Showing posts with label WiMAX. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WiMAX. Show all posts

WHY DO WE NEED NEW ROUTING MECHANISMS?



If anything is certain, the fact that 4G system will be completely IP-based is one. Although homogeneous at the higher levels of the architecture. 4G most likely will integrate several nestled networks with heterogeneous offered services, features, applications and service providers represented by mobile operators, companies or even individual users and content providers. The role of 4G systems in the wireless arena will be parallel to that of the Internet for fixed networks. It will be a common place to find the same service being offered by different sub-networks though maybe under varying security, bandwidth, delay, availability and pricing features.
While the prices for multi-radio and multi-interface devices are continuing to drop, new network topologies are also emerging including ad-hoc, mesh, hybrid and multi-dimensional ones. The latter are networks where a node may take part into different technology dependent networks at the same time, leading hence to a multi-layer view of the new topology. For this reason, new routing algorithms are designed to lead with new topologies and network challenges.

New Network Topologies

One expects that existing traditional network topologies such as those based on fixed infrastructure, ad hoc networks and others, to blend into 4G networks in a highly dynamic cooperating environment. 4G is also embracing highly dynamic networks such as delay tolerant or disruptive networks in addition to opportunistic communications which may be exploited in disaster recovery scenarios and military applications. The emergence of vehicular networks also presents new challenges to the design of 4G edge capacity and mobility support. VANs are expected to have bit rates close to those of fixed networks. New VAN topologies depict dynamic multi-hop short range vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-with-infrastructure communications.
Similarly to fixed networks, overlay topologies can run over 4G to offer virtual high level structures among individuals across 4G networks. Examples of such overlays are emerging new social networks, where topology information is primordial to improving data forwarding, privacy and security as seen in (Bernardos, Casar & Tarrio, 2006). Unlike current networks, a 4G one should open up further possibilities for individuals and groups to work, discuss and play together often by self-structuring driven by common interests, needs and incentives, instead of mere connectivity. The success of future 4G systems may depend to a great extent on their capacity to accommodate these new data services using social, biological and other nature inspired.

4G Drivers and SCENARIOS | WIMAX VS. LTE



The rising mobile subscribers by 2011, estimating over 4 billion, in combination with converged systems and applications are the main contributors of the 4G evolution (GSM world 2009). Several services are expected to drive to the 4G converged ecosystem but the future operators revenues are data services and mainly entertainment services. Three services that exist in today's markets are expected to play a significant role in the future and into a more advanced mode. These are music, mobile games and mobile TV.
The new mobile user's lifestyle is increasing needs capacity, although the ‘walled garden’ might still be a limitation restricting the customer's experience. The users are changed from consumers to producers of content such as photos, videos etc. Several applications will drive the mobile broadband market globally, including:
  • Web 2.0,
  • Online blogs,
  • Mobile music,
  • Location Based Services (LBS),
  • Multimedia messaging,
  • Gambling and
  • Mobile TV.
There are a few scenarios discussed including WiBro, which is expected to evolve during 2010 and 2015 and attempting to cover different markets through restructuring and transition into 4G. For the next 5 years Verizon network will evolve into a 28Mbps download speed, leading to an early 4G LTE adoption compared to Vodafone.
These scenarios could be summarized as following:
  1. Independent 4G system with one standard, the 3GPP LTE
  2. Transition from 3G into 4G with existing (3GPP LTE) or new service providers WiMAX and WiBro
  3. Co-existence of different standards
  4. Spread of open transmission
To explain the above cases, we claim that history matters and the path dependent concept can really explain the long-term outcome based on initial conditions. The 4G development depends on the initial conditions as shaped from 3G in most of the cases. Based on the ‘Increasing Returns’, and ‘Path Dependency’, where alternatives are possible, and regarding the standards, "the one selected and heavily invested is good enough' or even optimal and remains in use because it becomes established in use". This theory is matching the scenario of different standards coexistence that will interact in the ecosystem and complement each other referring to an advanced LTE or LTE+ and WiMAX that will be established and standardized as 802.16e that offers advanced mobility. This is what usually occurs in technological development scenarios.

WIMAX VS. LTE



The LTE technology that Nokia and the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) are pushing is an upgrade to existing GSM networks. The attraction to this technology had made even the CDMA operator, Verizon Wireless, to join the 3GPP trials. It is also a strategic decision, in order to be compatible with its European, GSM-based parent company, Vodafone. LTE looks like it can heal the GSM/CDMA rift that has divided the industry, as no major carrier has yet signed on with obvious CDMA 4G upgrade technology, Ultramobile Broadband (UMB).
LTE will have the following advantages:
  • Fast, with peak data rates of 100 Mbps download and 50 Mbps upload.
  • It makes CDMA and GSM debates moot.
  • It offers both FDD and TDD duplexing, which means the upload and download speeds don't have to be synchronous, so operators can better optimize their networks to use more upload channels.
  • LTE will have lower latency, which makes real-time interaction on high band-width applications using mobiles possible.
3GPP LTE, one of the most advanced mobile communication technologies to date, is currently undergoing 4G technology standardization by the 3GPP This is the most likely technology to become the 4G standard, as many of the world's major operators and telecommunications companies are members of LTE/SAE (Long Term Evolution/System Architecture Evolution) Trial Initiative (LSTI). These companies include operators, such as Vodafone, Orange, T-Mobile, NTT DoCoMo, China Mobile and Telecom Italia and vendors, Ericsson, Nortel, Alcatel-Lucent, Nokia Siemens and LG Electronics. These are also the companies that will be considered to have the advantage in deploying first the 4G services.
WiMAX has certain advantages mainly over the Fiber to the home (FTTH) technology. When bundled with broadband internet access and IPTV, a WiMAX triple play becomes very attractive to residential subscribers. Given the QoS, security and reliability mechanisms built into WiMAX, the users will find WiMAX VoIP as good as or even better than voice services from the telephone company. It also offers a cost effective infrastructure with efficient use of spectrum. Currently, the average cost of WiMAX 802.16-2004 baseband has decreased from $35 to almost $20 today per subscriber.
4G proponents will serve as complements or upgrades to advance the 3G limitation to deliver video/TV and high speed Internet access. For WiMAX, there is a limitation of wireless bandwidth. For use in high density areas, it is possible that the bandwidth may not be sufficient to cater to the needs of a large clientele, driving potentially the costs high. But the main competitor for WiMAX today is the fiber and the wireline network that especially in the US is a real challenge for the residential users as the operators are deploying and growing really fast.

WiMAX ASN Profiles

The WiMAX standard has defined three different profiles, Profile A, B, and C, for an Access Service Network (ASN) which consists of multiple BSs and an ASN gateway (WiMAX Forum 2008). The relation between a BS and an ASN gateway is also similar to that between a BTS and a BSC in GSM systems. A hierarchical ASN is defined in Profile A and C, whereas a flat ASN is defined in Profile B. Profile A is a hierarchical structure that is similar to traditional cellular networks. 

As shown in Figure 1, the radio resource controller (RRC) and the radio resource agent (RRA) are implemented at the ASN gateway and the BS, respectively, so most radio resources are managed by the ASN gateway. In Profile B, the functionalities of a BS and an ASN gateway are co-located on the same platform/solution, which makes the architecture flat. That is, R6 defined for the link between an ASN gateway and a BS does not exist. In Profile C (Figure 2), the RRC is implemented at each BS, so all the RRM functions are performed at each BS as in a flat architecture, although it is still based on a hierarchical structure. Thus, mobility can be managed by the ASN gateway or other upper entities.



Figure 1: WiMAX ASN Profile A



Figure 2: WiMAX ASN Profile C
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...