Professional Documents
Culture Documents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Mobile operators are facing the daunting challenge of preserving legacy TDM assets and
existing revenue streams while simultaneously accommodating the divergent demands of
existing 2G networks and those of emerging 3G/4G technologies. As these operators roll
out new IP services as part of their offerings, selecting and deploying the right Radio Access
Network (RAN) and backhaul migration approach is becoming an increasingly pivotal part of
their overall strategy. Gradual migration towards an all-packet network necessitates cost-
effective interim steps that avoid forklift infrastructure upgrades and network disruptions.
This brief paper summarizes how an IP-over-TDM (IPoTDM) approach can facilitate this
evolution, consolidate the transport and management of circuit- and packet-based services
in a single physical RAN infrastructure, and allow operators to address CAPEX and OPEX
cost challenges by leveraging existing TDM transport resources to the maximum extent
possible.
ENTER ML-PPP
ML-PPP is defined in RFC 1990, and constructed as a PPP extension to allow for the
combining of multiple individual PPP links (dubbed “bonding”) into a single logical bundle.
Each individual physical link is controlled by the PPP protocol, with ML-PPP residing
between the data link and the network protocol layer and serving as the aggregation entity.
As a result, multiple physical circuits or channels can be bonded to form one higher capacity
virtual circuit, and bandwidth can be flexibly scaled in E1/DS-1 increments.
ML-PPP bundle membership negotiation offers an important tactical tool in that it can be
used to change the aggregate capacity via addition or removal of individual PPP links and for
purposes of designing resilience into the network. Additionally, operators can manage
converged transport of legacy and adjunct IP traffic in a way that allows the allocated ML-
PPP capacity to be adjusted as IP bandwidth demands rise. Lastly, ML-PPP can be
employed in conjunction with RFC 2686 multi-class extensions, providing the ability to
prioritize traffic. Packets waiting to be transmitted over the ML-PPP tunnel are sorted
based on priority, with suspension of transmission of low-priority fragments until all high-
priority fragments have been first serviced.
As an example, a GSM codec may generate 33 Bytes of payload, encapsulated in 64 Byte Ethernet
frames at the data link layer, and with the IPv4 header consuming 20 Bytes. As a result of the
overhead reduction achieved through the IPoTDM approach, a TDM microwave with an actual
transport capacity of 64 Mbps (32 x E1) can now carry the equivalent of approximately 90 Mbps of
uncompressed voice traffic load.
At the same time, the latency reduction achieved through fragmentation of longer PDUs will
benefit delay-sensitive voice and synchronization packets.
If packet-based synchronization (Precision Time Protocol/IEEE 1588v2) is neither desired
nor required by the NodeB, operators can continue to utilize the traditional E1/DS-1 line
synchronization method, as timing is maintained underneath the PPP/ML-PPP layers. As a
result, the IPoTDM architecture is not subject to synchronization discontinuities, and its
introduction can be decoupled from the challenges in migrating to new synchronization
technologies.
CONCLUSIONS
Microwave will continue to dominate mobile backhaul deployments for years to come;
however, the optimal phasing of the TDM migration strategy is not universally expressed,
but rather a function of mobile operator objectives, existing assets, available capacity,
scalability, cost of operation, and other factors. Aviat Networks offers multiple technology
options to serve these varied needs, including IPoTDM as described in this paper. In
summary, operators stand to realize the following benefits from it:
• Because IPoTDM leverages existing TDM technology, equipment already in service
as well as domain knowledge can continue to be exploited
• Where TDM based microwave is predominant, operators can significantly improve
the effective RAN capacity as an interim step, while still allowing for the benefits of
packet microwave to be employed at aggregation sites.
• The IPoTDM approach enables faster and less disruptive capacity expansion than a
forklift upgrade of the TDM infrastructure.
• Fewer routers are deployed in the RAN, resulting in a simplified and less costly
network architecture.
• Mature and standards-based technology minimizes interoperability risks between
multiple equipment vendors.
WWW.AVIATNETWORKS.COM
Aviat, Aviat Networks, and Aviat logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Aviat Networks, Inc.
© Aviat Networks, Inc. 2011. All Rights Reserved