partner for operatorsmoving towards the new paradigm of
Heterogeneous Networks.

Page 26

networks.nokia.com

9. Abbreviations
AAS
AP
CapEx
CO
CoMP
eICIC
FCAPS

Active antenna system

Access point
Capital expenditure
Carbon dioxide
Coordinated multipoint
Enhanced inter-cell interference coordination
Fault management, configuration, accounting,
performance, & security
FTTx Fiber to the x
GaN
Gallium Nitride
HD
High-definition
HFC
Hybrid fiber-coaxial
HSPA High speed packet access
ImpEx Implementation expenses
LOS
Line of sight
LTE
Long term evolution
MORAN  Multi-operator radio access network
MOCN Multi-operator core network
MIMO Multiple input multiple output
MLB Mobility load balancing
MRO Mobility robustness optimization
nLOS Near LOS
NLOS Non-LOS
O&M Operations &maintenance
OpEx Operating expenses
P2MP Point to multi-point
P2P
Point to point
QoS
Quality of Service
RF
Radio frontend
RAN
Radio Access Network
RRH
Remote Radio Head
RRM Radio resource management
SoC
System on chip
SON
Self Organizing Network
TCO
Total cost of ownership
TDD
Time Division Duplex

Page 27

networks.nokia.com

Public
Nokia is a registered trademark of Nokia Corporation. Other product and company names mentioned herein may be trademarks or trade names of their
respective owners.
Nokia
Nokia Solutions and Networks Oy
P.O. Box 1
FI-02022
Finland
Visiting address:
Karaportti 3,
ESPOO,
Finland
Switchboard +358 71 400 4000
Product code C401-01111-WP-201411-1-EN
Nokia Solutions and Networks 2014

networks.nokia.com