ITU Centres of Excellence for Europe

Mobile Broadband: LTE/LTE-Advanced,

WiMAX and WLAN
Module 3:
WLAN/WiFi broadband access networks

MODULE 3:
WLAN/WiFi broadband access networks
Contents
WLAN/WiFi broadband access networks..............................................................1
3 Introduction ........................................................................................................3
3.1 IEEE 802.11 standard (2012)..........................................................................3
3.2 Broadband WLAN/WiFi: the IEEE 802.11n .....................................................9
3.3 WLAN network design ..................................................................................19
3.4 Quality of Service (QoS) and Security in WLAN ...........................................34
3.5 WiFi hotspot solutions...................................................................................41
3.6 4G mobile data traffic offloading to WLAN (from LTE/LTE-Advanced, and
from Mobile WiMAX) ...........................................................................................45
3.7 Cognitive resource management in future wireless networks .......................48
3.8 Business and regulatory aspects of WLAN/WiFi...........................................52
3.9 Reference list ................................................................................................54

3 Introduction
Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs) represent a broadband access
technology which provides high data rates on limited coverage, with great fidelity.
That is why WLAN is usually seen as a complement technology to LTE or
WiMAX used to serve hot-spots or locations where the demand for network
capacity is extraordinarily high. The most proliferated WLAN technology is the
one based on IEEE 802.11 standard, also known as WiFi (Wireless Fidelity).
Considering its successful history and proved reliability, WiFi broadband access
networks are still an active and evolving technology, which deserves significant
attention among the plethora of wireless broadband technologies.
This third module of the course discusses the latest moments of the WiFi
technology evolution. We will start with the analysis of the newest standard
edition IEEE 802.11 (2012), and its latest and most famous amendment 802.11n.
This module also involves discussions regarding some inevitable aspects of
WLAN network design, Quality of Service (QoS) and Security in WLAN. We also
analyze the modern trends in WiFi hotspot solutions and 4G mobile data traffic
offloading to WLAN. Finally Module 3 provides some visions of the cutting-edge
developments in WLAN technologies represented by cognitive resource
management in future wireless networks and the business and regulatory
aspects of WLAN/WiFi technology.

3.1 IEEE 802.11 standard (2012)

The purpose of IEEE 802.11 standard is to provide wireless connectivity for fixed,
portable, and moving stations within a local area. This standard also offers to
regulatory bodies a means of standardizing access to one or more frequency
bands for the purpose of local area communication. The scope of this standard is
to define one medium access control (MAC) and several physical layer (PHY)
specifications for wireless connectivity for fixed, portable, and moving stations
(STAs) within a local area.
The original IEEE 802.11 standard was published in 1999 and reaffirmed in
2003. The first revision was published in 2007, which incorporated into the 1999
edition the following amendments: IEEE Std 802.11a-1999, IEEE Std
802.11b-1999, IEEE Std 802.11b-1999/Corrigendum 1-2001, IEEE Std
802.11d-2001, IEEE Std 802.11g-2003, IEEE Std 802.11h-2003, IEEE Std
802.11i-2004, IEEE Std 802.11j-2004 and IEEE Std 802.11e-2005.
The latest revision IEEE 802.11-2012 specifies technical corrections and
clarifications to 802.11 standard for wireless local area networks (WLANs) as
well as enhancements to the existing medium access control (MAC) and physical
layer (PHY) functions. It also incorporates Amendments 1 to 10 published in
2008 to 2011.

In particular, the current revision, IEEE Std 802.11-2012, incorporates the

following amendments into the 2007 revision:
IEEE Std 802.11k-2008: Radio Resource Measurement of Wireless
LANs (Amendment 1): Mostly used by AP manufacturers, this amendment
makes additional radio and network information available to WLAN
devices. This information is used to make real-time decisions about WLAN
management, typically for better load balancing.
IEEE Std 802.11r-2008: Fast Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition
(Amendment 2): This amendment is a good example of how various
amendments interact, and sometimes even conflict with each other to
degrade instead of enhance 802.11 performance. A critical aspect of Wi-Fi
is mobility, and this typically involves a client device moving from AP to AP
to maintain adequate signal strength as the user moves around. This
movement creates a transition or a hand-off and it needs to take place
relatively quickly for services to continue uninterrupted, especially timesensitive services like VoIP over wireless (VoFi). As more and more
amendments were added to 802.11 this transition time degraded
significantly, causing problems for services like VoFi. This amendment
addresses this degradation, making transitions as fast as they can be.
IEEE Std 802.11y-2008: 36503700 MHz Operation in USA
(Amendment 3): 802.11y specifies a light-licensing scheme for U.S.
users to take advantage of spectrum in the 3650 3700 MHz band, at
power levels that are significantly higher than those used in the 2.4 or
5GHz bands. The use case for this technology will typically be for longer
distance, point-to-point, backhaul communication using 802.11.
IEEE Std 802.11w-2009: Protected Management Frames (Amendment
4): 802.11w specifies methods to increase the security of 802.11
management frames. Management frames are 802.11 packets that control
communication on the WLAN, but do not contain data. Examples include
beacons, RTS/CTS, probe responses, acknowledgements, etc. Currently
management frames are sent in the clear making them potentially
vulnerable to malicious manipulation.
IEEE Std 802.11n-2009: Enhancements for Higher Throughput
(Amendment 5): this amendment will be discussed in Section 3.2.
IEEE Std 802.11p-2010: Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments
(Amendment 6): 802.11p deals with data exchange between high-speed
vehicles, and between vehicles and a yet-to-exist roadside WLAN
infrastructure based on licensed spectrum in the 5.85 5.925GHz band.
Though the plans for this technology seem quite grandiose, activity in this
area has been quite limited to date, and obviously has no affect on
enterprise WLAN users. Any WLAN analysis capabilities for 802.11p are
likely to be very specific to this particular application.

 IEEE Std 802.11z-2010: Extensions to Direct-Link Setup (DLS)

(Amendment 7): Direct link setup (DLS) allows WLAN client devices to
connect directly to each other, bypassing the typical link through an
infrastructure AP. This has many benefits, including an increase in speed
(between the clients), an increase in network throughput (for all users),
and an increase in overall service delivery, especially for multimedia (like
a computer to DVR connection or a laptop to projector connection).
IEEE Std 802.11v-2011: IEEE 802.11 Wireless Network Management
(Amendment 8): 802.11v provides a mechanism for wireless clients to
share information about the WLAN environment with each other and APs
to improve WLAN network performance in real time. Most client devices
do not yet take advantage of this new capability, but as compatible
devices (both client and infrastructure) come to market the need to
analyze 802.11v packets will become very important, especially in
determining if the information shared is really resulting in anticipated
improvements.
IEEE Std 802.11u-2011: Interworking with External Networks
(Amendment 9): This is an extremely hot topic in mobile computing, and
one that will continue to get tremendous attention. It also requires
solutions to some pretty difficult problems, including discovery,
authentication, authorization, and compatibility, hence progress towards
implementation has been slower than anticipated.
IEEE Std 802.11s-2011: Mesh Networking (Amendment 10): Mesh
networking specifies an architecture and protocol for WLANs that use
radio-aware metrics over self-configuring multi-hop topologies. Essentially,
802.11s enables the creation of high-performing, scalable, ad-hoc
networks, often with no wired network access at all. One of the most
widely discussed use cases is in emergency services, like those provided
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, where a scalable
network needs to be set up very quickly in a remote area for a finite period
of time. It is highly unlikely that enterprise customers will take advantage
of mesh technology. WLAN analysis of mesh environments is likely to be
highly specialized and mostly transient, so theres no need for the typical
enterprise-focused WLAN analysis system to deal with 802.11s, at least
not anytime soon.
As a result of publishing the 802.11-2012 revision, all of the previously published
amendments and revisions are now retired.
In IEEE Std 802.11-2012, the order of clauses and annexes has also been
revised. The result of this revised order on the numbering of clauses and
annexes is summarized in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Changes in clause numbers and annex letters from 2007 revision to
2012 revision

The IEEE 802.11-2012 standard has wide range of purposes. In particular, the
standard:
Describes the functions and services required by an IEEE 802.11compliant device to operate within independent and infrastructure
networks as well as the aspects of STA mobility (transition) within those
networks.
Describes the functions and services that allow an IEEE 802.11-compliant
device to communicate directly with another such device outside of an
independent or infrastructure network.
Defines the MAC procedures to support the MAC service data unit
(MSDU) delivery services.
Defines several PHY signaling techniques and interface functions that are
controlled by the IEEE 802.11 MAC.
Permits the operation of an IEEE 802.11-conformant device within a
wireless local area network (WLAN) that may coexist with multiple
overlapping IEEE 802.11 WLANs.
Describes the requirements and procedures to provide data confidentiality
of user information and MAC management information being transferred
over the wireless medium (WM) and authentication of IEEE 802.11conformant devices.
Defines mechanisms for dynamic frequency selection (DFS) and transmit
power control (TPC) that may be used to satisfy regulatory requirements
for operation in any band.
Defines the MAC procedures to support local area network (LAN)
applications with quality-of-service (QoS) requirements, including the
transport of voice, audio, and video.
Defines mechanisms and services for wireless network management of
STAs that include BSS transition management, channel usage and
coexistence, collocated interference reporting, diagnostic, multicast
diagnostic and event reporting, flexible multicast, efficient beacon
mechanisms, proxy ARP advertisement, location, timing measurement,
directed multicast, extended sleep modes, traffic filtering, and
management notification.
Defines functions and procedures aiding network discovery and selection
by STAs, information transfer from external networks using QoS mapping,
and a general mechanism for the provision of emergency services.
Defines the MAC procedures that are necessary for wireless multi-hop
communication to support wireless LAN mesh topologies.
The new IEEE 802.11 release is the product of an evolutionary process that has
played out over five years and drawn on the expertise and efforts of hundreds of
participants worldwide. More than 300 voters from a sweeping cross-section of

global industry contributed to the new standard, which has roughly doubled in
size since its last published revision.
In general, many telecommunication experts claim that IEEE 802.11-2012
revision has been expanded significantly the WiFi technology towards supporting
communications between devices and networks that are faster and more secure,
while offering improved Quality of Service and, improved cellular network handoff. IEEE 802.11 standards already underpin wireless networking applications
around the world, such as wireless access to the Internet from offices, homes,
airports, hotels, restaurants, trains and aircraft around the world. The standards
relevance continues to expand with the emergence of new applications, such as
the smart grid, which augments the facility for electricity generation, distribution,
delivery and consumption with a two-way, end-to-end network for
communications and control, as well as applications dedicated to manufacturers,
healthcare workers and retail service providers around the world.
Regarding the technical novelties delivered by the new 802.11-2012 we can
emphasize several of them such as, new support for 3.65 and 3.7GHz bands, to
avoid clashing with 2.4GHz or 5GHz networks, as well as better support for direct
linking, faster cellular hand-offs, in-car networks, roaming and mesh networking.
802.11-2012 is also expected to provide 600Mbps throughput. The PHY
(physical layer) and MAC (a software layer) components of 802.11-2012 will be
reworked to provide that impressive speed. Those changes will also allow for
new
additions
like
"mesh"
networking,
changes
in
security,
broadcast/multicast/unicast data delivery and additional network management
features.

3.2 Broadband WLAN/WiFi: the IEEE 802.11n

The IEEE 802.11n standard offers several technical benefits over previous
technology generations, which result in improved throughput to 802.11n-based
clients, as well as greater reliability for legacy 802.11a/b/g clients.
It is important to say that 802.11n is much more than just a new radio for 802.11.
In addition to providing higher bit rates (as was done in 802.11a, b, and g),
802.11n makes dramatic changes to the basic frame format that is used by
802.11 devices to communicate with each other. This subsection will describe
the changes incorporated in 802.11n, including MIMO, radio enhancements, and
MAC enhancements.
Environmental characteristics and network density plays a significant role in the
ultimate performance of a network. In well-designed networks, each access point
can serve well over 150 Mbps of TCP throughput to clients using 802.11n
technology, and multiple radios can operate simultaneously to provide several
gigabits of throughput.
The following table presents an overview of the used techniques for improvement
of network performance along with the corresponding effects and opportunities
that are provided by each of them.
Table 1 Overview of the techniques for network performance improvement

Multiple-input multiple-output is the heart of 802.11n. The following technical

discussion of MIMO provides a basis for understanding how 802.11n can reach
data rates of 600 Mbps.
MIMO technology takes advantage of several techniques to improve the SNR at
the receiver. One technique is transmit beamforming. When there is more than
one transmit antenna, it is possible to coordinate the signal sent from each
antenna so that the signal at the receiver is dramatically improved. This
technique is generally used when the receiver has only a single antenna and
when there are few obstructions or radio-reflective surfaces, e.g., open storage
yards.
To understand transmit beamforming, consider a radio signal as a wave shape,
with a wave length that is specific to the frequency of the signal. When two radio
signals are sent from different antennae, these signals are added together at the
receivers antenna (see Figure 2). Depending on the distance that each radio
signal travels, they are very likely to arrive at the receiver out of phase with each
other. This difference in phase at the receiver affects the overall signal strength
of the received signal. By carefully adjusting the phase of the radio signals at the
transmitter, the received signal can be maximized at the receiver, increasing
SNR. This is what transmit beamforming does: It effectively focuses the
transmitters on a single receiver, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 2 Destructive interference

Figure 3 Constructive Interference with Transmit Beamforming

Transmit beamforming cannot easily be done at the transmitter without
information from the receiver about the received signal. This feedback is
available only from 802.11n devices, and not from 802.11a, b, or g devices. To
maximize the signal at the receiver, feedback from the receiver must be sent to
the transmitter so that the transmitter can tune each signal it sends. This
feedback is not immediate and is only valid for a short time. Any physical
movement by the transmitter, receiver, or elements in the environment will
quickly invalidate the parameters used for beamforming. The wavelength for a
2.4 GHz radio is only 120mm, and only 55mm for a 5 GHz radio. Thus, a normal
walking pace of 1 meter per second will rapidly move the receiver out of the spot
where the transmitters beamforming efforts are most effective.
Transmit beamforming is useful only when transmitting to a single receiver. It is
not possible to optimize the phase of the transmitted signals when sending
broadcast or multicast transmissions. For this reason, in general networking
applications, the utility of transmit beamforming is somewhat limited, providing
improved SNR at the receiver for only those transmissions that are sent to that
receiver alone. Transmit beamforming can increase the data rate available at
greater distances from the AP. But, it does not increase the coverage area of an
access point, since that is determined, in large part, by the ability to receive the
beacons from the access point. Beacons are a broadcast transmission that does
not benefit from transmit beamforming.
In typical indoor WLAN deployments, (e.g., offices, hospitals, and warehouses)
the radio signal rarely takes the shortest and most direct path from the
transmitter to the receiver. This is because there is rarely line of sight between
the transmitter and the receiver. Often there is a cube wall, door, or other
structure that obscures the line of sight. All of these obstructions reduce the
strength of the radio signal as it passes through them. Luckily, most of these

environments are full of surfaces that reflect a radio signal as well as a mirror
reflects light.
Imagine that all of the metallic surfaces, large and small, that are in an
environment were actually mirrors. Nails and screws, door frames, ceiling
suspension grids, and structural beams are all reflectors of radio signals. It would
be possible to see the same WLAN access point in many of these mirrors
simultaneously. Some of the images of the access point would be a direct
reflection through a single mirror. Some images would be a reflection of a
reflection. Still others would involve an even greater number of reflections. This
phenomenon is called multipath (see Figure 4).

Figure 4 Multipath interference

When a signal travels over different paths to a single receiver, the time that the
signal arrives at the receiver depends on the length of the path it traveled. The
signal traveling the shortest path will arrive first, followed by copies or echoes of
the signal slightly delayed by each of the longer paths that the copies traveled.
When traveling at the speed of light, as radio signals do, the delay between the
first signal to arrive and its copies is very small, only nanoseconds. (A rule of
thumb for the distance covered at the speed of light is roughly one foot per one
nanosecond.) This delay is enough to be able to cause significant degradation of
the signal at a single antenna because all the copies interfere with the first signal
to arrive.
A MIMO radio sends multiple radio signals at the same time and takes advantage
of multipath. Each of these signals is called a spatial stream. Each spatial stream
is sent from its own antenna, using its own transmitter. Because there is some
space between each of these antennae, each signal follows a slightly different
path to the receiver. This is called spatial diversity. Each radio can also send a
different data stream from the other radios. The receiver has multiple antennas
as well, each with its own radio. Each of the receive radios independently decode
the arriving signals (see Figure 5). Then, each radios received signal is
combined with the signals from the other receive radios. With a lot of complex
math, the result is a much better receive signal than can be achieved with either

a single antenna or even with transmit beamforming. One of the two significant
benefits of MIMO is that it dramatically improves the SNR, providing more
flexibility for the WLAN system designer.

Figure 5 Spatial multiplexing

MIMO systems are described using the number of transmitters and receivers in
the systemfor example, 21 is two by one, meaning two transmitters and one
receiver. 802.11n defines a number of different combinations for the number of
transmitters and the number of receivers, from 21, equivalent to transmit
beamforming, up to 44. Each additional transmitter or receiver in the system
increases the SNR. However, the incremental gains from each additional
transmitter or receiver diminish rapidly. The gain in SNR is large for each step
from 11 to 21 to 22, the improvement with 33 is not quite as large, and
beyond 3x3 is more moderate. The use of multiple transmitters provides the
second significant benefit of MIMO: the ability to use each spatial stream to carry
its own information, providing dramatically increased data rates.
802.11n Enhancements
In addition to MIMO technology, 802.11n makes a number of additional changes
to the radio to increase the effective throughput of the WLAN. The most
important of these changes are increased channel size, higher modulation rates,
and reduced overhead. In the following we will describe each of these changes
and the effect they have on WLAN throughput.

Physical Layer Enhancements

The original 802.11 direct sequence radio and the 802.11b extension to the base
standard use a radio channel spacing that is 22 MHz wide. 802.11a and 802.11g
use 20 MHz wide radio channel spacing. Because 802.11g is an extension to
802.11b, 802.11g spaces its channels just as 802.11b does, every 22 MHz. The
size, or bandwidth, of the radio channel is an important measure of the efficiency
of the radio. This is called the spectral efficiency and is measured in bits per
Hertz. The spectral efficiency of 802.11b is one-half the bits per Hertz (for
example, 11 Mbps in 22 MHz). 802.11a and 802.11g have higher spectral
efficiency, as much as 2.7 bits per Hertz at 54 Mbps.
Using exactly the same technology as 802.11a and 802.11g, some proprietary
WLAN systems are available that provide up to 108 Mbps. These proprietary
systems use a simple technique to double the data rate of 802.11a and 802.11g.
They use two channels at the same time. This is called channel bonding. With
channel bonding, the spectral efficiency is the same as 802.11a and 802.11g, but
the channel bandwidth is twice as great. This provides a simple way of doubling
the data rate.

Figure 6 - 20MHz and 40MHz channels

802.11n uses both 20 MHz and 40 MHz channels. Like the proprietary products,
the 40 MHz channels in 802.11n are two adjacent 20 MHz channels, bonded
together. When using the 40 MHz bonded channel, 802.11n takes advantage of
the fact that each 20 MHz channel has a small amount of the channel that is
reserved at the top and bottom, to reduce interference in those adjacent
channels. When using 40 MHz channels, the top of the lower channel and the
bottom of the upper channel do not have to be reserved to avoid interference.
These small parts of the channel can now be used to carry information. By using
the two 20 MHz channels more efficiently in this way, 802.11n achieves slightly
more than doubling the data rate when moving from 20 MHz to 40 MHz channels
(see Figure 6).

802.11n continues to use OFDM and a 4-microsecond symbol, similar to 802.11a

and 802.11g. However, 802.11n increases the number of subcarriers in each 20
MHz channel from 48 to 52. This marginally increases the data rate to a
maximum of 65 Mbps, for a single-transmit radio. 802.11n provides a selection of
eight data rates for a transmitter to use and also increases the number of
transmitters allowable to four. For two transmitters, the maximum data rate is 130
Mbps. Three transmitters provide a maximum data rate of 195 Mbps. The
maximum four transmitters can deliver 260 Mbps. In total, 802.11n provides up to
32 data rates for use in a 20 MHz channel.
When using 40 MHz channels, 802.11n increases the number of subcarriers
available to 108. This provides a maximum data rate of 135 Mbps, 270 Mbps,
405 Mbps, and 540 Mbps for one through four transmitters, respectively.
Similarly, there are eight data rates provided for each transmitter, 32 in total, for
the 40 MHz channel.
802.11n can also use a short guard interval that is 400 nanoseconds long,
instead of 800 nanoseconds. This slightly increases the maximum data rates, for
example in 40 MHz channels, to 150 Mbps per transmitter. A four-transmitter
802.11n radio operating with 40 MHz channels and using the short guard interval
can therefore deliver a maximum of 600 Mbps.
The 802.11n standard includes the ability for the receiver to combine the
received signals from multiple antennas to reassemble a single spatial stream.
Multipath echoes in an environment can lead to frequency selective fading, in
which certain subcarriers within a 20 MHz or 40 MHz signal are stronger than
others. Maximal-ratio combining (MRC) enables the receiver to correlate the
signal reception from multiple antennas and select the strongest of each antenna
before decoding a particular subcarrier. The result is illustrated in Figure 7: the
aggregate signal of several antennas offers a stronger, more consistent result
than any individual antenna. This effectively increases the receive sensitivity,
solely through the use of digital signal processing.

Figure 7 Maximal Ratio Combining

MAC Layer Enhancements

There is a significant amount of fixed overhead in the 802.11 MAC layer protocol,
and in the interframe spaces and acknowledgements of each frame transmitted,
in particular. At the highest of data rates, this overhead alone can be longer than
the entire data frame. In addition, contention for the air and collisions also reduce
the maximum effective throughput of 802.11. 802.11n addresses these issues by
making changes in the MAC layer to improve on the inefficiencies imposed by
this fixed overhead and by contention losses.
Every frame transmitted by an 802.11 device has fixed overhead associated with
the radio preamble and MAC frame fields that limit the effective throughput, even
if the actual data rate was infinite (see Figure 8).

Figure 8 Frame Overhead

To reduce this overhead, 802.11n introduces frame aggregation. Frame
aggregation is essentially putting two or more frames together into a single
transmission. 802.11n introduces two methods for frame aggregation: Mac
Service Data Units (MSDU) aggregation and Message Protocol Data Unit
(MPDU) aggregation. Both aggregation methods reduce the overhead to only a
single radio preamble for each frame transmission (see Figure 9).

Figure 9 Aggregated frame

Because multiple frames are now sent in a single transmission, the number of
potential collisions and the time lost to backoff is significantly reduced. The
maximum frame size is increased in 802.11n, as well, in order to accommodate
these large, aggregated frames. The maximum frame size is increased from 4
KB to 64 KB. One limitation of frame aggregation is that all the frames that are
aggregated into a transmission must be sent to the same destination; that is, all
the frames in the aggregated frame must be addressed to the same mobile client
or access point. Another limitation is that all the frames to be aggregated have to
be ready to transmit from the client or access point at the same time, potentially
delaying some frames to wait for additional frames, in order to attempt to send a
single aggregate frame. A third limitation of aggregation is that the maximum
frame size that can be successfully sent is affected by a factor called channel
coherence time. Channel coherence time depends on how quickly the

transmitter, receiver, and other items in the environment are moving. The faster
things are moving the smaller the maximum frame size can be as the data rate is
reduced, i.e., the time for the transmission must be less than the channel
coherence time.
There are slight differences in the two aggregation methods that result in
differences in the efficiency gained. These two methods are described here.
MSDU (MAC Service Data Units) aggregation is the more efficient of the two
aggregation methods. It relies on the fact that an access point receives frames
from its Ethernet interface, to be translated to 802.11 frames and then
transmitted to a mobile client. Similarly, most mobile client protocol stacks create
an Ethernet frame, which the 802.11 driver must translate to an 802.11 frame
before transmission. In both these cases, the native format of the frame is
Ethernet, and it is then translated to 802.11 format for transmission.
Theoretically, MSDU aggregation allows frames for many destinations to be
collected into a single aggregated frame for transmission. Practically, however,
MSDU aggregation collects Ethernet frames for a common destination, wraps the
collection in a single 802.11 frame, and then transmits that 802.11-wrapped
collection of Ethernet frames (see Figure 10). This method is more efficient than
MPDU aggregation, because the Ethernet header is much shorter than the
802.11 header.

Figure 10 MSDU Frame Aggregation

For a mobile device, the aggregated frame is sent to the access point, where the
constituent Ethernet frames are forwarded to their ultimate destinations. For an
access point, all of the constituent frames in the aggregated frame must be
destined to a single mobile client, since there is only a single destination in each
mobile client.
With MSDU aggregation, the entire, aggregated frame is encrypted once using
the security association of the destination of the outer 802.11 frame wrapper. A
restriction of MSDU aggregation is that all of the constituent frames must be of
the same quality-of-service (QoS) level. It is not permitted to mix voice frames
with best-effort frames, for example.
MPDU (Protocol Data Units) aggregation is slightly different from MSDU
aggregation. Instead of collecting Ethernet frames, MPDU aggregation translates
each Ethernet frame to 802.11 format and then collects the 802.11 frames for a
common destination. The collection does not require a wrapping of another
802.11 frame, since the collected frames already begin with an 802.11 MAC
header (see Figure 11).

Figure 11 MPDU Aggregation

MPDU aggregation does require that all the 802.11 frames that constitute the
aggregated frame have the same destination address. However, this results in
the same behavior as MSDU aggregation, since the destination of all frames sent
by a mobile client is that clients access point, where the 802.11 frames are
translated to Ethernet and forwarded to the ultimate destination. Similarly, the
destination of any frame sent by the access point is a single mobile client.
With MPDU aggregation, it is possible to encrypt each constituent frame
independently, using the security association for each individual 802.11
destination address. This does not have any effective difference from the
encryption done in MSDU aggregation, as all frames sent by a mobile client are
encrypted using the security association for the access point, and all frames sent
by the access point are encrypted using the security association for the single
mobile client that is the intended recipient of the frame.
Similar to MSDU aggregation, MPDU aggregation requires that all of the
constituent frames be of the same QoS level. The efficiency of the MPDU
aggregation method is lower than that of the MSDU aggregation method,
because of the extra overhead of the individual 802.11 frame headers for each
constituent frame. The efficiency is further reduced when the encryption is used.
Encryption adds overhead to each of the constituent frame in MPDU
aggregation, where MSDU aggregation incurs overhead for a single encryption of
the outer 802.11 wrapper.

3.3 WLAN network design

While there have been great advances made in the speed and easy of
implementation of Wi-Fi networks, the basic nature of radio frequency (RF) is
generally unchanged. Designing an optimal WLAN with high number of users
who can access the WLAN in a small physical space (high-density WLAN)
remains a challenge. High-density WLAN design refers to any environment
where client devices will be positioned in densities greater than coverage
expectations of a normal enterprise deployment, for example a traditional,
carpeted office. For reference, a typical office environment has indoor
propagation characteristics for signal attenuation. User density is the critical
factor in the design. Aggregate available bandwidth is delivered per radio cell,
and the number of users and their connection characteristics (such as speed,
duty cycle, radio type, band, signal, and SNR) occupying that cell determines the
overall bandwidth available per user.
A typical office environment, Figure 12, may have APs deployed for 2500 to 5000
square feet with a signal of -67 decibels in millowatts (dBm) coverage and a
maximum of 20 to 30 users per cell. That is a density of one user every 120
square foot (sq. ft.) and yields a minimum signal of -67 dBm.

Figure 12 Typical office WLAN

In planning and deploying such a WLAN, an AP is typically placed in an area
expected to have a higher user density, such as in a conference room, while
common areas are left with less coverage. In this way, pre-planning for high
density areas is anticipated. Conference rooms are often placed in clusters, so it
is best to design for the maximum capacity of the area. For example, maximum
occupancy for the three rooms is 32, so user density would be one user per 28
square feet, Figure 13.

Figure 13 Calculating user density

Planning
The WLAN design process can begin in many ways but generally it begins with
an expressed desire to provide connections to a specific area where a number of
users will participate in a focused activity. To evaluate what is possible, it is first
necessary to understand what is required as well as what is possible. There is
generally a primary application that is driving the need for connectivity.
Understanding the throughput requirements for this application and for other
activities that will take place on the network will provide the designer with a peruser bandwidth goal. Multiplying this number by the number of expected
connections yields the aggregate bandwidth that will be required.
The required per connection bandwidth will be used to drive subsequent design
decisions.
Design Point #1: Establish and Validate a Per-Connection Bandwidth
Requirement
How much bandwidth does each user require on average? In Table 2, the
nominal throughput requirements for several popular applications and use cases
in a higher education setting are shown.
Table 2 Bandwidth requirements per application

In all cases, it is highly advisable to test the target application and validate its
actual bandwidth requirements. Software designers are often required to pick just
one average number to represent the applications requirements when there are
actually many modes and deployment decisions that can make up a more
accurate number. It is also important to validate applications on a representative
sample of the devices that are to be supported in the WLAN. Additionally, not all
browsers and operating systems enjoy the same efficiencies, and an application
that runs fine in 100 kilobits per second (Kbps) on a Windows laptop with
Microsoft Internet Explorer or Firefox, may require more bandwidth when being
viewed on a smart phone or tablet with an embedded browser and operating
system.
Once the required bandwidth throughput per connection and application is
known, this number can be used to determine the aggregate bandwidth required
in the WLAN coverage area. To arrive at this number, multiply the minimum
acceptable bandwidth by the number of connections expected in the WLAN
coverage area. This yields the target bandwidth needed for the need series of
steps.
Design Point #2: Calculate the Aggregate Throughput Required for the
Coverage Area
If this course was for a wired rather than wireless network, calculating aggregate
throughput requirements would entail dividing the aggregate capacity by the
channel bandwidth available. Then, the number of channels would be
established and these would be plugged into a switch. But in a WLAN, a
channels speed is effected by multiple factors including protocols, environmental
conditions, and operating band of the adapter. Before calculating aggregate
throughput, several things must be considered.
In the aggregate throughput calculation, the connections instead of the seats
were used as the basis for calculation. The number of connections in a cell is
what determines the total throughput that will be realized per connection instead

of the number of seats. Most users today carry both a primary computing device
(such as a tablet computer, or laptop) as well as a second device (such as a
smartphone). Each connection operating in the high-density WLAN consumes air
time and network resources and will therefore be part of the aggregate bandwidth
calculation. An increase in numbers of device connections is one of the primary
reasons older WLAN designs are reaching oversubscription today.
Wi-Fi is a shared medium. Much like an un-switched Ethernet segment, it
operates as a half duplex connection. Only one station can use the channel at a
time and both the uplink and downlink operate on the same channel. Each
channel or cell used in a Wi-Fi deployment represents a potential unit of
bandwidth much like an Ethernet connection to a hub. In Ethernet, switching
technology was developed to increase the efficiency of the medium by limiting
the broadcast and collision domains of a user to a physical port and creating
point-to-point connections between ports on an as-needed basis, dramatically
increasing the overall capacity.
Users and applications also tend to be bursty (a measure of the unevenness or
variations in the traffic flow) in nature and often access layer networks are
designed with a 20:1 oversubscription to account for these variances. Application
and end user anticipated usage patterns must be determined and also accounted
for. Some applications, such as streaming multicast video, will drive this
oversubscription ratio down while others may drive this factor even higher to
determine an acceptable SLA for each cells designed capacity.
For 802.11 wireless networks or any radio network in general, air is the medium
of propagation. While there have been many advances in efficiency, it is not
possible to logically limit the physical broadcast and collision domain of an RF
signal or separate its spectrum footprint from other radios operating in the same
spectrum. For that reason, Wi-Fi uses a band plan that breaks up the available
spectrums into a group of non-overlapping channels. A channel represents a cell.
Using the analogy of Ethernet, a cell represents a single contiguous collision
domain.
How many users can access an AP comfortably? Hundreds. But the question
should not be how many users can successfully associate to an AP but how
many users can be packed into a room and still obtain per-user bandwidth
throughput that is acceptable.
802.11 Scalability: How much bandwidth will a cell provide?
To scale 802.11 networks to reliably deliver consistent bandwidth to a large
number of users in close proximity, it is important to examine certain WLAN
fundamentals under reasonably ideal conditions. Once the rules are understood,
the ways to manipulate them to maximum advantage will be presented.
In real WLANs, the actual application throughput is what matters to the end user,
and this differs from the signaling speed. Data rates represent the rate at which
data packets will be carried over the medium. Packets contain a certain amount

of overhead that is required to address and control the packets. The application
throughput is carried as payload data within that overhead.
Table 3 shows average application throughput by protocol under good RF
conditions.
Table 3 Average application throughput by protocol

Are 802.11n Data Rates Dependable?

Today, many clients are 802.11n ready and this can provide throughput and
efficiency increases in a high-density deployment. Most WLANs, however, will
support a mix of client protocols. Evaluating the historic average client mix in a
WLAN is possible by either looking at the WLAN controller graphical user
interface (GUI) and using this historic mix of information for planning purposes.
Unless the WLAN is very unique, most environments will likely be dealing with a
diverse mix of clients and protocols for the near future. Consider that other
factors, such as the number of connections, can also be expected to vary over
time and for these reasons it is often a best practice to build in some buffer to
smooth the long term results. The raw speed advantage of 802.11n high
throughput (HT) rates is impressive and boosts the overall efficiency and
capacity of the design by permitting more users or higher speeds to be realized
on the same channel. Figure 14 shows mixed client protocol capacities for a
given cell.

Figure 14 Mixed wireless client protocol performance in a cell (802.11a/g/n)

The graph above shows throughput rates under varying mixes of HT20
modulation coding scheme-15 (MCS15) 2SS data rates and legacy 802.11a/g
(for the purpose of this discussion 802.11a and 802.11g are the same protocol
different bands and are considered equal) data rates within a single isolated cell.
With either all MCS15 or all 802.11a/g clients, the difference in throughput is
480 percent
With a 50/50 mix, there is a 400 percent increase over legacy throughput
With a drop to just 25 percent of MCS15 clients, the increase is 300 percent
In this example using 30 connections, the application throughput to the end user
would be 833 Kbps with all legacy connections or 3.9 Mbps with all 802.11n
connections. A mix drives throughput down. Other variables, such as user
density or environmental noise, can and likely will change over time and will
effect the throughput as well.
Using legacy data rates as a nominal value, Table 4 shows the relationship
between cell bandwidth and per connection bandwidth.
Table 4 data throughput and user connections per wireless protocol

A mixed cell containing both 802.11b and 802.11g traffic results in a throughput
rate that is less than double that of 802.11b alone and roughly half of 802.11g
alone. A similar effect was seen when 802.11n and legacy 802.11a/g rates were
compared. Until the inclusion of 802.11n, all advances in Wi-Fi technology have
come through incremental increases in encoding technology. 802.11n changed
the encoding and streamlined the logistics of bonding 20 MHz channels and
increasing the available channel bandwidth. In implementing new technology, it is
also necessary to provide a mechanism that allows the old and the new protocols
to coexist. It is this mechanism that reduces the overall efficiency of the channel
due to additional overhead. An 802.11b modem was not designed to speak
802.11g. In order to avoid collisions, the 802.11b radios must be informed that
the channel is needed by 802.11g for a period of time.
What is Co-Channel Interference and Why is it Important in High-density
WLANs?
CCI is a critical concept to understand when it comes to understanding the
behavior and performance of 802.11 WLANs. It is a phenomenon where
transmissions from one 802.11 device bleed into the receive range of other
802.11 devices on the same channel, causing interference and reducing the
available spectrum and resulting performance. CCI can cause channel access
delays as well as collisions in transmissions that corrupt frames in transit. Figure
15 illustrates how APs on the same channel interfere with each other.

Figure 15 Co-channel interference

802,11 networks are contention based and rely on Clear Channel Assessment
(CCA) mechanisms to judge the medium state (if busy we wait, when free we
transmit). In the example above, this clients performance is being impacted
because it can hear both APs. To this client, the two AP cells are coupled or
acting as one super cell. For the uplink, both APs transmissions will be seen as
a busy channel by the client and the client will simply wait for an opportunity to
transmit. Worse yet, on the downlink, transmissions from either AP will potentially
collide and retries will increase the contention for the medium and continue to
drive the data rates down overall. The effects of CCI are not limited to just the AP
cell. In a high-density environment, the clients themselves will have the effect of
increasing the overall cell size.
CCA is based on a receive threshold that evaluates the carrier for activity. It is
generally a good practice to consider -85 decibels per milliwatt (dBm) as that
threshold. Figure 16 shows a coverage model based on data rates. Higher data
rates do not propagate as far. If the distances look long in this model, it is
because it was calculated using an outdoor open space model rather than an
indoor model which assumes attenuating factors in the environment. There are
not many walls between the APs and clients in most high-density deployments.

Figure 16 WLAN Coverage model based on data rates

In any Wi-Fi design, the effects of CCI can be limited by isolating the individual
cells from one another through the use of non-overlapping channels and natural
environment attenuation (walls, ceilings, file cabinets and cubes). We would not
place two APs on the same channel directly next to one another intentionally. In
a normal design, the environment and distances we are covering generally
permit adequate coverage without a lot of CCI. But in a high-density network
design, the distances are going to be constrained and propagation will be good,
as such cell coupling and resulting CCI will become much more likely.
Design Point #3: Choose a High Minimum Data Rate to Support Increased
Efficiency, Lower Duty Cycle, and Reduce the Effective Size of the
Resulting Cell
CCI is not only an issue that will be faced in aggregating channels within the
high-density deployment but something that must be kept in mind regarding
existing deployments of surrounding areas. Lecture halls and classrooms tend to
be co-located in the same facility, so overall design must be considered.
In 2.4 GHz there are three non-overlapping channels with which to work in
achieving isolation. The RF properties of 2.4 GHz signals give it better range and
less attenuation than signals in 5 GHz. In a high-density environment, there is
often only one clean channel reuse within a 10,000 square foot area. Channel
reuse in such an area is opportunistic at best and it is not possible to estimate
without careful advanced survey techniques. Results will vary from no increase in
bandwidth to modest gains and will differ from site to site. If faced with such a
challenge, consult with a professional with experience in advanced engineering
techniques specific to a high density RF deployment. Adding more APs can
reduce the number of users per cell and may appear to give more coverage
when the space is empty. But once it fills up, the effect will be that of one large

super cell covering the room with limited bandwidth and sporadic connections for
all.
In contrast to 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz has many more channels with which to work. As
many as 20 channels can be received in the United States and between five and
21 in the rest of the world. Most regions have between 19 and 21 channels. But
all 5 GHz channels are not created equally. Limitations on maximum power for
parts of the band are not of concern, but Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS)
channels represent some challenges that must be addressed.
DFS was implemented so that APs and clients can share the band with radar
devices. DFS details how radar is detected and what should be done in the event
of detection. APs operating on DFS channels must first listen to a channel for 60
seconds to determine if there is a radar present before transmitting any energy. If
an AP is operating on a DFS channel and detects a radar (real or false) it must
shut down operations on that channel and abandon it for 30 minutes before that
channel can be evaluated again for use.
802.11n can operate in a 40 MHz channel by bonding two 20 MHz channels
together and this significantly increases throughput. However, this is reserved for
burst mode transfers only. It is only practical to do this in 5 GHz because 2.4
GHz is already limited by the number of channels available. If there are enough 5
GHz channels to achieve the WLAN goals using a bonded channel plan (9 in the
U.S. if using available DFS channels) to meet throughput goals, consider it. If
forced to reuse 5 GHz channels, more consistent results will be delivered using
strictly 20 MHz channels and avoiding loss of efficiency due to CCI.
The essential question for a high-density design is how many channels for each
band will be needed to match the client base? This can be a tricky question since
even dual band capable clients do not always select the faster 5 GHz band.
Since bandwidth in 2.4 GHz is going to be limited, 5 GHz must be relied on to
reach the goal. Dual band adapters have been shipping with most laptops for
some time. This does not mean that every laptop is a dual band client, but many
are. Simply having a dual band client does not guarantee that it will choose 5
GHz over 2.4 GHz. The Microsoft Windows operating system defaults to a Wi-Fi
channel search that starts with the 5 GHz channel 36 and continues searching
through all of the 5 GHz channels that the client is capable of. If no 5 GHz AP is
found then it will continue the search in 2.4 GHz starting at channel 1. Unless the
Windows default is changed or the user has chosen a third party Wi-Fi utility to
set spectrum preference to 2.4 GHz, the client radio will first try to associate to a
5 GHz AP. Apple Computers latest release for Atheros and Broadcom chipsets
also searches 5 GHz first.
Design point #4: Determine the Number of Channels and Cells Needed
A sample high-density WLAN project may include a design that yields 300 Mbps
consistently to support 300 concurrent users. Under optimal conditions, 802.11g
and 802.11a data rates yield 25 Mbps throughput. However, a high-density
environment will be less than optimal from a SNR standpoint. A better number to
use is 20 Mbps throughput. Table 5 provides a quick reference using 20 Mbps

per cell and per channel as the throughput value. Looking strictly at 5 GHz and
assuming no channel reuse at this point, it is clear that 1 Mbps per user with 15
channels and 15 cells can be easily supported.
Table 5 Reference guide for channels

Design Point #5: Account for and Manage all Energy within the Operating
Spectrum to Ensure all of it is Available for Use
The discussion until now has centered on a use case where every client in the
room will be competing for bandwidth simultaneously. This is the case when the
users in the room simultaneously access a resource on queue. However there
are many instances where the design requirement is to offer access to resources
or the Internet for casual use at an event or within a venue such as a sports
arena. Planning and sizing for these types of events can be quite different and
will be based on expected Client Duty Cycle.
At a sporting event, for example, there are certain areas that will require
ubiquitous and instant access during the entire event. Ticketing, vendor sales,
staff, and press areas will generally require the highest amount of access. Of
these, the press area is the only one that requires a high level of capacity in the
arena itself. For the fans attending the event, only a percentage will be active on
the WLAN at any one time. We see a 20 to 30 percent take rate with some well
defined peaks occurring during period breaks. During play, very few fans are
accessing the WLAN. However, this is changing as applications such as video
replay, instant stats, and concession orders from the seat become more
commonplace.
Observation and understanding of the requirements of WLAN users and
situational requirements will guide the development of reasonable design goals.
500 users in a room who require simultaneous access to a single resource is a
different design challenge than 1000 or 1500 users who only occasionally use
the wireless network. Also, be aware that user patterns can and do change with
time. This has been seen with the increase in the number of network clients per
user. Monitoring network access and keeping good statistics will allow wireless
engineers to stay on top of user trends on the university campus.
Often one of the biggest challenges in a high-density environment is access and
aesthetics. A large meeting hall is impressive because of its size and a great deal
goes into the aesthetics of the environment. The best approach to engineering a
specific space is to do a qualified sight survey. Once the APs are mounted,
physical adjustments become a lot more complex, so it is best to test while
installing and make certain that the coverage that has been defined in the design
is what is installed.
APs have evolved rapidly in short period of time. If an AP with external antenna
capabilities is to be used, it is essential that an antenna that was designed for
that AP also be used. MIMO or 802.11n APs need MIMO antennas to perform
properly. Even if HT rates are not being counted on, the antenna and the radios
are a system and the system is designed to perform with all of these elements.
Mounting APs or directional antennas directly overhead in an environment may
not be acceptable to the building owners. There are several ways to solve this
problem and, depending on the environment and restrictions imposed, several
methods may be used together.

The best approach to engineering a specific space for a high-density WLAN is to

first do a thorough, active site survey to determine how and where the APs
should be optimally installed. This will clarify what is possible in the space and
provide a design to work from. Any changes to the optimal placement imposed
by restrictions will require another survey because the final throughput for the
space will likely change. If the environment and requirements neccesitate the use
of directional antennas, remember that once the APs are mounted, physical
adjustments can become a lot more complex, depending on the mounting
location. So it is best to test them while they are being installing to ensure that
the anticipated coverage results from what is installed.
Use of directional antennas and downtilt
One challenge often faced in a lecture hall or auditorium is the need to provide
more bandwidth than a single use of the channels available in 2.4 GHz will allow.
Using a directional antenna can provide cell-to-cell isolation if placed, mounted,
and adjusted properly. One aspect of using directional antennas is the concept of
mechanical downtilt. Downtilt involves adjusting the antenna down to change the
coverage pattern that is created.
The coverage pattern can be adjusted by changing the mounting height or the
mechanical downtilt angle, Figure 17.

Figure 17 Adjusting directional antenna using downtilt

H = height of the antenna
A = downtilt angle
BW = the 3 dB horizontal beamwidth of the antenna

By adjusting the downtilt of the antenna, it is possible to dial in " or add WLAN
coverage" to specific areas within the coverage zone. APs and RF energy
operate much like light cast by lighting fixtures. It is possible to light an entire
warehouse with a bare bulb on the ceiling, but the result is low levels of light in
some areas. But if there are multiple fixtures, including some with higher patterns
of luminosity to illuminate larger, the result is comprehensive overall lighting. RF
is invisible, so measuring the coverage and adjusting it appropriately requires
tools to measure the coverage. For each antenna placement, simply walking the
area below it and adjusting the antenna to change the pattern based on
Received Strength Signal Indication (RSSI) levels to match coverage
requirements is generally all that is required at the initial installation. Antennas
hear the same as they transmit.
If measuring and adjusting are done carefully, using consistent measurements
and tools, good results can be achieved. Any additional tuning can be managed
with power threshold adjustments through RRM. In all cases, a full site survey to
compare the results to the plan is required once all assets are installed.
AP Placement Options
The most common method of achieving even coverage is to evenly space the
APs directly over the clients they will serve. There are multiple options to
accommodate overhead mounting of the APs in an unobtrusive manner.
Although many people do not consider any AP to be a welcome stylistic addition
to a room, APs with internal antennas can be flush mounted to a variety of
surfaces and offer an option with less impact on a rooms aesthetics. In these
cases, a flush mount antenna can be much less obtrusive. External antennas
increase the cost and complexity of the installation slightly, but can be justified if
the end result is the ability to cover the room at a sufficient density and meet
aesthetic requirements. Once the decision is made to incorporate external
antennas, numerous options are opened for shaping the RF cell through the use
of directional antennas. Channel reuse in 2.4 GHz can be achieved in smaller
spaces by using directional antennas overhead. Ceiling height and antenna
choice will determine cell boundaries and taking measurements is required.
In Figure 18, assuming the room is 9000 square feet, using the internal antenna
enables AP nine channels of 5 GHz, and three channels of 2.4 GHz to be
provided comfortably. Using an external omnidirectional antenna, the results
would be much the same. Using omnidirectional antennas on 5 GHz and
directional antennas on 2.4 GHz, one, two, or three additional 2.4 GHz channels
could be added within this space. Throughput improvements would largely be
gained by more even client distribution and less resulting CCI at the client. Some
additional capacity will be gained, but only to the extent that CCI can be
eliminated between the cells and this will depend on ceiling height, antenna
pattern, and power levels in 2.4 GHz.

Figure 18 Nine AP WLAN deployment

3.4 Quality of Service (QoS) and Security in WLAN

WLAN QoS
QoS refers to the capability of a network to provide differentiated service to
selected network traffic over various network technologies. QoS technologies
provide the following benefits:
o Provide building blocks for business multimedia and voice applications
used in campus, WAN, and service provider networks
o Allow network managers to establish service-level agreements (SLAs)
with network users
o Enable network resources to be shared more efficiently and expedite the
handling of mission-critical applications
o Manage time-sensitive multimedia and voice application traffic to ensure
that this traffic receives higher priority, greater bandwidth, and less delay
than best-effort data traffic.
With QoS, bandwidth can be managed more efficiently across LANs, including
WLANs and WANs. QoS provides enhanced and reliable network service by
doing the following:
o
o
o
o
o

Supporting dedicated bandwidth for critical users and applications

Controlling jitter and latency (required by real-time traffic)
Managing and minimizing network congestion
Shaping network traffic to smooth the traffic flow
Setting network traffic priorities

In the past, WLANs were mainly used to transport low-bandwidth, dataapplication traffic. Currently, with the expansion of WLANs into vertical (such as
retail, finance, and education) and enterprise environments, WLANs are used to
transport high-bandwidth data applications, in conjunction with time-sensitive
multimedia applications. This requirement led to the necessity for wireless QoS.
Several vendors have supported proprietary wireless QoS schemes for voice
applications. To speed up the rate of QoS adoption and to support multi-vendor
time-sensitive applications, a unified approach to wireless QoS is necessary. The
IEEE 802.11e working group within the IEEE 802.11 standards committee has
completed the standard definition, but adoption of the 802.11e standard is in its
early stages, and as with many standards there are many optional components.
Just as occurred with 802.11 security in 802.11i, industry groups such as the WiFi Alliance are defining the key requirements in WLAN QoS through their Wi-Fi
MultiMedia (WMM) ensuring the delivery of key features and interoperation
through their certification programs.
An example deployment of wireless QoS is shown in Figure 19.

Figure 19 WLAN QoS Deployment solution

QoS is defined as the measure of performance for a transmission system that
reflects its transmission quality and service availability. Service availability is a
crucial element of QoS. Before QoS can be successfully implemented, the
network infrastructure must be highly available. The network transmission quality
is determined by latency, jitter, and loss, as shown in Table 6.
Table 6 QoS parameters

WLAN Security
Security was the IT managers main concern in the past and the reason why
WLANs were not implemented. However, as the ubiquity of wireless devices

drove demand from end users, evolving wireless standards have solved these
security issues to the point where a properly implemented wireless network is
more secure than most wired networks. The following is a brief summary of the
previous issues and resolutions.
Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP)
The original standard for wireless security was proven to be crackable. Now
standards are more secure. With the introduction of 802.11i in 2004, encryption
became effectively uncrackable in its current form; however, this can come with
some complexities. 802.1X is the strongest form of authentication, but it is more
expensive and difficult to set up and maintain.
Using a pre-shared key (PSK) can be strong, but using a single passphrase limits
security to its weakest link the human factor, and requires IT managers to
replace passphrases manually on a regular basis for security purposes. For best
user experience and in the interest of saving IT manager time with
troubleshooting and maintenance, it is important to consider a balance between
strong 802.1X and PSK. Dynamic PSK is the best balance for usability and
security in that it does not involve IT time and removes the user from handing out
their unique key. Figure 20 shows the WLAN security options.

Figure 20 WLAN security options

Rogue access points (APs)

Rogue APs have long been a bane to IT. Network administrators wasted
countless hours tracking down unauthorized devices. Two fundamental issues
drove rogue APs: lack of corporate Wi-Fi and cheap home APs that required little
network knowledge to install. The later made it simple for employees to bring
rogue APs to the workplace. Rogue APs are possibly the first case of consumer
products critically impacting tightly controlled corporate networks. Rogue AP
detection and location services in modern enterprise-class WiFi systems have
given IT powerful tools to combat these devices.
WLAN Security is part and parcel of Network Security
Wireless security is network security. The WLAN exists to provide mobile end
users with access to the wired network, both for internal resources and Internet
access. Whether the organization has a simple flat single subnet network
connected only to an Internet gateway, or is segmented by multiple routers and
firewalls, the WLAN has to integrate with the network as a whole and all WLAN
traffic can be expected to wind up on the wired network.
Virtually all wired networks have a firewall implemented between the corporate
network and the Internet. Some larger or more security conscious users may also
have a firewall segmenting the corporate network from the rest of the user
groups within the enterprise. In either case, the existing wired network security
implementation can be leveraged to ensure that both the wired and wireless
networks are secure.
For example, a security conscious business or larger enterprise with the
resources to manage a robust security network would route all of the network
traffic from the Internet into the corporate network through a firewall at the DMZ.
Further, they would have another firewall segmenting the corporate network from
differing end user groups on the wired network via different corporate VLANs with
802.1x authentication. Another corporate VLAN set-up would be created for the
wireless network with a corporate SSID, and another SSID could be set-up for
guest users wishing to only access the internet which would circumvent the
internal firewall and corporate network. See the diagram below.

Figure 21 WLAN implementation

In this example, the WLAN implementation layered on the existing wired network
and existing security implementation negates the need for another firewall on the
WLAN controller, which would simply be more software to learn and maintain
without any added benefit.
WLAN Authentication and Encryption
Because radio waves cannot be isolated to a narrow location, the central
concerns of WLAN security from the beginning have been access control (who
can use the WLAN) and encryption (how to keep WLAN data private).
These are essentially the same concerns that came up with VPN access to
secure networks over the insecure Internet. In fact, because of flaws in the
original WEP security standard, many early WLAN deployments were completely
separated from the primary network and used VPN connections for
authentication and encryption to corporate resources. This architecture treated
the WLAN as if it were an incoming Internet connection. It was and is a very
secure architecture, but it required additional equipment, such as additional VPN
concentrators beyond the scale required by the organizations remote access
needs.
The earlier flawed WEP security standard has been replaced by 802.11i/WPA2,
which is much more robust and allows for full integration of the WLAN into the

LAN. Although a detailed description of encryption options follows, it boils down

to, if at all possible, use WPA2 security with AES encryption.
WPA2 options PSK
The 802.11i standard defines two authentication methods, commonly called by
their Wi-Fi alliance certifications: WPA2-Enterprise and WPA2-Personal (or
WPA2-PSK for pre-shared key). WPA2-Enterprise is extremely secure and is
built around the 802.1X port authentication standard. Note that even though
802.1X frequently comes up in discussion of Wi-Fi networks, it is a port based
authentication protocol and was originally designed for wired networks.
WPA2-Enterprise requires a RADIUS server (or RADIUS proxy) and a database
of users with their corresponding credentials. However, 802.1X can be
challenging to deploy.
For less complex WLAN deployments, WPA2-PSK uses a single passphrase, the
Pre Shared Key, or PSK, to access the WLAN. From an end user point of view,
and even a deployment point of view, it is virtually the same as WEP the user
chooses the SSID of the WLAN and is asked for the passphrase, which will be
cached by the OS for future automatic connections. However, unlike WEP,
WPA2-PSK corrects implementation weaknesses, can use AES encryption and
cannot be broken unless a weak passphrase was chosen.
The security concerns with WPA2-PSK do not stem from the quality of the
encryption implementation, but from issues of managing the passphrase.
Because the passphrase is shared, all users of the WLAN must know it. The
more people that know a secret, the less secret it is. Well meaning folks tend to
give the PSK to visitors who wish to check their email. Key rotation (periodically
changing the passphrase) almost never happens, even when someone leaves
the organization, because it is so cumbersome. When it does happen, informing
users of the new PSK may wind up being by email or posted signs not great
ways to preserve a secret. Although the encryption is strong, a poorly chosen or
weak passphrase is subject to brute-force dictionary attacks that attempt to
guess the passphrase.
Figure 22 presents the topology and communication when dynamic PSK is
implemented.

Figure 22 Dynamic PSK

3.5 WiFi hotspot solutions

Wireless hotspots are springing up all over the world. They are typically located
in areas where travelers need to wait or want to take a break. These include but
are not limited to: motorway service areas, railway stations, airport lounges, hotel
lounges, coffee shops and internet cafes.
Anyone with a broadband connection and a wireless device can set up an open
wireless area. The key to a successful wireless hotspot is to make sure only
paying guests can gain access. The larger hotspot operators are using billing
mechanisms similar to those used for mobile phones: either pre-paid or billed
monthly. But unlike mobile phones, few roaming agreements have been put in
place which means these accounts are only valid at hotspots supported by
individual operators.
A more flexible billing mechanism is to sell access by the hour or minute. At the
point of sale, a ticket is issued with the appropriate login details. The user enters
these details when they connect to the wireless gateway and can use the
facilities for the amount of time purchased. This simple method only requires a
few moments of a staff members time to issue a ticket from the point-of sale
ticket printer. It means any user can access the system and they only pay for
what they need.
Many coffee shops, bars and restaurants are offering wireless internet access as
a way of not just attracting but also keeping visitors for longer. Visitors that stay
longer will also spend more on drinks and food. Add the extra sales to the money
made from selling the wireless internet access and it becomes a win-win
business proposition.
The wireless hotspot can also be combined with an existing Internet caf
installation using fixed PCs and ordinary wiring as shown in Figure 23.

Figure 23 Coffee shop/Internet caf architecture

Business travelers on the road can catch up with their email or download
important documents for their next sales meeting while having a break at a
motorway service area equipped with a wireless hotspot. Similarly, air travelers
can respond to that important email or work on their sales plans while sitting in
the airport lounge waiting for their flight.
Depending on the size and layout of the terminal, the wireless area can be
extended using wireless bridges so that users can roam from caf to restaurant
to lounge while still logged in to the single wireless gateway account. In this way,
longer sessions can be sold to users and more clients can share the same
services as shown in Figure 24.

Figure 24 Road, Rail or transportation Hub

Hotel lobbies and lounges are one of the favorite watering holes for road
warriors. They like to use them for impromptu meetings or as refueling stops both
for the body and email. A wireless hotspot can increase the appeal for hotel
facilities and encourage guests to stay longer and spend more on food and
beverages.
In addition, the wireless hotspot can be combined with a business centre facility
to offer both wired and wireless access for travelling professionals. It can also be
combined with an in-building xDSL solution which provides high speed internet
access to guest rooms using the hotels internal telephone wiring.
A combined wireless hotspot, business centre and xDSL solution is shown in
Figure 25. The same accounting and authorization system can be used for all
three types of users. This helps spread the investment costs and increases the
revenue potentials of each solution.

Figure 25 Hotel lounge or lobby

A business case for a wireless hotspot
A wireless hotspot solution can be a surprisingly lucrative investment. It can
make good economic sense either as a new venture or as an additional service
added on to an existing Internet caf or hotel internet service. The competitive
rates for high speed broadband links and wireless broadband equipment mean
that anyone with a suitable location and a steady stream of visitors can benefit
from a wireless hotspot solution.
In the following simple example for a coffee shop, we have assumed that on
average 4, 12 or 24 users a day make use of the service and spend on average
half an hour connected. The cost of an hours access is 5 and it takes a staff
member less than a minute to serve a wireless client. The cost to set-up and run
the hotspot and the potential revenue stream are shown in Table 7.
Table 7 - Wireless Hotspot Business Case

As can be seen, a small investment can generate a reasonable revenue stream.

Staffing and running costs are kept low as staff is already in place to provide the
food and drinks. Advertising can be kept minimal e.g. simply a sign or leaflets
and flyers. And the higher the advertising budget, the more customers you will

get per day. So even with a modest number of customers using the facilities, the
investment soon pays for itself and leads to profit within a year.
Wireless networks have been available for many years. It is simple to set up an
open wireless network that can be used by anyone with a wireless card in the
vicinity. In fact many companies have set up open wireless networks without
realizing it. The key differences between a wireless hotspot and an open wireless
network are the following important features:
Only registered users are allowed to use the network and are charged for what
they use
The network must be secure and not allow users to see each others data or
access each others machines
The wireless network must be able to cover a large area and the reach of the
network should be controllable to prevent signal leakage
The network connection should not become a bottleneck as more users are
added or power users require more bandwidth
Free access to some sites should be allowed to allow clients to login and to
provide extra advertising opportunities
When a client first tries to access the Internet in a wireless hotspot, the clients
browser is redirected to a registration screen where they enter their login details.
These can be an existing pre-paid or billable account set up with the wireless
ISP. Alternatively, it can be a temporary account generated on purchase of the
access units required at the point of sale. Once the account details have been
authorized against the authentication database, the client is granted access to
the connection. The session is closed either when their pre-paid time has
elapsed or when the client closes the connection.
Security is essential for the successful operation of a wireless hotspot. There are
various aspects of security that have to be considered:
Protection of data: Most wireless receivers and transmitters can be set-up with
data encryption so that snoopers cannot eavesdrop on email or other peoples
conversations.
Prevention of unauthorized access: A wireless network should be secured
against unauthorized access by disabling the broadcast of the wireless station
beacon and by ensuring all clients are authenticated against the authorization
database.
Isolation of wireless clients: Wireless clients must be isolated so that they
cannot access other clients computers or see their data.
Protection from hackers and snoopers: The wireless hotspot should include an
industrial strength firewall between the wireless network and the internet
connection to prevent malicious access from external internet users. Internet
addresses should be hidden behind the firewall using the Network Address
Translation (NAT) protocol.

3.6 4G mobile data traffic offloading to WLAN (from LTE/LTEAdvanced, and from Mobile WiMAX)
With the advent of network technologies such as 3G and 4G (LTE/LTE advanced
and mobile WiMAX) mobile data traffic has been growing at an unprecedented
pace and increasingly outstripping the network capacity. The introduction of
smart-phones that offer ubiquitous internet access allied to a host of other
internet capable devices including tablets, consoles, laptops and navigators - all
becoming internet capable has been driving the data growth. The network
operators are also increasingly introducing data services as a result of data
increasingly contributing to the service revenues, but data traffic consumption is
outpacing the data revenue. The proliferation of these mobile broadband devices
along with the unlimited data bundles from the operators has led to network
congestion and deteriorating network quality.
Figure 26 presents the major data growth factors.

Figure 26 Data growth factors

In this section we have considered both the aspect of data migration from Mobile
to Fixed which we term - Data Offload and also data migration from Fixed to
Mobile which we term - Data Onload. We recognize that even though data
offload alleviates some of the operators network congestion using micro cells, a
significant proportion of the offload could itself be offset by fixed to mobile
migration of data as demonstrated in Figure 27 below.

Figure 27 - Data Migration from Mobile to Fixed and Fixed to Mobile

The whole offloading market has been a well understood market for a long time
now, and by making the cell smaller the carriers will have more capacity. The
challenges have always been how to execute the deployment of microcells and
to find all the places to deploy the necessary access points and other factors
including mounting; power supply; and backhaul to interconnect them to mobile
carriers core network.
The following list summarizes the key inhibitors for Mobile Data Offloading.
o Seamless user experience: WiFi connections need to provide a seamless
connection and need to be of higher strength for the users to offload from
the carriers network to the WiFi network.
o This means once connected to the WiFi network users must be able to
seamlessly connect to the same network when in range.
o Legal and Regulatory Issues: According to the FCCs (Federal
Communications Commission) lawful intercept requirements, any traffic
originating from a licensed spectrum should be sent over the carriers core
network and has to be managed by the carrier which would ideally include
the femtocell traffic. Conversely in WiFi, data traffic does not have to
advance through many core network elements.
o Branding and Marketing approach: Brand is everything for a mobile carrier
along with the user experience associated with the brand. As found,
mobile network operators have to become increasingly innovative in their
branding for a product.

Conducted reports provide five year forecasts for mobile data offload and onload,
across eight regions of the world: North America, Latin America, Western
Europe, Central & Eastern Europe, Far East & China, Indian Sub-Continent, Rest
of Asia Pacific and Africa & Middle East. The forecasts within the full report cover
several aspects: total mobile data usage, data growth over the cellular network,
data offloaded via femtocells and WiFi, data onload from fixed to mobile.
As the mobile data to be offloaded from the operators cellular network depends
on the data that is primarily intended for the cellular network, we need to consider
the total data traffic generated by mobile devices whose primary usage is via the
operators cellular network. The following chart shows the forecast for total
mobile data traffic generated.

Figure 28 - Mobile Data Traffic Generated by Smart-phones, Feature Phones &

Tablets
The amount of data traffic that is being offloaded from the operator networks to
other complementary networks will increase from 43.1% in 2010 to 63.2% by the
end of 2015. Developed markets including North America and Western Europe
are forecast to witness the highest offload factor (%) throughout the forecast
period, reaching 76% and 74% by the end of the forecast period respectively.
Developing markets are forecast to witness higher growth over the forecast
period with Indian Sub Continent at 137.8% CAGR (Compound Annual Growth
Rate), Latin America and Africa & Middle East at 126% CAGR.

3.7 Cognitive resource management in future wireless networks

During the last decades development of wireless communication systems has
been an immensely successful endeavor. We have witnessed an explosion
especially in popularity of technologies utilizing the license-exempt ISM
frequency bands. Both Wireless LANs and Bluetooth are now available in
practically every larger mobile terminal.
The dark side of this success story is the over-crowdedness one is already
witnessing in these popular ISM bands. In the technology-homogeneous case
the standard medium access control procedures can relatively effectively be
used to share the wireless medium amongst communicating nodes. However,
this solution is not anymore sufficient when numerous different technologies
compete from the same spectrum. This is already a severe problem for new
technologies especially in the 2.4 GHz ISM band. It is also arguable that more
intelligent (cognitive and self-learning) methods could lead to better MAC
utilization.
In addition to traditional interoperability solutions, such as the ones developed
to mitigate WLAN-Bluetooth interference, more radical approaches have also
been suggested. In particular spectrum agility techniques originally developed to
reclaim momentarily unused parts of the strictly regulated radio spectrum can be
exploited in the ISM bands as well. Key idea in these approaches is to
reconfigure communicating radios with very rapid response times to use
frequencies that are at the moment not used by their primary users.
Most interesting of these proposals is perhaps the suggestion of using adaptive
machine learning techniques. These cognitive radio solutions were originally
suggested for enabling dynamic spectrum management in licensed frequency
bands to regain some of the unused spectrum but are suitable for solving the coexistence problems introduced above.
In a sense we can view cognitive radios as extreme spectrum agile radios that in
the ISM band case borrow spectrum from other users sharing the band, instead
of a primary user authorized by some governing body.
Major concerns with respect to the methods proposed so far are twofold:
1) It is very difficult to guarantee that heterogeneous population of cognitive
radios that attempt to optimize their own spectrum usage can achieve even
satisfactory global use of wireless resources. Collaboration in communication
systems on single layer, network or link, has been studied in detail especially in
game theory formalism. However, overall system analysis considering crosslayer aspects remains to be done.
2) Straightforward optimization of link and physical layer performance can lead to
vast amounts of wasted capacity if no higher layer protocol or entity is able to
benefit from it. We argue that cognitive techniques also offer an alternative to
traditional cross-layer optimization which has proven to be more problematic than
the initial optimistic works indicated.

There are proposals for extending the scope of the cognitive radio research
towards more holistic approach. The idea is to introduce a framework for
cognitive resource manager (CRM) enabling autonomic optimization of the
communication stack as a whole, instead of focusing solely on the spectrum
problem and thus going well beyond simplistic RRMs (Radio Resource
Managers) and medium access control techniques. Thus section further
discusses the exchange of network information between the CRMs as a method
to avoid harmful interactions arising from local optimization methods leading into
globally unsatisfactory solutions. Communication between CRM instances could
finally be used to federate individual cognitive radios to become cognitive
wireless networks. This way the CRM would offer a systematic approach as a
framework for distributed cross-layer optimization.
In this section we discuss about the functions of the Cognitive Resource
Manager (CRM) with more details. Its conceptual architecture is shown in figure
29. We see the CRM as a multi-functional software entity that will primarily carry
out cross-layer optimization using a toolbox of advanced reasoning methods and
a great variety of information from the application layer, the underlying
networking and data link layer as well as the operating system. Based on the
collected knowledge the CRM can for example, optimally manage spectrum
resources, flexibly adapt MAC and link parameters and allow the best possible
settings for the applications running on top. In addition the CRM could consider
policies such as proposed by the DARPA XG project during all optimization
processes. Later on the CRM can return its recommendations for policy updates
based on experiences and observed behavior of other network nodes.

Figure 29 - Conceptual architecture of the CRM

The CRM can also function as a connection manager deciding upon the
frequency channels as well as the type of communication technology to be used
(IEEE 802.11, Bluetooth, UMTS, etc.) in case a variety of interfaces and
networks are available. In this context, different services such as voice-call,
audio- and video-conferencing can experience higher quality if their specific QoS
requirements, e.g. in terms of delay and bit rate, are carefully taken into account.
Since the CRM will perform multidimensional optimizations using substantial
amount of data, the traditional numerical methods might not be fast and scalable
enough if applied to the full dataset. Accordingly, alternative approaches such as
genetic algorithms and simulated annealing are used inside a toolbox as
depicted in figure 29. These natural optimization methods are interesting
candidates since they are proven to be successful in solving problems with large
number of variables, can work with numerically generated or experimental data,
and so on.
In order to more efficiently handle the large amount of knowledge data (including
historical data), sorting and clustering of the available information used in the
CRM is required. Classical techniques like k-means can be considered, however
due to the high degree of data variety and dynamicity, more advanced algorithms
will be needed. Promising candidates include neural networks based approaches
such as self organizing maps (SOMs). SOMs have already been successfully
applied e.g., to perform unsupervised traffic pattern classification and estimation
without a priori information. Additionally, time series analysis can be used, for
example, in finding periodicity and compensating for the missing data to be able
to provide reasonable estimates.
In order to achieve a reliable operation of the CRM, quality of the data used in
the decision process should be ensured. Accordingly, data filtering techniques to
handle the linear and non-linear noise are required. Techniques such as
Bayesian reasoning and statistical learning theory can be deployed to deal with
uncertainty and ensure the reliability of the data and inference.
Although it is represented as a single block in the architecture, the CRM usually
has a modular and extensible structure. For example, the toolbox itself is not
limited to the enabling optimizing techniques mentioned above. Further methods
could be added in a plug-and-play fashion. In fact, from an implementation point
of view, the CRM could be seen as a micro kernel with additional software
modules where the scheduling and time synchronization mechanisms of different
optimization and reasoning processes are carried out. One of the key challenges
for CRM is its distributed structure.
Figure 30 presents a behavioral model of the cognitive radio and how the steps
are realized using a CRM.

Figure 30 - Behavioral model of the cognitive radio and how the steps are
realized using CRM

3.8 Business and regulatory aspects of WLAN/WiFi

Regulation can be defined as: A written rule made by a government or another
authority which is intended to control the way something is made or done. Or:
Regulation is the process of making rules which govern behavior. Regulation
exists in many forms: economic, health, safety, technologic. In this section the
focus is towards economic and business regulation of WLAN/WiFi.
Regulators have always been interested in the development of the
telecommunications industry and infrastructure. In the past, the main role of the
telecommunications regulation was in protecting customers from the monopoly
power of vertically integrated operators. Deregulation in the 90s changed the
industry and the role of the regulators. The technological convergence on the
other hand is bringing together the telecom, broadcasting, and information
services regulation.
The main rationales behind regulation are: effective use of resources,
competitive markets, customer rights, preventing abuses like monopolies and
cartels, redistribution of wealth.
The regulators have a so called narrow window to guide business models they
can not make any drastic decisions which could affect the industry overnight.
New business models may arise either accidentally or deliberately. Regulation
may in the worst case seriously hinder business activities, if planned negligently.
Regulators face always challenges when new technologies are introduced. The
legislation is always a little bit late. The regulators need to define how they apply
the existing laws to new technologies and businesses.
EU does not impose specific legal provisions on public WLAN. It establishes a
regulatory framework and defines the tasks of National Regulatory Agencies
(NRA). The telecommunications regulatory framework recognizes that much of
telecommunications regulation exists as a means of addressing potential and
actual abuses of market power. With that in mind, the EU attempts a
comprehensive, technology neutral approach to regulation.
The European Commission defines a series of relevant telecommunications
markets, and provides a set of guidelines for determining the presence or
absence of market power. Within each market the NRA determines whether one
or more parties possess Significant Market Power (SMP). If SMP exists, the NRA
will impose appropriate obligations. Basically EU seeks to move completely away
from technology-specific and service-specific legislation.
Many countries have not considered the legal status of WLAN Networks because
WLAN has not yet become sufficiently common. Some countries have dealt with
the matter only from the viewpoint of frequencies and licenses. Most countries
that have considered the matter further, share the opinion Finland has taken. For
example, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Turkey, Hungary and Estonia considered that
service offered by a caf or a hotel to its customers is not public
telecommunications.

On the other hand, there may be obligations imposed on service providers on the
basis of other laws. For example in Italy, service providers must authenticate
users on the basis of the anti-terrorism law.
In the US the legal and regulatory framework is very different than in EU. The
latest revision of the Telecommunications Act of 1934, of 1996, separates
telecommunication services from information services.
The Act defines an information service as the offering of a capability for
generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, retrieving, utilizing, or
making available information via telecommunications, and includes electronic
publishing, but does not include any use of any such capability for the
management, control, or operation of a telecommunication system or the
management of a telecommunication service. It underpins the US deregulatory
policy toward the Internet. The Internet should be viewed as an enhanced
service, and that the Internet consequently should not itself be subject to
significant regulation.
In the US regulators seem to lack authority and the people tend to trust the
companies more than the government at least when compared to Europe. The
American attitude to large companies has always been somewhat ambivalent
they worry about the power of large corporations wield, and yet at the same time
they appreciate the potential benefits associated with the economies of scale and
the scope that they command. It is not held to be a problem for a firm to possess
market power; rather the abuse of the market power is problematic.
FCC has a limited power to collect confidential information and it lacks the ability
to protect that information. Although regulation in the U.S. is multilevel with
federal, state and municipal bodies, the FCC has taken a position that the
Internet is interstate. Theres a huge interest in WLAN in the US and they are
cautious to introduce any laws that might jeopardize the growth of the wireless
network infrastructure. On the other hand the Americans are increasingly
concerned about cyber-security. They have noticed that the nature of connection
is very different from traditional LAN people can appear and disappear from
sight. As they are opening up an additional 255 megahertz of spectrum in the 5gigahertz band, the biggest concern is whether or not it could affect military
radars.
Table 8 Regulation comparison (US, EU)

Neither the US nor EU has taken public WLAN networks into deeper
consideration. In the Table 8 there are few major differences that affect the way
regulation is applied generally.

3.9 Reference list

1. IEEE 802.11-2012 Standard for Information technology--Telecommunications and
information exchange between systems Local and metropolitan area networks-Specific requirements Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and
Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications
2. Meraki White Paper: 802.11n Technology, February 2011
3. Wireless LAN Design Guide for High Density Client Environments in Higher
Education, CISCO 2011
4. WLAN Quality of Service, Voice over Wireless LAN 4.1 Design Guide, 2010
5. WLAN Security: Simplifying Without Compromising, Ruckus Wireless | White Paper,
2011
6. Wireless Hotspot Solutions, SMC Networks, 2005
7. MOBILE DATA TRAFFIC & WIFI OFFLOADING, DANU TECHNOLOGIES IRELAND
LTD, 2010
8. Carrier WiFi Offload, Building a Business Case for Carrier WiFi Offload, Wireless
20/20 WiROI WiFi Offloading Business Case Tool enables mobile network
operators to analyze the commercial and financial benefits of implementing a Carrier
WiFi Offload Network, By Randall Schwartz and Magnus Johansson | March 2012
9. Balancing the mobile data load, White paper, Juniper research, Integration strategies
2011-2015.
10. Deliverable FI3-D1.1.6 Study on Cognitive Resource Management for Multi-access
Networks, TIVIT Future Internet Programme, 2012
11. E.H. Mamdani and S. Assilian, "An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy
logic controller," International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 113, 1975.
12. FuzzyLite: A fuzzy Logic Library written in C++. Developed by Juan Rada Vilela
http://code.google.com/p/fuzzy-lite/
13. J. Mkel, M. Luoto, T. Sutinen and K. Pentikousis, Distributed information service
architecture for overlapping multi-access networks. International journal of
Multimedia Tools and Applications, Springer 2011.
14. S. Horsmanheimo, J. Eskelinen, and H. Kokkoniemi-Tarkkanen: "NES - Network
Expert System for Heterogeneous Networks", In Proceedings of the 17th
International Conference on Telecommunications 2010 (ICT-2010), April 2010,
Doha, Qatar.
15. In the development of wireless cognitive science, Basic Theories in Cognitive
Wireless Networks, October 2012 Vol.57 No.28-29: 3661, Chinese Science Bulletin
16. Zhang P, Liu Y, Feng Z Y, et al. Intelligent and efficient development of wireless
networks: A review of cognitive radio networks. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 36623676

17. Wu Q H, Ding G R, Wang J L, et al. Consensus-based decentralized clustering for

cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57:
36773683
18. Feng Z Y, Wei Z Q, Zhang Q X, et al. Fractal theory based dynamic mesh grouping
scheme for efficient cognitive pilot channel design. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 3684
3690
19. Yang C G, Li J D, Sheng M, et al. Resource flow: Autonomous cognitive resource
management framework for future networks. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 36913697
20. Dong X, Li Y, Wei S Q. Design and implementation of a cognitive engine functional
architecture. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 36983704
21. Li X, Wang J, Li H S, et al. Delay performance analysis and access strategy design
for a multichannel cognitive radio network. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 37053712
22. Zhang P, He Q, Feng Z Y, et al. Reconfiguration decision making in cognitive
wireless network. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 37133722
23. He Z Q, Niu K, Qiu T, et al. A bio-inspired approach for cognitive radio networks.
Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 37233730
24. Zhang H Z, Zhang Z Y, Yuen C. Energy-efficient spectrum-aware clustering for
cognitive radio sensor networks. Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57: 37313739
25. A Survey on Cognitive Engine, M. Prabhananthakumar, R. Rajaguru and S.
Rathnamala, J. Acad. Indus. Res. Vol. 1(1) July 2012
26. Carneiro, G., Ruela, J. and Ricardo. M. 2004. Crosslayer design in 4G wireless
terminals. IEEE Wireless Communications. 11(2):713.
27. Ian F. Akyildiz, Won Yeol Lee, Mehmet C. Vuran and Shantidev Mohanty. 2006. Next
generation/dynamic spectrum access/cognitive radio wireless networks: A survey.
Comp. Networks. 50(13): 2127-2159.
28. Mitola, J. 2006. Cognitive radio architecture. J. Wiley & Sons, New York.
29. Mitola. J. 2007. The software radio architecture. IEEE Communication magazine.
Vol. 33, pp. 26-33.
30. Nadkar, T., Thumar, V., Shenoy, G., Mehta,A., Desai, U.B. and Merchant, S.N. 2011.
A Cross-layer framework for symbiotic relaying in cognitive radio networks. Int.
Symp. on dynamic spectrum access networks.
31. Petrova, M. P. and Mahonen (2007). Cognitive resource manager: A cross-layer
architecture for implementing cognitive radio networks. In: Fittzek & Katz (eds.),
cognitive wireless.
32. Qi Wang and Abu, M.A. 2003. Cross-layer signaling for next generation wireless
systems. In IEEE WCNC, Vol. 2, pp.10841089.
33. Sutton, P., Doyle, L. and Nolan, K. 2006. A reconfigurable platform for cognitive
networks. In Proc. of IEEE CROWNCOM 06, Mykonos, Greece.
34. P. Mhnen, M. Petrova, J. Riihijrvi, M. Wellens "Cognitive Wireless Networks:
Your Network Just Became a Teenager" poster in IEEE INFOCOM, Barcelona, April
2006.

35. BUSINESS MODELS FOR WIRELESS INTERNET ACCESS, Heikki Hmminen,

Editor, Helsinki University of Technology Department of Electrical and
Communications Engineering Networking Laboratory.