EDGE Optimisation Guide Ed1

Alcatel File Reference Date Edition Page
EDGE Optimisation Guide ed1.doc 04/05/05 2.0 1

Site
Velizy
Mobile Radio Division
Originator(s)
P. F. Costa
B8 EDGE Optimisation Guide

Domain : network optimisation
Product : GSM B8
Division : methods
Rubric : GPRS
Type : guideline
Distribution codes Internal : IDDL-PCS, ISC Manager, BR Operation Manager

Pre-distribution :

Abstract : this optimisation guide deals with all aspects related to the QoS Iollow-up
and optimisation oI an EDGE network Algorithms, Parameters, Network Dimensioning,
Field Tests and QoS Iollow-through.
In the whole document, B8 MR5 is considered, but the majority oI the inIormation is valid
also Ior lower releases oI the B8 BSS.

Key words : EDGE, radio algorithms, radio parameters, B8, QoS Follow-up

Appraisal and approval authorities
PCS C. Brechtmann PCS France E. Desblancs
DD-MM-YY : Signature : DD-MM-YY : Signature :
PCS/NMO F. Jarreau
DD-MM-YY : Signature : DD-MM-YY : Signature :

Table of contents

1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................... 4
2 ALGORITHMS & PARAMETERS ....................................................... 5
2.1 CHAPTER STRUCTURE ................................................................................................5
2.2 MAIN CONCEPTS........................................................................................................5
2.3 RADIO RESOURCES MANAGEMENT...........................................................................10
2.4 TRANSMISSION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT...............................................................14
2.5 RADIO LINK ADAPTATION .......................................................................................16
2.6 PARAMETERS SUM-UP ..............................................................................................19
3 NETWORK DIMENSIONING............................................................. 24
4 QOS FOLLOW-UP................................................................................ 27
4.1 MAIN KPI`S ............................................................................................................27
4.1.1 TBF Establishment Rate ................................................................................27
4.1.2 TBF Retransmission Ratios ...........................................................................27
4.1.3 TBF Normal Release Rate (UL and DL) ........................................................29
4.1.4 CS/MCS distribution and useful traffic ..........................................................29
4.1.5 Resource Reallocation...................................................................................32
4.1.6 Ater congestion .............................................................................................33
4.1.7 KPIs order of importance.............................................................................34
4.2 QOS FOLLOW-UP DURING A FIELD-TRIAL..................................................................34
4.3 QOS FOLLOW-UP ON A REGULAR NETWORK..............................................................41
5 KNOWN ISSUES................................................................................... 43
5.1 ATER CONGESTION ..................................................................................................43
5.2 EDGE PERFORMANCE DEGRADATION WITH FREQUENCY HOPPING............................45
5.3 APD ISSUES ............................................................................................................45
5.4 FAULT REPORTS THAT MAY IMPACT EDGE PERFORMANCE.......................................46
5.4.1 Bad PING performance in some Nokia mobiles .............................................46
5.4.2 Wrong RLC block coding when retransmitting with MCS3 (with padding).....47
6 FINAL COMMENTS............................................................................. 48

History :

Edition Date Originator Comments
1
Proposal 1
30/03/2005 P. F. Costa Creation oI the document
1
Proposal 2
18/04/2005 P. F. Costa Second draIt version
1 22/04/2005 P. F. Costa Edition 1 Release

Edition changes :
Corretions to the text
New document template

References :

|1| EDGE & HSDS: introduction, algorithms and parameters, 3DF 01906 2810 VAZZA,
ed. 02
|2| RRM sub-layer (PCC), 3BK 11202 0367 DSZZA, ed. 09
|3| Resource Allocation and Management (RAM), 3BK 11202 0350 DSZZA, ed. 03
|4| 3GPP TS 05.08, Radio subsystem link control
|5| EDGE Field Trial Guideline, MRD/PCS internal document
|6| DEUTRIP User Guide, MRD/PCS Internal document
|7| DEUTRIP: Indicators & Tests Protocols, 3DF 01905 3020 VAZZA, ed. 01
|8| http://aww-mnd.alcatel.de/pcs/Measurements.html, PCS Intranet page dedicated to
measurement equipment
|9| DMS Drive Measurement Statistic User Guide, 3DF 01900 3080 PCZZA, ed. 02
|10| BSS B8 Dimensioning Rules ConIiguration Description, 3DF 01903 2810 PGZZA 01,
ed. 01

1 Introduction
The present document aims at presenting all the basic inIormation and methods needed
Ior optimizing an EDGE network.
This document will only Iocus on EDGE networks, but it is nevertheless important to
have some knowledge on it. A similar document dedicated to GPRS networks is expected
to appear at the time oI writing oI the current edition oI the present document, it was still
not the case.
It is also important to state that although the majority oI the algorithms are presented in
this document, its objective is not to introduce Alcatel`s EDGE solution |1| exists Ior this
purpose.

Chapter 3 presents all the EDGE related algorithms and parameters.
Chapter 4 presents Network Dimensioning aspects.
Chapter 5 presents all issues related to Iield-testing.
Chapter 6 presents the proceedings Ior QoS Iollow-up both the main KPI`s and the
most typical problems (and their workaround) are presented.
Chapter 7 gives some Iinal comments.

2 Algorithms & Parameters
2.1 Chapter structure
The present chapter will Iollow the same structure than |1|, so please reIer to it Ior more
details regarding the diIIerent algorithms considered.

2.2 Main concepts
EDGE introduces some new aspects that Iatally distinguish it Irom the 'classical
GPRS service:
- New coding schemes are introduced EDGE uses MCS1 to MCS9 (MCS meaning
Modulation and Coding Scheme). In release B8, MCS1 to MCS9 is available in DL,
while MCS1 to MCS4 is available in UL.
- New modulation besides the GMSK modulation, which is still used in MCS1 to
MCS4, EDGE uses 8-PSK modulation. This modulation has a variable envelope,
which impacts the available output power.
- New LLC PDU segmentation while in GPRS the LLC PDU is segmented in RLC
blocks taking into account the used coding scheme, in EDGE the LLC PDU is
segmented in payload blocks (new concept in EDGE) taking into account the used
MCS Iamily in EDGE the RLC block can carry one or two payload blocks.
- The coding scheme Iamily concept, reIerred just above is also new in EDGE.
Besides what was already reIerred, this new concept changes the way retransmission
is made. Table 1 presents the diIIerent coding scheme Iamilies available (currently
missing in the table below), as well as its theoretical throughput.
- Puncturing Schemes new concept in EDGE also used in the retransmission
mechanisms.

Coding
scheme
Coding scheme
Family
Modulation
Theoretical throughput per
PDCH (kbit/s)
CS1 GMSK 8
CS2 GMSK 12
CS3 GMSK 14.4
CS4
-
GMSK 20
MCS1 Family C GMSK 8.8
MCS2 Family B GMSK 11.2
MCS3
Family A;
Family A
padding
GMSK 14.8 / 13.6

Coding
scheme
Coding scheme
Family
Modulation
Theoretical throughput per
PDCH (kbit/s)
MCS4 Family C GMSK 17.6
MCS5 Family B 8-PSK 22.4
MCS6
Family A;
Family A
padding
8-PSK 29.6 / 27.2
MCS7 Family B 8-PSK 44.8
MCS8
Family A
padding
8-PSK 54.4
MCS9 Family A 8-PSK 59.2
To6|o 1: CoJiog Schomos

Retransmission mechanism, or ARQ (Automatic Repeat request), has been greatly
modiIied in EDGE.

The Iirst modiIication comes Irom the introduction oI the payload concept. In an
EGPRS TBF the RLC block can be retransmitted either by using the same MCS or by
using a MCS Irom the same coding scheme Iamily.
A side eIIect Irom this is that even iI Link Adaptation (algorithm that changes the
coding scheme according to radio conditions) is disabled, we can observe RLC blocks with
diIIerent coding schemes (although always with the same Iamily).

Still in the ARQ mechanism, EDGE introduces a new type oI ARQ. Now we have:
- Type 1 ARQ the decoding oI a re-transmitted RLC block does not take into
account the previously transmitted versions oI this same RLC block. It is always
used in GPRS and in uplink EGPRS.
- Type 2 hybrid ARQ (used only in EGPRS) also known as Incremental
Redundancy (IR), this mechanism works as Iollows:
o The Iirst emission oI the RLC block is done with a Iirst puncturing scheme
(PS1).
o II the RLC block needs to be retransmitted, the same MCS or a MCS Irom
the same Iamily will be used. The block may or may not be re-segmented
(depending on parameterisation). The transmitter will also select the
Puncturing Scheme to use.
o The receiver will use the inIormation in all versions oI the received block as
to increase its decoding probability.

Note that 3GPP states that:
- IR is mandatory in MS`s receiver;
- There is no way to activate/de-activate IR in the MS receiver by signalling over the
air-interIace IR can only be de-activated in the case oI insuIIicient memory in the
mobile;
- The soIt combining can be done between MCSx and MCSx blocks (same MCS
used), a MCS9 and a MCS6 block (RLC data blocks with the same number oI
payload units) or between a MCS7 block and a MCS5 block (RLC data blocks with
the same number oI payload units).

Note also that IR is only available in DL in the B8 version oI the Alcatel BSS.

The RLC Window management also changes in EDGE. While in GPRS the RLC
window size is Iixed at 64 blocks, in EDGE:
- It is variable and determined Ior each TBF depending on the MS multi-slot class;
- It varies between 64 and 1024 blocks (512 blocks in B8);
- It is increased Iollowing an increase on the number oI PDCH`s, but not decreased in
the case oI a reduction.

Hardware and Power Aspects
In terms oI HW compability, EDGE is available (i.e. 8-PSK is supported) in all TRE
Irom G4 (also called TRA) onward.

In all cases the output power available in GMSK is always greater than in 8-PSK this
is due to design issues concerning the Iact that GMSK is a constant envelope modulation,
while 8-PSK is not. Table 2 presents the output powers oI the diIIerent EDGE capable
TRE`s available.

TkA GM5K output power 8-F5K output power 8-F5K output power
(EDGE+ TkA}
00 Medium power 45 W / 4.5 d8m 15 W / 41.8 d8m 30 W / 44.8 d8m
00 High power 0 W / 47.8 d8m 25 W / 44 d8m 30 W / 44.8 d8m
1800 Medium power 35 W / 45.4 d8m 12 W / 40.8 d8m 30 W / 44.8 d8m
1800 High power 0 W / 47.8 d8m 25 W / 44 d8m 30 W / 44.8 d8m
To6|o 2: Powot chotoc|otis|ics ltom |ho Jillotoo| ovoi|o6|o Tk/ (EDGE copo6|o TkEsj.

Because GMSK output power is oIten diIIerent Irom 8-PSK output power, there is a
new concept introduced with EDGE the Average Power Decrease (APD).

According to the 3GPP specs, there are some constraints on this parameter when the
TRE responsible Ior the EDGE service is also carrying the BCCH. |4| states that:
'Furthermore, 8-PSK modulated timeslots on the BCCH carrier may use a mean power
which is at most 4 dB lower than the mean power used Ior GMSK modulated timeslots
with the exception oI the timeslot preceding a slot used Ior BCCH/CCCH where at most 2
dB lower mean power is allowed. (3GPP 45.008 5.i.0, section 7.1)

3GPP also predicts some speciIic problems Ior Iast moving mobiles, in |4|:
'In the case that 8-PSK modulation is allowed on the BCCH carrier and Irequency
hopping including the BCCH carrier is used, the reception quality in connected mode Ior
some Iast moving MS (meaning MS experiencing Doppler Irequencies oI 100 Hz or more)
may be degraded. This may be seen as a backwards compatibility problem Ior some
existing MS, most likely occurring iI the used APD is larger than 2 dB.
(3GPP 45.008 5.i.0, section 7.1)

A very important new concept (Alcatel SpeciIic) introduced with EDGE (and in GPRS
CS3/CS4) is the TRX class concept.
Depending on the used MCS, Irom one to Iive 16kbit/s channels (GCH) are needed per
PDCH between the BTS and the MFS. So, each TRX has a TRX class (Irom one to Iive)
that deIines the number oI Abis/Ater GCH per radio TS or PDCH. Note also that 1 EGCH
n GCH n 16 kbit/s channels).

A concept that is associated to the notion oI TRX class n is the TRX Transmission pool
this is the set oI extra Abis nibbles (Abis nibble (16k) used to carry traIIic when TRX is a
class n TRX , n ~ 1).

Regarding the TBF mode and TBF establishment, there exist some diIIerences between
GPRS and EDGE. Please reIer to |1| and |2| Ior more details.

Table 3 presents the most important parameters related to these new concepts.

Forometer nome Definition
Defoult
Volue
EM_EGFk5 Enobles (disobles} EDGE EMA8LE
MAX_EGFk5_MC5
Moximum MC5 (Modulotion ond Coding 5cheme} used for
EGFk5 troffic in the cell
MC5
M8_EXTkA_A85_T5
Mumber of oll extro Abis (4k} T5 of oll the pools defined on the
2 possible sectors on which the cell is mopped
-
EM_FULL_k_DL
Disobles (enobles} the re-segmentotion for the downlink T8F in
the cell
EMA8LE
85_TXFWk_MAX 8T5 moximum ollowed tronsmission power. 0
To6|o 3: So|oc|ioo ol potomo|ots to|o|oJ |o moio coocop|s io EDGE

II about EN_EGPRS there is not much that can be said (setting it to enable, or disable, just
enables, respectively disables, EDGE service in the cell), regarding the three other parameters
some notes should be added.

MAX_EGPRS_MCS is comparable to MAXGPRSCS in GPRS it indicates the
maximum MCS achievable in terms oI parameterisation. But note that the maximum MCS
achievable depends on other Iactors like the TRX class oI the TRX where the EDGE call is
being made. Usually this parameter is set to 9 hence letting that the TRX class available
deIine the maximum MCS achievable.

NB_EXTRA_ABIS_TS is a virtually changeable parameter although it is possible to see
it in the OMC terminal, it is not possible to change it. Its value is automatically deIined at the
OMC depending on the conIiguration oI the cell. Nevertheless it permits us to have an idea oI
the EDGE capabilities oI the cell. It is important to note that a class n TRX will need (n-1)*2
extra Abis TS (e.g., a cell with only one class 4 TRX will have NBEXTRAABISTS 6).

EN_FULL_IR_DL has a somewhat deceitIul name in Iact IR is always enabled on the
MS receiver, only re-segmentation is disallowed (ENFULLIRDL enable) or allowed
(ENFULLIRDLdisable). By deIault, ENFULLIRDL is set to enable (hence, re-
segmentation is disallowed). This recommendation comes Irom the diIIerent experimentations
perIormed already by PCS team.

BS_TXPWR_MAX is not an EDGE speciIic parameter but a GSM one. This parameter
deIines the BTS maximum allowed transmission power, which itselI is deIined relatively to
the BTS maximum RF transmit power in GMSK. The BTS will have a GMSK output power
equal to BTSGMSKoutputpower BSTXPWRMAX. This permits to reduce the APD
oI a cell, as it permits to change the GMSK output power. Normally, this parameter is not
changed, as it aIIects the site coverage.


2.3 Radio Resources Management
All the subjects Irom this chapter are described in detail in |2| and |3|.
Regarding the TRX conIiguration and priority deIinition, it is basically the same in
GPRS or EDGE the only distinction is made between CS and PS traIIic. Contrary to the
previous version oI the BSS, B7.2, there is only one parameter Ior setting TRX priority
both Ior CS and PS traIIic TRXPREFMARK. Furthermore, only TRX`s with
TRXPREFMARK 0 can carry PS traIIic.

The process determining the TRX priority, handled by the BSC, can be described in 4
steps:
- DR (Dual Rate) TRE selection the priority is given to non EDGE TRE`s, then to
Medium Power EDGE TRE`s and Iinally to High Power EDGE TRE`s.
- TRX-TRE mapping PS capable TRX are mapped preIerentially (Irom highest to
lowest priority) on the Iollowing TRE (the reverse order is used to set the TRX
priority Ior the CS traIIic):
o Full Rate, High Power, EDGE capable TRE
o Dual Rate, High Power, EDGE capable TRE
o Full Rate, Medium Power, EDGE capable TRE
o Dual Rate, Medium Power, EDGE capable TRE
o Full Rate, non EDGE capable TRE
o Dual Rate, non EDGE capable TRE
- Ordering oI the TRX Ior the PS traIIic the PS capable TRX are ordered as Iollows
(Irom highest to lowest priority):
o BCCH TRX iI PSPreIBCCH true
o HW TRX capability: EGPRS High Power, then EGPRS Medium Power,
then non EGPRS
o Full Rate then Dual Rate
o Size oI the PDCH group: rank Iirst TRX with maximum number oI
consecutive SPDCH per TRX
o Finally TRX identity (lowest TRX id Iirst)
- Association oI the TRX transmission pools to each TRX the biggest TRX
transmission pool is associated to the TRX with the highest PS priority.

For the Resource allocation, there is a set oI principles that are Iollowed when
establishing an EGPRS TBF:
- EGPRS TBF must be established preIerentially on the highest class TRX;

- It is preIerred to multiplex several EGPRS TBF`s on a high class TRX than
allocating the EGPRS TBF on a low-class TRX;
- A new re-allocation trigger (T4 re-allocation) is added Ior UL GPRS TBF that share
at least one PDCH on an EDGE TRX with a DL EGPRS TBF although it is now
possible that an UL GPRS TBF can share the same PDCH than a DL EGPRS TBF,
it is not advisable, as it brings some perIormance degradation.

To Iollow the principles stated above, some rules are needed when establishing the
EDGE TBF.
The BSS selects only the EGPRS TRX oI highest class (that is which oIIer the highest
throughput) as long as the maximum number oI EDGE TBF per PDCH on these TRX is
not higher than a threshold (NTBFPDCHMCSiMCSj). There are some exception to
this rule: in the case oI Immediate UL EGPRS TBF establishment (only EGPRS TRX are
taken into account, but they are not necessarily oI the highest class) and in the case oI a UL
(respectively DL) EGPRS TBF establishment when there is a concurrent DL (respectively
UL) EGPRS TBF and T2 re-allocation is disabled (the TRX which supports the ongoing
DL (respectively UL) EGRPS TBF is the only candidate).

AIter selecting the TRXs where to allocate the EGPRS TBF, some additional rules are
Iollowed Ior the timeslot allocation. The Iollowing order is respected:
- Candidate allocations with the highest number oI non-busy PDCH in the direction
oI the bias;
- Candidate allocations with the highest number oI non-Iull PDCH in the direction oI
the bias;
- Candidate allocations with the highest number oI non-busy PDCH in the direction
opposite oI the bias;
- Candidate allocations with the highest number oI non-Iull PDCH in the direction
opposite oI the bias;
- Candidate allocations with the lowest number oI established EGPRS TBF in the
direction oI the bias;
- Candidate allocations with the lowest number oI established EGPRS TBF in the
direction opposite oI the bias;
- Candidate allocations on the TRX with the highest priority (reIer to the beginning oI
part 3.3);
- Candidate allocations with the lowest number oI GPRS TBF in the direction oI the
bias;
- Candidate allocations which have all their PDCH established (iI all the preIerred
candidate allocations require additional PDCH, a request is sent to the BSC);
- Candidate allocations which do not require a re-allocation oI the ongoing TBF;
- Candidate allocations with the PDCH oI lowest index.


By candidate allocation we mean either a double list oI contiguous PDCH in a TRX
(one list per direction), which veriIies the concurrent constraints; or a single list oI
contiguous PDCH in a TRX in the direction oI the request.

In the present BSS version, B8, 4 re-allocation triggers exist: T1 to T4. The Iollowing
priorities are Iollowed:
T1 ~ T4 ~ T3
Incoming TBF establishment request ~ T4

T1 and T2 remain unchanged regarding the GPRS and EGPRS TBF.

In T3 re-allocation, a new condition was added Ior EGPRS TBF. The re-allocation is
triggered when:
- An EDGE TBF is not established on the TRX which has the highest EGPRS
capability AND
- More than NCANDIDATEFORREALLOC bytes have been exchanged since
the beginning oI the TBF or the last re-allocation AND
- T3192 is not running

As Ior T4, this re-allocation occurs when an UL GPRS TBF and a DL EDGE TBF share
at least one PDCH on an EDGE TRX the UL GPRS TBF (or more exactly the MS) will
be candidate Ior the re-allocation.

One oI the new Ieatures Irom BSS version B8 is the Iast initial (E)GPRS access. II the
parameter ENFASTINITIALGPRSACCESS true (hence enabling the Ieature) one
PDCH is allocated separately and preIerably on an EDGE TRX (to provide Iast initial
access Ior GPRS and EGPRS), then on a TRX with the lowest class (to waste not too much
transmission resources), then on a TRX with the highest priority (to avoid a conIlict with
the CS traIIic) and Iinally on the timeslot with lowest index (in order to minimise the risk
oI having to perIorm a T1 re-allocation).

Table 4 presents the most important parameters related to these new concepts (reIer also
to part 3.6 Ior more details on these parameters).

Defoult
Volue
TkX_FkEF_MAkK Freference Mork ossigned to o given TkX -
F5_FkEF_8CCH_TkX
ndicotes whether or not the F5 requests sholl be
preferentiolly served with FDCH(s} of the 8CCH TkX
D5A8LE
EM_kE5_kEALLOCATOM
Enobles (disobles} the resource reollocotion feoture
(individuol triggers considered}
1 (oll
triggers
octivoted}
EM_FA5T_MTAL_GFk5_ACCE55
This flog indicotes whether or not one 5love FDCH for
(E}GFk5 troffic usoge will be stoticolly estoblished in the
cell
D5A8LE
To6|o 4: So|oc|ioo ol potomo|ots to|o|oJ |o koJio kosoutco Mooogomoo|

TRX_PREF_MARK was already discussed above. It is not possible to talk about a
deIault value Ior it what is certain is that at least one TRX must have this parameter set to
0 to be able to carry PS traIIic.

Alcatel`s deIault value Ior PS_PREF_BCCH_TRX is 'disable. But several networks
have opted to chose a diIIerent value both options present advantages and disadvantages.
Opting to give priority Ior PS traIIic Ior the BCCH TRX might have the advantage oI
using a cleaner Irequency this is true only in the case oI NH/RH or SFH, not in the case
oI BBH. Another advantage may arise Irom the Iact that the TRE recovery mechanism
always gives priority to the BCCH TRX.
Regarding disadvantages oI the above option (and so, advantages Ior the option oI not
giving priority to the BCCH TRX), there are mainly two:
- On one hand, the biggest PDCH group possible on the BCCH TRX is, in the best
case scenario, 7 TS, and depending on SDCCH conIiguration can be even smaller.
In the case where there is a TRX with class above any oI the other TRX`s, this
means that the number oI TS 'enjoying this extra transmission capability (and
extra throughput that goes with it) is smaller.
- On the other hand, there are also some 3GPP requirements regarding the 8-PSK
APD when EDGE is on the BCCH TRX (see 2.2). There might be the need to
decrease the cell coverage (by decreasing the GMSK power output) in order to
Iollow these recommendations this can have a inadmissible impact on CS service.
(Note that recent Iield experiments seem to indicate that there is no negative impact
in recent MSs behaviour when disregarding these recommendations - it is relatively
saIe not to Iollow the 3GPP specs in this aspect.)

EN_RES_REALLOCATION can be changed as to enable any oI the diIIerent Iour re-
allocation triggers. The deIault value is nonetheless 'enable all triggers option that will
permit a better EDGE perIormance.


EN_FAST_INITIAL_GPRS_ACCESS is by deIault disabled. Anyway, many
operators have chosen to activate this Ieature. Its major gains are in terms oI end-user
perIormance. Because the resources are allocated in advance, some time can be gained
when establishing a DL or UL TBF. The disadvantage oI this Ieature is that PDCH and
GCH might be allocated Ior nothing, causing some waste oI transmission resources.

2.4 Transmission resources management
Regarding transmission resources, two aspects can be considered: Abis resources and
Ater resources.

As Iar as Abis resources are concerned, we have already introduced the TRX class n
and the TRX transmission Pool concepts beIore.

As Iar as Ater is concerned, two concepts must be deIined at this moment: Ater
congestion state oI a DSP (in the MFS GPU), and Ater usage.

Ater congestion is deIined as:
- Beginning, iI the number oI available Ater nibbles Ior the DSP is lower than a
threshold (NbAterThreshold);
- End, iI the number oI available Ater nibbles Ior the DSP is equal or higher than a
threshold (NbAterThreshold).
See 0 Ior more details on how this threshold is deIined.

When a DSP enters in Ater congestion state, it triggers an algorithm to reduce the
number oI GCH.
This process consists, Ior one TRX, in reducing the number oI GCH to 2 (iI
MaxGPRSCS ~ 2 in the cell) or to 1 (iI MaxGPRSCS 2 in the cell) Ior the PDCH
that do not carry any EGPRS TBF.
When a TRX has been processed, the algorithm is stopped iI the number oI available
Ater nibbles Ior the DSP is higher or equal than NbAterthreshold. See 0 Ior more details
on which TRX`s are processed.

When there is no Ater congestion, each TS oI a class n TRX uses n GCH (1 EGCH n
GCH) on the Ater interIace. But during the Ater congestion state, things change:
- In the case oI an EGPRS TBF establishment on a class n TRX, there is no impact -
one EGCH is established with n GCH

- In the case oI GPRS TBF establishment on a class n TRX, one EGCH is established
with 1 (iI MaxGPRSCS 2) or 2 (iI MaxGPRSCS ~ 2) GCH note that this
has absolutely no impact on end-user perIormance, as 1 GCH (respectively 2) are
enough to have coding scheme CS2 (respectively CS4).

One slight nuance must be pointed out here. Although EGPRS TBF`s are not supposed
to be aIIected by this GCH reduction process, it was seen in the Iield that this is not true
the GCH reduction does aIIect EGPRS TBF`s.

What might happen is that iI a EGPRS TBF is established during the time when a GPRS
TBF is still established, or iI it is established less than TPDCHINACTIVITY seconds
aIter the end oI the GPRS TBF, it may use the same PDCH's that were only associated to 2
GCH's. This will limit the maximum coding scheme to MCS5.

Ater usage is deIined as the percentage oI Ater nibbles that are used in a GPU:
AterGPUUsage NbusedAternibbles / NbAternibbles * 100.

In case oI high Ater usage, the maximum number oI PDCH allocated to a new TBF
(transitions between normal and high Ater usage have no consequence on on-going TBF)
is limited to MAXPDCHPERTBFHighAterUsage whereas it is limited to
MAXPDCHPERTBF in case oI normal Ater usage.

Defoult
Volue
GFk5_MULT5LOT_CLA55_DEFAULT_VALUE
Defoult volue of the GFk5 multislot closs
ossumed ot T8F estoblishment when the octuol
M5 multislot closs is unknown
8
ATEk_U5AGE_THkE5HOLD
Threshold (percentoge of used Ater nibbles,
in o GFU} obove which the Ater usoge is soid
high.
0.7
MAX_FDCH_FEk_T8F
Moximum number of FDCH ollocoted to o
single (E}GFk5 connection
5
MAX_FDCH_FEk_T8F_HGH_ATEk_U5AGE
Moximum number of FDCH ollocoted to o
single (E}GFk5 connection, when the Ater
usoge is high
5
To6|o 5: So|oc|ioo ol potomo|ots to|o|oJ |o Ttoosmissioo kosoutco Mooogomoo|

GPRS_MULTISLOT_CLASS_DEFAULT_VALUE is normally set at 8, meaning a 41
MS. There may be some waste oI resources when considering that by deIault all mobile are

class 8 in some cases (especially in case oI Ater congestion) it is advised to set this
parameter to a smaller value.

ATER_USAGE_THRESHOLD is usually set to 70. This parameter may be changed to
make the PDCH reduction process kick in sooner (by reducing the threshold) or later (by
increasing the threshold).

MAX_PDCH_PER_TBF and MAX_PDCH_PER_TBF_HIGH_ATER_USAGE deIine
the maximum number oI PDCH that a TBF can use in respectively normal and high Ater
usage conditions. Normally both are set to 5. This value is more than enough, as no mobile
will need more than 4 TS Ior establishing the TBF. As both parameters are equal, the PDCH
reduction process has generally no impact.

2.5 Radio Link Adaptation
In EGPRS new radio measurements are used (as deIined in 0) MeanBEP (Mean Bit
Error Probability) and CVBEP (CoeIIicient oI Variation oI the Bit Error Probability).

The MS can report 32 diIIerent MeanBEP values (MEANBEP0 to
MEANBEP31), and the reported MeanBEP value depends on the used modulation. As
Ior CVBEP values, the MS can report 8 diIIerent CVBEP values (CVBEP0 to
CVBEP7).
The BTS measures Ior each UL burst the BEP and calculates Ior each UL radio block (4
bursts) the MeanBEP and the CVBEP StdBEP / MeanBEP. The MeanBEP and the
CVBEP are reported on a radio block basis by the BTS to the MFS.

The EGPRS link adaptation can be disabled thanks to the
ENCSADAPTATIONACK (RLC acknowledged mode) and
ENCSADAPTATIONNACK (RLC unacknowledged mode) parameters (same
parameters than Ior the GPRS link adaptation).

Regarding the Algorithms used both in DL and UL Ior the Link Adaptation, please reIer
to |1| Ior details.

One point to keep in mind is that this process does not use O&M parameters but internal
tables taking into account the RLC mode oI the TBF (acknowledged or unacknowledged),
then the ENFULLIRDL parameter value (TBF acknowledged mode only), then the
APD (Average Power Decrease) in 8PSK oI the used TRE and Iinally the modulation
scheme currently used (GMSK or 8PSK).

There is also a DL and UL TBF deIence mechanism available. In DL, iI too many
consecutive EGPRS Packet downlink Ack/Nack messages are asked by the MFS but are
not received, the modulation and coding scheme is changed to MCS1 (whatever the value
oI the current coding scheme). In UL, the deIence procedure is used in case too many
consecutive uplink radio blocks are not decoded. II a certain number oI conditions is
IulIilled, the coding scheme is changed to MCS1.


Forometer nome Definition Defoult Volue
8EF_FEkOD
Filter constont for EGFk5 chonnel quolity
meosurements
10
EM_C5_ADAFTATOM_ACK/MA
CK
Enobles (disobles} the link odoptotion in kLC ock
(respectively unock} mode
EMA8LE
T8F_DL/UL_MT_MC5
Volue of the DL/UL modulotion ond coding
scheme when the link odoptotion olgorithm is
disobled or initiol volue of the modulotion ond
coding scheme otherwise
MC53
T8F_MC5_DL/UL
n DL.
For o monoslot T8F olone on its FDCH, threshold
defining the number of consecutive EGFk5 Focket
Downlink Ack/Mock not received obove which the
coding scheme of o downlink ocknowledged or
unocknowledged T8F is chonged to MC51 (only in
downlink}.
For o multi-slot T8F or o T8F thot shores its
FDCH(s}, the limit is proportionol to the
instontoneous bondwidth ollocoted to the T8F.
n UL.
Threshold defining the moximum number of
consecutive times the network receives on involid UL
kLC doto block or nothing from the M5 hoving o
monoslot EGFk5 T8F before chonging the coding
scheme to MC51
DL. 12
UL. 8
E_TX_EFFCEMCY_FEkOD
Mumber of received rodio blocks for on EGFk5
T8F ofter which E_TX_EFFCEMCY is computed.
200
TX_EFFCEMCY_ACK/MACK_TH
k
Threshold below which the T8F is releosed
becouse of o bod tronsmission efficiency in ock
(respectively nock} mode
ock mode.
10% nock mode.
15%
To6|o : So|oc|ioo ol potomo|ots to|o|oJ |o koJio Liok /Jop|o|ioo

BEP_PERIOD is a parameter considered in the calculation oI the MeanBEP value. Its
deIault value was Iound through the various Iield trials and experimentations done so Iar.

II a bigger value is used, the MeanBEP calculation will be less reactive, iI it is smaller, it
will be more re-active. Even considering this, the value oI 10 should be good enough either
Ior normal cells or Ior Iast moving traIIic cells. It is also important to know that in previous
versions oI the BSS B8 (MR4 or lower), the deIault value was 25, which is coded 10 this
might arise some conIusion. The actual deIault is 10, coded 6.

EN_CS_ADAPTATION_ACK/NACK is the parameter responsible Ior enabling (or
disabling) the Link Adaptation mechanism. It is important to note here that even iI Link
Adaptation is disabled, it is possible that other MCS diIIerent Irom the initial MCS might
be used iI too many erroneous packets are exchanged, MCS switches back to MCS1, and
it is possible that retransmissions are done in a diIIerent MCS but Irom the same MCS
Iamily.

TBF_DL/UL_INIT_MCS deIine in which MCS the TBF should start. The deIault
value can be considered as rather conservative, but advantages and disadvantages exist in
changing it to a higher (or lower) MCS.
Starting with a high MCS means that the throughput will potentially be high since the
beginning oI the TBF. Furthermore, even short TBF`s will use a high MCS.
In good radio conditions, it is clear that the average throughput will be higher,
particularly in the case oI short TBF`s (on long TBF`s the Link Adaptation mechanism
would have enough time to kick in, and the initial lower throughput would be diluted on
the whole TBF transIer, hence reducing the impact oI low initial MCS).
The disadvantages oI starting with a high MCS are equally evident. In the case oI
medium/bad radio conditions, MCS will have to be decreased beIore successIully
transmitting any blocks. This 'delay will obviously impact the throughput achieved and
again, the impact will be bigger on short TBFs. KPIs will also be impacted by these
additional Iailures (principally TBF establishment and retransmission rates see 4.1 Ior
details on KPIs).

TBF_MCS_DL/UL is considered on the TBF deIence mechanism. For a monoslot TBF
alone on its PDCH, TBFMCSDL deIines the number oI consecutive EGPRS Packet
Downlink Ack/Nack not received above which the coding scheme oI a downlink
acknowledged or unacknowledged TBF is changed to MCS1 (only in downlink). For a
multi-slot TBF or a TBF that shares its PDCH(s), the limit is proportional to the
instantaneous bandwidth allocated to the TBF.
The TBFMCSUL deIines the threshold Ior the number oI missed reception oI RLC
blocks (either because they are invalid or because they were not received at all) beIore
switching back to MCS1 (coding scheme which oIIers best protection).
These parameters are the EDGE counterparts oI the TBFCSDL/UL parameters.

E_TX_EFFICIENCY_PERIOD and TX_EFFICIENCY_ACK/NACK_THR are
considered Ior the DL deIence mechanism, together with EGPRSN3105LIMIT.

Contrary to TBFMCSDL/UL, they deIine thresholds Ior abnormally releasing the TBF.
II EGPRSN3105LIMITis Iixed at BSS and MFS level, the Iirst two parameters permit
changes. They are not usually considered when optimising parameters, though. Note also
that ETXEFFICIENCYPERIOD is the EDGE counterpart oI the
TXEFFICIENCYPERIOD parameter.

2.6 Parameters sum-up
In the previous sections, only some parameters were presented. Table 7 presents all
these parameters and other that were not seen beIore.

Mome Type
konge
OMC-k occess
Definition
Generol porometers
ACCE55_8Uk5T_TYFE Cell 0 or 1
Formot of the occess burst used by
(E}GFk5 M5s when sending o FACKET
CHAMMEL kEQUE5T, o FACKET
COMTkOL ACKMOWLEDGEMEMT or o
FTCCH/U messoge
Ater_Usoge_Threshold 855 1 to 100 %
Threshold (percentoge of used Ater
nibbles, in o GFU} obove which the Ater
usoge is soid "high"
EM_EGFk5 Cell Enoble/Disoble
Enobles/Disobles EGFk5 troffic in
the cell
EM_FA5T_MTAL_GFk5_ACCE55 Cell Enoble/Disoble
This flog indicotes whether or not
one 5love FDCH for (E}GFk5 troffic
usoge will be stoticolly estoblished in
the cell
MAX_EGFk5_MC5 Cell 1 to
Moximum Modulotion ond Coding
5cheme used for EGFk5 troffic in the
cell
MAX_GFk5_C5 Cell 2 to 4
Moximum coding scheme used for
GFk5 troffic in the cell
MAX_FDCH_FEk_T8F_High_Ater_
Usoge
Cell 1 to 5
Moximum number of FDCH
ollocoted to o single (E}GFk5
connection, when the Ater usoge is
"high"
M8_EXTkA_A85_T5 Cell
0 to
Virtuol
chongeoble
Mumber of oll extro Abis (4k}
timeslots of oll the pools defined on the
2 possible sectors on which the cell is
mopped
M8_T5_MFDCH Cell 0 to 4
Mumber of rodio timeslots reserved
for the primory ond secondory moster
FDCHs defined in the cell

Mome Type
konge
OMC-k occess
Definition
MC_kEFOkTMG_FEkOD_T Cell 0.48 to 1.44 s
keporting period of MC
meosurements reported by the M5
while in pocket tronsfer mode
F5_FkEF_8CCH_TkX Cell 0 or 1
ndicotes whether or not the F5
requests sholl be preferentiolly served
with FDCH(s} of the 8CCH TkX
T_DL_EGFk5_Meoskeport Cell 0 to 3000 ms
Time period to request for on EGFk5
Focket Downlink Ack/Mock with
meosurements
AkQ porometers
EGFk5_DL_Ack_Foctor MF5
0 to 1
Mo occess
f the EGFk5 troffic is corried
through Abis terrestriol link ond Ater
terrestriol link, this porometer defines
the rotio between the number of
tronsmitted kLC doto blocks necessory
to request for o EGFk5 Focket Downlink
Ack Mock in ocknowledged mode, ond
the kLC window size
EGFk5_DL_ACK_Foctor_5otellite 855
0 to 1
Mo occess
through Abis sotellite link or Ater
sotellite link, this porometer defines the
downlink EGFk5 AkQ period foctor.
Acknowledgement period over window
size rotio
EGFk5_UL_Ack_Foctor MF5
0 to 1
Mo occess
through Abis terrestriol link ond Ater
terrestriol link, this porometer defines
the rotio between the number of
received kLC doto blocks necessory to
send o Focket Uplink Ack/Mock in
ocknowledged mode, ond the kLC
window size
EGFk5_UL_Ack_Foctor_5otellite MF5
0 to 1
Mo occess
through Abis sotellite link or Ater
sotellite link, this porometer defines the
rotio between the number of received
kLC doto blocks necessory to send o
Focket Uplink Ack/Mock in
ocknowledged mode, ond the kLC
window size
EM_FULL_k_DL (from 88 Mk5
releose}
855 Enoble/Disoble
Enobles/disobles the re-
segmentotion for the downlink T8F in
the cell
EM_k (before 88 Mk5 releose} 855 Enoble/Disoble
Enobles/disobles ncrementol
redundoncy for the downlink T8F in the
cell

Mome Type
konge
OMC-k occess
Definition
kodio meosurements
8EF_FEkOD Cell 1 to 25
Filter constont for EGFk5 chonnel
quolity meosurements
MC5_AVG_FEkOD MF5
0.02 to 5 s
Mo occess
Feriod Tegprs ofter which o weight
of 0. is opplied to the current UL or DL
meon8EF somples in the overoging
Modulotion ond Coding 5cheme
odoptotion filter
M_AVG_ Cell 0 to 15
M_AVG_ volue is broodcost to the
(E}GFk5 M5 in the 513. The (E}GFk5
M5 uses it for filtering the interference
signol level meosurements thot it sholl
perform during the pocket tronsfer
mode. These meosurements ore used
by the (E}GFk5 M5 for output power
control, but olso reported to the
network ond used for performing
downlink link odoptotion
kodio link supervision
E_TX_EFFCEMCY_FEkOD 855 1 to 500
Mumber of received rodio blocks for
on EGFk5 T8F ofter which
E_TX_EFFCEMCY is computed
EGFk5_M3105_LMT MF5
1 to 1
Mo occess
n o mono-slot DL EGFk5 T8F
tronsfer procedure, if the EGFk5 troffic
is corried through Abis terrestriol link
ond Ater terrestriol link, this porometer
defines the moximum number of
expected EGFk5 Focket Downlink
ACK/MACK or Focket Control
Acknowledgement messoges
consecutively lost (from the M5} on the
rodio interfoce, before releosing
obnormolly the DL T8F. For o multi-slot
EGFk5 T8F or on EGFk5 T8F which
shores its FDCH(s}, the limit is
proportionol to the instontoneous
bondwidth ollocoted to the T8F

Mome Type
konge
OMC-k occess
Definition
EGFk5_M3105_LMT_5ATELLTE MF5
1 to 1
Mo occess
n o mono-slot DL EGFk5 T8F
tronsfer procedure, if the EGFk5 troffic
is corried through Abis sotellite link or
Ater sotellite link, this porometer
defines the moximum number of
expected EGFk5 Focket Downlink
ACK/MACK or Focket Control
Acknowledgement messoges
consecutively lost (from the M5} on the
rodio interfoce, before releosing
obnormolly the DL T8F. For o multi-slot
EGFk5 T8F or on EGFk5 T8F which
Link odoptotion for EGFk5
EM_C5_ADAFTATOM_ACK Cell Enoble/Disoble
Enobles / disobles the link
odoptotion in kLC ocknowledged mode
EM_C5_ADAFTATOM_MACK Cell Enoble/Disoble
Enobles / disobles the link
odoptotion in kLC unocknowledged
mode
T8F_DL_MT_MC5 Cell 1 to
Volue of the downlink modulotion
ond coding scheme when the link
odoptotion olgorithm is disobled or
initiol volue of the modulotion ond
T8F_MC5_DL 855 0 to 15
For o monoslot T8F olone on its
FDCH, threshold defining the number
of consecutive EGFk5 Focket Downlink
Ack/Mock not received obove which the
coding scheme of o downlink
ocknowledged or unocknowledged T8F
is chonged to MC51 (only in downlink}.
For o multi-slot T8F or o T8F which
T8F_MC5_FEkOD MF5
1 to 25
Mo occess
Mumber of rodio blocks ofter which
the MC5 odoptotion decision moy be
mode, in EGFk5

Mome Type
konge
OMC-k occess
Definition
T8F_MC5_UL 855 1 to 12
Threshold defining the moximum
number of consecutive times the
network receives on involid UL kLC
doto block or nothing from the M5
hoving o monoslot EGFk5 T8F before
chonging the coding scheme to MC51.
For o multislot EGFk5 T8F,
T8F_MC5_UL_limit = T8F_MC5_UL x
n_ollocoted_timeslots
T8F_UL_MT_MC5 Cell 1 to 4
Volue of the uplink modulotion ond
coding scheme when the link
odoptotion olgorithm is disobled or
initiol volue of the modulotion ond
To6|o 7: EDGE ooJ HSDS potomo|ots (88 to|oosoj

3 Network Dimensioning
The present document does not intend to go deeply in the Network Architecture and
Dimensioning. Nonetheless, the system architecture is a very important part oI the whole
system description and will be looked at in this chapter in particular some notions will be
described. Moreover the architecture topic is very important when considering EDGE as
the EDGE introduction has a major impact on the BSS dimensioning due to the static Abis
allocation in B8.

For more details concerning System Architecture and Dimensioning, please reIer to 0.

By allowing new modulations and coding schemes, the data traIIic throughput oI a
given radio timeslot was increased. This implies that this increase oI throughput is handled
on Abis and Ater interIaces too.

Up to now, only a 16 kbit/s nibble was allocated per timeslot in each interIace, clearly
insuIIicient Ior the actual possible throughputs.

MFS Telecom allocates dynamically several Ater nibbles (16kbit/s channels) on the
Ater interIace, to allow higher than 16 kbit/s throughputs.

On the Abis interIace, several Abis nibbles are also used. But contrary to the Ater
interIace, the conIiguration oI these Abis nibbles is done statically. Depending on the
requested throughput, a radio timeslot will have associated up to 4 extra Abis nibbles (in
addition to the basic one).
All radio timeslots must have the same the same throughput capability, and so a TRX
may need up to 8 extra Abis timeslots (as seen above, these extra Abis timeslots are called
a 'TRX Transmission Pool).

8ocuuso lhoro is u big incrouso in lho numbor o Abis rosourcos noodod, ono singlo Abis
link mighl nol bo onough. 88 inlroducos lhon lho possibilily o udding u socond Abis
link. This socond Abis link cun only bo usod or puckol lruic - CML, PSL und busic
limoslols uro ulwuys muppod lo lho irsl link, whilo lho oxlru limoslols uro splil ovor lho
lwo Abis links.

Other important notion is that Extra Abis timeslots are mapped only on a TCU
supporting TRE FR (a DR TCU does no support extra Abis TS).
It implies that the operator may need to trigger a complete reshuIIling to group all DR
TRE and to Iree some TCU Ior FR TRE or extra Abis TS.

Regarding the FR TCU occupancy, we need to use the 'Equivalent Full-Rate (Eq-FR)
concept to look at it, as described in Table 8.

Number oI Eq-FR available on a TCU 4
Number oI Eq-FR needed Ior a TRE FR 1
Number oI Eq-FR needed Ior a TRE DR 2
Number oI Eq-FR needed Ior an extra Abis timeslot 0.5
To6|o 8: Fk TCU occupoocy co|cu|o|ioo

As Ior TSU connectivity:
o 1 Dual Rate TRX is equivalent to 2 Full Rate TRX
o 1 TRX with a Transmission pool type 2 is equivalent to 2 Iull rate TRX

It is possible that Dual Rate is supported on a class N TRX; a 'dual rate class N TRX will
consume in the BSC equivalent oI the connectivity consumed by (N1) simple Full Rate
TRXs.

To be able to map the cell onto the GPU, the MFS needs to know the 'GPRS weight oI
the cells. In B8, this 'GPRS Weight corresponds to the number oI extra Abis timeslots
(NBEXTRAABISTS).

Regarding the GPU capability, this depends on the TRX class and iI EDGE is activated or
not.

Table 9 shows the GPU capability in the diIIerent possible cases.

TRX Class Coding Schemes Max nb oI PDCH per
GPU
EDGE not-Activated
1 CS1, 2 240
2 CS1, 2, 3, 4 208

TRX Class Coding Schemes Max nb oI PDCH per
GPU
EDGE Activated
1 CS1, 2
MCS1, 2
228
2 CS1, 2, 3, 4
MCS1, 2, 3, 4, 5
196
3 CS1, 2, 3, 4
MCS1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
160
4 CS1, 2, 3, 4
MCS1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
120
5 CS1, 2, 3, 4
MCS1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
96
To6|o : GPU copo6i|i|y

4 QoS Follow-up
4.1 Main KPI`s
4.1.1 TBF Establishment Rate
This indicator shows iI the TBF's are being correctly established.

For DL (in both RNO and NPA):
F_roquosls GPPS_DL_T8
F_succoss GPPS_DL_T8
(CPDTESUP} rulo F_succoss_ GPPS_DL_T8 =

For UL (in both RNO and NPA):
F_roquosls GPPS_UL_T8
F_succoss GPPS_UL_T8
(CPUTESUP} rulo F_succoss_ GPPS_UL_T8 =

The name oI the indicators above might be deceiving, as both GPRS and EDGE TBF`s
are considered. Moreover it is not possible to distinguish GPRS and EDGE TBF with the
available counters.
4.1.2 TBF Retransmission Ratios
This indicator serves to have an idea iI aIter establishing the TBF's, the RLC blocks are
correctly received or not.

The Iollowing RNO indicator (which has no correspondent in NPA) gives this ratio in
DL:

GPRSDLRLCbytesPDTCHMCSxretransackratio (QRPDDRMO)

Its Iormula:
_bylos_uck ghpul_MCSx oul_lhrou GPPS_DL_us ing_uck olrunsmiss TCH_MCSx_r C_bylos_PD GPPS_DL_PL
ing_uck olrunsmiss TCH_MCSx_r C_bylos_PD GPPS_DL_PL
+

And its` counterpart in UL (again, without correspondent indicator in NPA):

GPRSULRLCbytesPDTCHMCSxretransackratio (QRPDURMO)

Its Iormula:

_bylos_uck ghpul_MCSx oul_lhrou GPPS_UL_us ing_uck olrunsmiss TCH_MCSx_r C_bylos_PD GPPS_UL_PL
ing_uck olrunsmiss TCH_MCSx_r C_bylos_PD GPPS_UL_PL
+

ln bolh cusos wo culcululo lho rulio o DL (or UL} PLC dulu bylos oncodod in MCSx (sonl
lhrough EGPPS} und rolrunsmillod duo lo unucknowlodgomonl o lho MS (or MFS},
luking us rooronco lho ovorull numbor o DL (or UL} PLC dulu bylos sonl on PDTCH und
oncodod in MCSx (sonl lhrough EGPPS} in PLC uck modo.

It is possible in UL to take as reIerence Ior the ratio the total number oI UL RLC data
bytes retransmitted both in GPRS and EGPRS (instead oI the overall number oI EGPRS
RLC data bytes sent on PDTCH); in that case we`ll have the RNO indicator:
GPRSULRLCbytesMCSxretransmissingackratio (QRUDTRRBMO)

Again, there is no NPA counterpart. UnIortunately there isn`t also a correspondent
indicator Ior DL.

It is important to point out that it is not possible to do the distinction between diIIerent
MCS when seeing the retransmission all retrasnmissions in MCS are accounted in only
one counter per direction, P20e Ior DL and P21e Ior UL (contrary to GPRS where a
diIIerence counter accounts the retransmissions in each one oI the diIIerent CS).

It is interesting to recall the correspondent indicator Ior classical GPRS.
In GPRS it is possible to calculate the ratio considering as reIerence:
- Overall number oI RLC data bytes transmitted in GPRS mode, corresponding to
indicators:
o GPRSDLRLCbytesPDTCHCSxretransmissingratio
(QRDDTRRBCO);
o GPRSULRLCbytesCSxretransmissingackratio (QRUDTRRBCO);
o No NPA correspondent.
- Overall number oI RLC blocks transmitted in GPRS mode, corresponding to
indicators:
o GPRSDLRLCblockPDTCHCSxretransackratio (QRDDTRRO);
o GPRSULRLCblockPDTCHCSxretransackratio (QRUDTRRO);
o No NPA correspondent.
- Overall number oI RLC data blocks sent on PDTCH in RLC ack/nack mode:
o GPRSDLRLCPDTCHCSxretransmissingackrate (QRDDTRRR);
o GPRSULRLCCSxPDTCHretransmissingackrate (QRUDTRRR);

o Correspond to DLRLCBLOCKRETRANSMISIONRATE and
ULRLCBLOCKRETRANSMISIONRATE in NPA.

To do the comparison with EGPRS, only the Iirst two indicators should be considered
(QRDDTRRBCO and QRUDTRRBCO).

4.1.3 TBF Normal Release Rate (UL and DL)

This indicator is useIul to have an idea iI the TBF's Iinished well.

For DL:
F_succoss GPPS_DL_T8
oluso F_normul_r GPPS_DL_T8
(CPDDTNPP} oluso_rulo F_normul_r GPPS_DL_T8 =
For UL:
F_succoss GPPS_UL_T8
oluso F_normul_r GPPS_UL_T8
(CPUDTNPP} oluso_rulo F_normul_r GPPS_UL_T8 =

Both indicators above are in RNO. Their correspondents in NPA are
DLTBFNORMALRELEASERATE and
ULTBFNORMALRELEASERATE, Ior DL and UL respectively.

Note that like in the establishment indicators, both EGPRS and GPRS TBF`s are taken
into account (again, the name is somewhat deceiving). It is also not possible to distinguish
between GPRS and EGPRS TBF.

4.1.4 CS/MCS distribution and useful traffic

There are large possibilities to calculate/present the distribution oI CS and/or MCS
blocks.
But all ratios/rates/useIul throughput/etc. indicators will be based on the number oI
useIul blocks received per (M)CS.
The indicators in RNO Ior counting the number oI blocks in each type oI MCS (and so,
only EDGE TBF`s are considered) are:

GPRSDLuseIulthroughputMCSack (TRPDDMN), corresponding to the
number oI useIul DL RLC blocks sent in RLC acknowledge mode and encoded in CS

(retransmitted blocks and RLC blocks containing LLC Dummy UI Commands are not
taken into account).

GPRSULuseIulthroughputCSack (TRPDUMN), corresponding to the number
oI useIul UL RLC blocks sent in RLC acknowledge mode on PDTCH and encoded in
MCS (blocks not correctly received are not taken into account).

And Ior GPRS:
GPRSDLuseIulthroughputCSack (TRPDDCN), corresponding to the number
oI useIul DL RLC blocks sent in RLC acknowledge mode and encoded in CS
(retransmitted blocks are not taken into account).

GPRSULuseIulthroughputCSack (TRPDUCN), corresponding to the number
oI useIul UL RLC blocks sent in RLC acknowledge mode and encoded in CS (blocks not
correctly received are not taken into account).

Note that each one oI these indicators correspond directly to one counter:
- P55a to P55d, Ior DL RLC blocks encoded in CS1 to CS4;
- P55e to P55m, Ior DL RLC blocks encoded in MCS1 to MCS9;
- P57a to P57d, Ior UL RLC blocks encoded in CS1 to CS4;
- P57e to P57m, Ior UL RLC blocks encoded in MCS1 to MCS9.

The distribution oI (M)CS blocks is only relative to useIul blocks it is not possible to
have it relative to established blocks, dropped blocks, etc there are no counters Ior it.

Note also that all the indicators above have no correspondent in NPA.
As said in the beginning oI the section, with the amount oI useIul blocks in each (M)CS
it is possible to calculate diIIerent rates. For instance, the Iollowing RNO indicator:

GPRSDLuseIulthroughputMCSx8PSKackratio (TRPDDM8PO). This indicator
corresponds to the ratio oI DL useIul blocks in EGPRS mode, RLC ack mode and encoded
in 8-PSK (MCS5 to MCS9), relatively to the total number oI useIul blocks in EGPRS
mode and RLC ack mode (again, no correspondent in NPA).

Besides this indicator, many other are available, and are easily calculated.

It is also possible to calculate the useIul traIIic. The calculation is done by multiplying
the number oI blocks encoded in each (M)CS by its payload.


Regarding traIIic, it also possible to know it at LLC level through the Iollowing RNO
indicators:
- GPRSDLLLCbytesEGPRSackmode (TGBVCDLEAN), which gives the
number oI DL LLC bytes transmitted and acknowledged on established DL TBF in
EGPRS mode and RLC ack mode.
- GPRSDLLLCbytesEGPRSunackmode (TGBVCDLENN), which gives the
number oI DL LLC bytes transmitted and acknowledged on established DL TBF in
EGPRS mode and RLC unack mode.
- GPRSULLLCbytesEGPRSackmode (TGBVCULEAN), which gives the
number oI UL LLC bytes transmitted and acknowledged on established DL TBF in
EGPRS mode and RLC ack mode.
- GPRSULLLCbytesEGPRSunackmode (TGBVCULENN), which gives the
number oI UL LLC bytes transmitted and acknowledged on established DL TBF in
EGPRS mode and RLC unack mode.

The above RNO correspond to the Iollowing NPA indicators:
- DLLLCBYTESEGPRSACKNUMBER
- DLLLCBYTESEGPRSNACKNUMBER
- ULLLCBYTESEGPRSACKNUMBER
- ULLLCBYTESEGPRSNACKNUMBER

Obviously, the GPRS traIIic is also available, through the corresponding RNO
indicators:
- GPRSDLLLCbytesGPRSackmode (TGBVCDLGAN);
- GPRSDLLLCbytesGPRSunackmode (TGBVCDLGNN);
- GPRSULLLCbytesGPRSackmode (TGBVCULGAN);
- GPRSULLLCbytesGPRSackmode (TGBVCULGNN);

Which in turn correspond to the NPA indicators
DL/ULLLCBYTESGPRSACK/NACKNUMBER.

Finally note that each one oI these indicators corresponds directly to one counter only
(p43a to p43d Ior DL, p44a to p44d Ior UL, where p43a and p44a correspond to GPRS and
ack mode; p43b and p44b to GPRS and unack mode, p43c and p44c to EGPRS and ack
mode, and pp43d and p44d to EGPRS and unack mode).

4.1.5 Resource Reallocation
To analyse the resource reallocation, either the number oI requests is evaluated (in RNO):
GPRSDLTBFreallocrequest (TRDRRRQN)
GPRSULTBFreallocrequest (TRURRRQN)
Only in DL there is a corresponding NPA indicator:
DLTBFRESREALLOCREQUESTNUMBER.

Or looking at it per allocation trigger:
For DL:
GPRSDLTBFreallocTrequest (TRDRRTN)
1, 2, 3 or 4
Corresponding to DLTBFRESREALLOCTREQUESTNUMBER in NPA.

For UL:
GPRSULTBFreallocTrequest (TRURRTN)
1, 2, 3 or 4
No correspondent indicator in NPA.

The number oI successes is also available:
GPRSDLTBFreallocsuccess (TRDRRSUN)
GPRSULTBFreallocsuccess (TRURRSUN)
Only in DL there is a corresponding NPA indicator:
DLTBFRESREALLOCSUCCESSNUMBER.

Or per reallocation trigger:
GPRSDLTBFreallocTnsuccess (QRDRSUN)
1, 2, 3 or 4
(DLTBFRESREALLOCTREQUESTNUMBER in NPA).

GPRSULTBFreallocTnsuccess (QRURSUN)
1, 2, 3 or 4
(No correspondent indicator in NPA).

With all the indicators above, it is easy to calculate the success rate:

roquosl F_roulloc_ GPPS_DL_T8
succoss F_roulloc_ GPPS_DL_T8
(TPDPPSUP} lo succoss_ru F_roulloc_ GPPS_DL_T8 = in
DL;
roquosl F_roulloc_ GPPS_UL_T8
succoss F_roulloc_ GPPS_UL_T8
(TPUPPSUP} lo succoss_ru F_roulloc_ GPPS_UL_T8 = in
UL.

In both cases, there is no correspondent indicator in NPA.

To calculate the success rate per triggering condition, the Iormula used is similar, but
considering the requests and successes per triggering cause.

4.1.6 Ater congestion
Two types oI congestion can be considered when talking about Ater congestion.

Either the congestion is at Ater Mux level, meaning that the resources in the Ater Mux Ior
PS traIIic are not enough, or the congestion is at DSP level, meaning that the DSP`s inside the
GPU don`t have enough processing power Ior all PS traIIic available.

SpeciIic counters exist Ior both congestions:
- GPRSGPUAtercongtime (QAGALCTT) Ior congestion at Ater Mux level;
- GPRSGPUDSPcongtime (QRGPUCDT) Ior congestion at DSP side.

To obtain the Ater congestion rate, just divide the timers above by the
GPRSObservationPeriod, which is normally one hour, or 3600 seconds.

There is also a third indicator that can indicate us that problem exist:
- GPRSPDCHdegradedtime (ARPDCUSDGT), corresponding to the cumulative
time during which a slave PDCH is degraded due to Ater congestion (that is the
number oI GCH channels on the Ater interIace is lower than n Ior a PDCH on a class n
TRX).
Or in terms oI rate:
- GPRSPDCHdegradedtimerate (ARPDCUSDGR), which corresponds to the rate
between GPRSPDCHdegradedtime (ARPDCUSDGT) and
GPRSPDCHtraIIictime (ARPDCUSBUT) (corresponding to the cumulative time
during which the slave PDCHs are established and carry at least one UL or DL TBF
established in GPRS mode or EGPRS mode).


Please take note that this last indicator is based on counter P38d. This counter is not
reliable beIore B8 MR5. So consider this indicator only iI BSS sub-release is MR5 ed1
onwards.

4.1.7 KPI`s order of importance
The Iirst 3 indicators - establishment success, retransmission and normal release rate -
are the most important Ior QoS Iollow-up.

On a second approach, it's important to have a metric oI the traIIic exchanged. In terms
oI importance, next Iollows the (M)CS distribution and last the resource reallocation.

OI course other indicators (which are not considered as Key indicators) are available
and used Ior a deeper technical analysis oI the QoS.

4.2 QoS Iollow-up during a Iield-trial

A Iield trial has usually two main objectives:
- Validate the gains brought by EDGE on the Iield;
- Help the customer to deIine the best EDGE introduction strategy.

For detailed guidelines on how to perIorm the Iield tests, 0 should be checked.

The QoS Iollow-up during a Iield trial should be a combination oI Iield test results
analysis and KPI analysis.

Field tests are normally perIormed with the help oI a series oI possible test tools.
Normally the Iollowing tools are used/recommended:
- DEUTRIP, Ior generating PS traIIic (i.e. end user PS applications like FTP or
WAP). DEUTRIP is a PCS internal tool;
- Agilent NITRO, Ior logging all air-interIace related measurements (messages, radio
measurements, etc);
- DMS Ior post-processing oI air-interIace traces (e.g. Irom Nitro). DMS is a PCS
internal tool.

DEUTRIP (which stands Ior Data End User TRaIIic generator & Indicators Provider) is
a collection oI modules that automatically generate a diIIerent set oI applications deIined
by the user. At the same time, it provides application layers QoS indicators.
For more details on DEUTRIP, please reIer to 0 and 0.

Agilent E6474 (usually known as NITRO) is an air-interIace measurements tool. This
tool logs all air-inteIace measurements and messages, displaying them in a convenient
graphical way. These measurements can come Irom one mobile or more, and/or Irom an
external digital scanner.
More details regarding Agilent E6474 optimization platIorm can be Iound in Agilent`s
website (www.agilent.com).

DMS (which stands Ior Drive Measurement Statistic) is a set oI small tools Ior drive
tests statistics. It uses text exports Irom Agilent Nitro (although, other tools can be
considered, provided text export is available), and provides three types oI statistics:
- GSM Network Statistics;
- GSM Call Statistics;
- GPRS/EDGE Network Statistics.

For inIormation concerning Agilent NITRO and DMS (Iormerly known as
'GPRSMeasEval), please reIer to 0 and 0.

Obviously, there are alternatives to the tools above cited.
For generating PS traIIic, the operator may use operator internal tools, or even no tools
at all (it can have someone generating the traIIic manually Alcatel dissuades this option).
Make sure oI asking the operator Ior tool documentation when operator internal tools
are used.

Ericsson TEMS, Nemo TOM, among others, are alternatives to the Agilent tool. DMS
can be used Ior post-processing oI the traces logged with these other tools.

As Iar as post-processing is concerned, there exists some commercial tools alternatives
to DMS: Actix Analyser, Nemo Analyse, TEMS Deskcat, etc. As they are commercial
tools, their prize is obviously higher than DMS.

Regarding KPI Iollow-up during a pilot, Figure 1 presents quickly the procedure
recommended.

8egin
dentify cells
Field kesults
ok
End
Mo Yes
Verify EDGE KFs per
cell & per oreo
Verify Generol KFs per
cell & per oreo
All KFs ok All KFs ok
Check Optim.
Tobles Check counter volidity
Check test volidity
nform TD
Yes
Yes Mo Mo

Figuto 1: kocommooJoJ ptocoJuto lot KPl lo||ow-up Jutiog o pi|o| |tio|

The Optimisation tables reIerred in Figure 1 show a quick analysis oI what might be the
cause oI degraded KPI`s or bad Iield test results. They can be Iound in Table 10.

Indicator Threshold Investigation Path
TBF
Establishment
Success Rate
95 in DL;
95 in DL;
95 in both
directions.
VeriIy the distribution oI TBF Establishment
Failures per cause:
- Failures due to Gb this might indicate
problems at Gb link side (no BVC available,
which would aIIect the cell this implies that
the cell`s operational state is 'disabled);
- Failures due to BSS this might indicate a
system problem (e.g.: Iaulty board at MFS
side). VeriIy also iI CS traIIic is being aIIected
due to BSS causes (e.g. TCH assign Iailures due
to BSS);
- Failures due to congestion: these can also be
divided in other subcauses:
o Radio congestion this might be due
to badly Iunctioning resources (like a
TRE not working, with unavailable TS
or even 0 available TS), Irom too
much CS traIIic, or even Irom too
much PS traIIic.
o Ater congestion, DSP congestion and
CPU congestion either due to lack oI
Atermux resources or to not enough
DSP and/or CPU processing power.
See 5.1 Ior details.
Failures due to radio might indicate radio
problems (e.g. bad Irequency plan)
TBF
Retransmission
Ratio
5
A high retransmission rate might indicate numerous
problems:
- The initial MCS could be set too high (deIault
value, MCS3, shouldn`t Iace this problem). To
veriIy this possibility, check iI retransmissions
are being made on the MCS corresponding to
the initial MCS;
- Radio conditions on the cell are bad, and so are
causing many blocks to be not decoded;
- Other causes.

TBF Normal
Release Rate
95
note that:
-in DL, it is
expected a lower
normal release rate
in UL most oI the
traIIic is signalling,
and so is short and
coded in MCS1

-the global
normal release rate
will be closer to the
UL value there are
many more UL TBFs
due to signalling
VeriIy how TBF`s are being abnormally released.
The Iollowing causes are possible:
- RLC blocks are being lost during the GPRS
connection
- RLC blocks are being retransmitted too many
times check the TBF Retransmission Ratio
KPI;
- Connection drop is high this might be due to 3
other sub-causes:
o System drop indicating a system
problem. VeriIy other KPI (GSM
included);
o Gb drop indicating problem on Gb
interIace;
Radio drop this might be due either to
real radio drops or to acceptable
releases (due to cell reselection;
suspend/resume procedure; PDCH pre-
emption).
MCS
Distribution
-
No clear threshold exists Ior this KPI, because it
depends a lot Irom the conIiguration oI the cell and the
end user traIIic (short (e.g. WAP) or long (e.g. FTP)
transIers).
Nevertheless some very useIul indications might be
taken Irom it:
- II MCS2 ratio is very high, this might indicate
that extra GCH might be badly conIigured. In
this case, veriIy iI any particular cell is having
maximum MCS2, as this might indicate a Iaulty
secondary Abis link;
- II MCS5 ratio is very high, this might indicate
that there is some Ater congestion see Ater
congestion KPI analysis.
Resource
Reallocation
-
In B8 and with EDGE, it is natural that some re-
allocation triggers will occur very Irequently (T2 and
T4, Ior instance). Other triggers should not occur so
Irequently:
- a high Irequency oI occurrence oI T1 might
indicate that the cell is sub-dimensioned to
accommodate all CS and PS traIIic;
- a high Irequency oI occurrence oI T3 might
indicate that there is too much PS traIIic
which in itselI is not a bad thing, but in this case
congestion indicators should be checked.

Ater
Congestion
0.2 Ior Ater
Mux congestion is
acceptable
provided it occurs
only occasionally
For more details concerning Ater congestion issues,
please check 5.1.
To6|o 10: Cp|imiso|ioo |o6|os - tocommooJoJ iovos|igo|ioo po|hs togotJiog |ho moio KPls

Finally, Table 11 and Table 12 present the FTP results expected during the Iield trials,
based on the results obtained so Iar.

Some notes are due, though:
- The presented intervals are in Iact the intervals Iound in the results Irom various
Iield trials and pilots;
- DiIIerent results considering same TRX class, same Irequency hopping scheme
were averaged. All values were considered independently iI resegmentation was
enabled or not, and iI PSPREFBCCH was set to true or not.
- For DL results, only tests with Iilesize oI 1 MB, 2 MB or 3 MB were considered. In
UL Iilesizes oI 200kB and 500 kB were considered.
- TraIIic conditions in all cases were such not to aIIect EDGE tests.
- DiIIerent MS types were used: Nokia 6220 (21 in EDGE), Nokia 6230 (41 or 32
in EDGE) and Philips DragonIly (41 or 32 in EDGE) hence the option to
present results in per RTS throughput.
- The objective oI these tables is to give a quick idea oI what kind oI results to expect.
Further details can be Iound in the EGPRSQoSdatabase (a intranet version is
currently being prepared by PCS);
- Note that in UL, as 8PSK is not available in B8 release, it is indiIIerent to have TRX
class 2 or a superior TRX class;
- Both RxLEv and MeanBEP measurements usually deIine radio conditions.
UnIortunately this was not the case in some pilots. Also, there were some cases
where the radio conditions were perhaps badly deIined (normal radio conditions that
are in Iact poor, Ior instance).
- The deIinition oI radio conditions can be Iound in Table 13.

TkX Closs kodio Conditions*
Expected Throughput per
FDCH intervol (kbit/s} **
Good 43. - 4.3
Mormol 3.4 - 44. 5
Foor 30.8 - 37.5
Good 44. - 4.8
Mormol 3.7 - 42.8 4
Foor 2.0 - 37.4
Good 25.7 - 2.3
Mormol 24. - 25.3 3
Foor 20.8 - 25.2
Good 1.2 - 1.
Mormol 18.5 - 18.7 2
Foor 15.3 - 18.3
To6|o 11: FTP DL tosu||s

kodio Conditions*
Expected Throughput per FDCH intervol
(kbit/s} **
Good 12.4 - 13.5
Mormol 12.4 - 13.2
Foor 10.4 - 12.7
To6|o 12: FTP UL tosu||s

Radio Conditions* RxLev MeanBEP
Good |-55 dBm, -65 dBm| |31, 25|
Normal |-75 dBm, -85 dBm| |25, 15|
Poor |-85 dBm, -100 dBm| |15, 0|
To6|o 13: koJio cooJi|ioo io|otvo| Jolioi|ioo (os s|o|oJ oo 0j

As seen beIore, other services can be tested during a Iield trial. The results depend too
much on the deIinition oI the test.

WEB test results will depend a lot on the used web page structure a simple text page with
Iew big images will obviously give a better throughput than a page with many small elements.

WAP tests are seldom made due to two main reasons: on one hand, the results depend a lot
on the page structure and size, and rarely it is possible to have a Iixed WAP page (normally,
commercial pages are used); on the other hand, a WAP session uses many short connections,
so the improvements oI EDGE are less visible.

MMS tests would normally show improvements in EDGE. Again, they are very dependent
on the message considered.

Video streaming tests are also seldom made. There is still not a clear way oI perIorming
these tests, so they are normally avoided.

Last but not least, PING tests are regularly made to prove non-regression in EDGE. Notice
has to be made to the Iact that some mobiles may be buggy, and so present bad results. See
Iault report 3BK A25FBR 153113 Ior more details.

To see all results Irom previous experimentations, Ior all services, please reIer to the
EGPRSQoSdatabase.

4.3 QoS Iollow-up on a regular network

QoS Iollow-up on a regular network is somewhat diIIerent Irom the Iollow-up done during
a Iield trial. Namely:
- There is not a speciIic (set oI) cell(s) to look at the traIIic is not speciIically generated
on a speciIic cell, but comes Irom end-user usage, and appears scattered all over the
network;
- There is no control on what the end-users will do the traIIic mix is not controllable,
as well as there is no guarantee regarding which mobiles are being used;
- While the QoS Iollow-up during a Iield trial is done only during the duration oI the trial
itselI (considering some extra week(s) Ior reIerence, oI course), the QoS on a regular
network must be checked regularly.

QoS Iollow-up in an EDGE network is not very diIIerent Irom the Iollow-up done in a
GSM/GPRS network. The main diIIerences are at KPI level in an EDGE network, the KPI`s
to be observed are diIIerent (see 4.1 Ior deIinitions). To be Iair there are Iew EDGE speciIic
indicators.

Figure 2 presents quickly the recommended procedure. The optimisation tables reIerred
therein correspond to Table 10.

8egin
Verify Generol KFs
Generol KFs
ok
G5M/GFk5
Follow-up
process
Verify EDGE KFs
EDGE KFs
ok
Verify bod KF(s} per
Metwork Element
dentify Foulty
Metwork Element
Air-itf meos.
possible
Do oir meosurements
Meos. ok
Follow problem during
some more time
Froblem
persists
Check Optimizotion
Tobles
nform TD
End
Mo
Yes
Yes
Mo
Mo Yes
Yes
Mo
Yes
Mo

Figuto 2: kocommooJoJ ptocoJuto lot KPl lo||ow-up io o togu|ot oo|wotk

5 Known Issues
5.1 Ater congestion

As seen in 2.4, during the Ater congestion state the GCH Reduction Mechanism is
active.

This GCH Reduction Mechanism only aIIects the establishment oI GPRS TBF`s. But
experience on the Iield showed that EGPRS TBF`s are also aIIected!

II an EGPRS TBF is established while a GPRS TBF is still active, or is established less
than TPDCHINACTIVITY seconds aIter the end oI the GPRS TBF, it will be aIIected.
In both cases the EGPRS TBF will be established on the PDCH already established Ior
the GPRS TBF, hence only having 1 or 2 GCH`s associated. Please note that iI EGPRS and
GPRS TBF`s are sharing the same TBF`s, it will be the GPRS TBF that will be re-
allocated.

This use oI 'limited PDCH`s will have the immediate impact oI limiting the maximum
MCS to MCS5, whatever the class considered (obviously only TRX class 3 or above are
aIIected). Note also that iI MAXGPRSCS CS2, the maximum will be logically limited
to MCS2.

What Iield tests have shown, and it is important to retain, is that even iI there is a
correct Ater dimensioning (enough Ater Mux links), Ater congestion at DSP level is
possible!

DSP processing is limited and easily the maximum can be reached. Furthermore there
are some situations where there is a waste oI resources.

The most Irequent situation oI waste oI resources is linked to the GPRS Resource
Anticipation mechanism.

When establishing an UL TBF one-phase access, the MFS may trigger the GPRS
Resource anticipation (depending on parameterisation, oI course) meaning that some TS
will be reserved Ior PDCH`s in DL anticipating some upcoming traIIic in DL. The mobile
class is not known at this time, and so the MFS will consider the
GPRSMULTISLOTDEFAULTVALUE as mobile class.

Note that the MFS is not sure that there will be any DL traIIic, and so considering a
class n TRX, and considering the deIault value oI
GPRSMULTISLOTDEFAULTVALUE, that is 8 (meaning 41 mobile), there could
be a potential waste oI 4*(n-1) GCH.

The way to detect the Ater congestion is described in 4.1.6.

Actually two workarounds are known. Either more GPU`s or Atermux links are added,
or parameters are changed.

II Ater congestion is at Ater Mux level, there is no way to escape the need to add more
Ater Mux capacity (i.e. new link or dedicated link or increased granularity). II Ater
congestion is at DSP level, adding GPU`s might solve the problem, but it is neither a
practical solution nor an inexpensive one.

In the case oI Ater congestion at DSP level, parameterisation changing is preIerred. The
Iollowing parameters can be changed:
- GPRSMULTISLOTDEFAULTVALUE to 1(meaning 11 MS) to avoid
wasting resources;
- TPDCHINACTIVITY to 3s and TPDCHINACTIVITYLAST to 20s to
liberate resources sooner.
Note that in the case oI congestion at Ater Mux level, the parameterisation changes will
not solve (or improve) the problem.

The above parameterisation has theoretically some drawbacks.
II during the DL anticipation process the traIIic to be exchanged is indeed data traIIic,
and the mobile is oI an higher class (thus needing more than 1 DL TS), it is probable that
new resources need to be allocated, hence decreasing the speed gain brought by the DL
anticipation mechanism.
On the other hand, decreasing the TPDCHINACTIVITY|LAST| might also lead to
an increase oI the average time to establish TBF`s, as the delayed DL TBF release
mechanism will be slightly less eIIective.

Tests have been made to study the impact oI these parameter changes, and results have
shown that impact is negligible.

5.2 EDGE perIormance degradation with Frequency Hopping

In all pilot and Iield trials made so Iar, EDGE perIormance is worse when Frequency
Hopping is used.

As a consequence oI these results, a test campaign was launched to quantiIy and veriIy
the degradation oI hopping in EDGE perIormance.

First tests made in optimum laboratory conditions (no interIerence, no Iading, etc.)
showed that Frequency Hopping and EDGE work well together.

The tests made with the Nokia 6220 showed that in Lab tests, increasing the number oI
Ireq. in hopping law makes meanBEP and throughput decrease. But relation between
number oI Irequencies and EDGE perIormance is not clear in tests made later!
In general, it was seen that Irequency hopping does impact negatively EDGE
perIormance.

Tests made with the Nokia 6230 showed that there was negligible perIormance
degradation with Irequency hopping.

No clear conclusion can be taken Irom the results so Iar.

Further tests will be perIormed, considering diIIerent mobiles (including the Philips
DrangonIly), but considering always the same conditions (radio conditions, number oI TS,
etc.).

5.3 APD issues

As seen in 2.2, 3GPP specs give some constraints regarding APD values when EDGE is
carried in the BCCH-TRX.

To avoid having a too great APD, it might be needed to decrease the GMSK output power
(through BSTXPWRMAX parameter), hence decreasing the cell coverage this might be
inadmissible to the operator.
Other alternative to respect the 3GPP specs might be to declare TS7 as SDCCH, avoiding
the tighter constraints in this TS (2 dB on TS7 vs. 4 dB in all the other TS).

But again, this option might be impracticable when Cell Broadcast Ieature is activated (CB
must use a SDCCH channel on TS0 to TS3 oI the BCCH-TRX).

As can be easily calculated Irom Table 2, the APD will easily be bigger than 4 dB. So to
respect the 3GPP recommendations might be an issue.

AIter some trials where the recommendation was disregarded it was seen that no negative
impact was Iound. Also, the speciIications Irom 3GPP are a little vague regarding iI they are
really mandatory or only recommended.

The reason behind the 3GPP recommendation is to avoid an issue (a MS does not
reselect/is not handed over to the best neighbour cell) that occurs only in older mobiles.
In theory, the MS is time-synchronised to the best 6 neighbors (in order to be able to read
SI3), and so the MS should make RxLev measurements on TS0 oI those neighbour cells. The
RSSI in other TS should not be considered.

As the Iield tests didn`t show any negative impact, which just conIirms that only older
mobiles are prone to have problems, we can say that:
It is possible to use normally the BCCH TRX Ior EDGE without any re-conIiguration or
output power modiIication.

5.4 Fault Reports that may impact EDGE perIormance

5.4.1 Bad PING performance in some Nokia mobiles
During the EDGE tests made with Orange France (ZE B8), it was detected that the ping
perIormance Ior small data ping sizes and large intervals in the Nokia 6230 was degraded. A
Iault report 3BK A25FBR 153113 was open.

AIter some talks with Alcatel, Nokia has admitted that the problem is inside its mobile
SW.
IOT tests made on 19/Jan showed that ping perIormance has improved with new Iirmware
version (5.28). The Fault Report linked to this problem was closed during w505.

There are no more details on what was really the problem behind the ping perIormance
degradation, but problem is solved with the new Iirmware version.

When doing PING tests with the Nokia 6230, take care oI the Iirmware version oI the
mobile older versions will surely give bad results.

5.4.2 Wrong RLC block coding when retransmitting with MCS3 (with padding)
It was seen in the platIorm that whenever there was retransmission oI some block initially
coded in MCS8 and re-segmentation was enabled, some problems could occur.
When the retransmission is done using MCS3 (with padding) Ior the coding oI the
retransmitted blocks, these blocks are incorrectly coded, and so the mobile can not decode
them, which impacts the perIormance.

This problem has originated the Fault Report 3BKA20FBR154745, which is actually
closed. This problem was solved through Change Request 3BKA20CBR154875, available
Irom MR6 Iorward.

The recommendation Irom TD is in the mean time to disable re-segmentation (which is in
line with the deIault value Ior ENFULLIR).

6 Final Comments

The present document aimed at giving a general view on how to Iollow-up the Quality
oI Service and how to optimise an EDGE network.

All assumptions made take into account the knowledge obtained in the diIIerent EDGE
networks and in the pilots made so Iar.

Obviously, there is a risk that the document becomes outdated. II this occurs, a new
edition oI the document will be prepared so please check that you have the latest version.

END OF DOCUMENT

EDGE Optimisation Guide Ed1

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

EDGE Optimisation Guide Ed1

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Alcatel File Reference Date Edition Page

EDGE Optimisation Guide ed1.doc 04/05/05 2.0 1

Вам также может понравиться