Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Agenda
Overview of ESG LTE Experience ESG AT&T Engagements for LTE
LTE Protocols trainings & hands-on optimization workshops delivered to 2600+ engineers
R&D
ESG
3GPP SA5 Participation
LTE design guidelines LTE capacity & dimensioning Performance assessment & troubleshooting in commercial LTE networks Performance studies & evaluations using ESG simulation platforms
Field testing in BAWA & Dallas FOA clusters, lab testing in Redmond
FDD/TDD
Throughput expectations
System Configuration
8
Transmission Modes used for DL (Diversity, MIMO schemes) Control channel reservation for DL Resource Reservation for UL System Parameters
8
NW Idle, not camped PSS, SSS, PBCH, SIBs Number of RACH Attempt, RACH Power, Contention Procedure Success rates
Attach complete
Attach response (accept) Incl. Activate Default Bearer Ctxt Request Attach and PDN Connectivity Duration, Success Rates
30-60ms
>99%
250-550ms
10
11
11
Near Cell field location 5% BLER, 100% scheduling UL MCS 24 and 45 RBs (some RBs reserved for PUCCH)
12
12
FTP
T2 13.90
L1
14.44
Norm. L1**
46.71
30.91
5.74
23.31
49.4
14.18
-73.85
-9.06
P2 P2
Total
(3 devices)
16.58 17.34
47.82
16.65 17.87
48.96
53.04 60.0
31.39 29.68
91.98
5.40 1.52
25.12 26.47
49.76 49.80
14.48 14.87
2 2
-71.01 -68.87
-8.98 -9.06
Total L1 Cell Throughput ~49 Mbps Total Scheduling rate ~92% (<100%)
Device with highest CQI reported receives highest MCS and low BLER and consequently highest DL L1 Throughput
Above data is from a commercial LTE network with all 3 devices in Near cell conditions
13
13
0.8
0.7 Distribution 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 30 pdf 40 cdf 50 60
Stationary, Near cell conditions Ping size = 32 Bytes Ping Server: Internal server
70
80
Min (ms) 36
Max (ms) 62
Ping Round-Trip-Time distribution from one commercial network above is concentrated between 40 -50 ms Lower Ping RTT ~25 ms have been observed in some networks Ping RTT can be dependent on CN delays, backhaul, system parameters and device
14
99.80
Percentage [%] 99.60 99.40 99.20 99.00 98.80 98.60 98.40 99.05
99.69
A) RACH attempt not successful and T304 expires B) HO command not received after Measurement Report
DL Test Run
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Total
15
15
HO Interrupt Time: Interval between Last DATA/CONTROL RLC PDU on source cell and First DATA/CONTROL RLC PDU on target cell Data Interruption Time: Interval between only DATA RLC PDUs becomes much higher than 199 ms
Ave (ms) 78
Min (ms) 38
STD (ms) 34
Current LTE Networks have higher HO and Data Interruption Times eNodeB buffer optimization and data forwarding support needed
16
16
17
Deployment
Mobility
Data Performance
Backhaul Constraints
18
18
Sub-optimal RF optimization delays LTE call-setup Mall served by PCI 367 PCI 212 leaking in partly
19
19
RRC Connection Request RRC Conn. Setup Complete 1st Attach request incl. PDN connectivity request 2nd Attach request incl. PDN connectivity request
RACH (Msg1-Msg4)
UL data to send RACH not successful UE Reselects to PCI 367 3rd Attach request incl. PDN connectivity request
20
PCI 212: RSRP = -110 dBm PCI 367: RSRP = -104 dBm Attach Accept is sent
20
PCIs 426, 427,428 are not detected (site is missing) Lack of dominant server => Area of Pilot pollution
21
21
MRM A3
1. 2. 3. 4.
5.
22
UE is connected to PCI 411 RLF UE reports event A3 twice for PCI 142 (Reporting int. = 480 ms) UE reports event A3 for PCI 142 & 463 No Neighbor relation exists between PCI 411 and 142 (Clear need for ANR). UE does not receive handover command, RLF occurs RRC Re-establishment is not successful, UE reselects to PCI 42
22
Throughput is always lower than 50 Mbps, even at high SINR Backhaul limitation negatively Impacts the allocation of radio resources
5000
0 -10 -5 0 5 10 SINR (dB) 15
20
25
30
35
23
0.8
0.6
Highest CQI is 15 and highest DL MCS is 28 Although we see a significant number of CQI=15 reported, scheduler hardly assigns any MCS=28! Whenever DL MCS 28 is scheduled BLER on 1st Tx is 100%, hence scheduler uses MCS 27 Number of symbols for PDCCH is fixed at 2 and results in higher code-rate for MCS 28
MCS
1
0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
0.8
CDF
0.8 0.64
CDF
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
MCS=28: TBS = 36696 (@49&50 PRB) MCS=27: TBS = 31704 (@49&50 PRB) 10 Mbps L1 throughput difference! (2x2 MIMO, 2 Code Words)
0.2 0.02
0.18
0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04
0.2
PDF
24
CDF
24
CDF
PCI 465
PCI 237
RRC Releases
25
50,000
L1 Tput
kbps
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 26 24 22
Scheduling
Scheduling rate ~ 85-90% (< 100%) Linked to lack of DL scheduling when SIB1 is transmitted and only 1 user/TTI support
percentage
MCS
N/A
20 18 16 14 12
MCS ~26-27
6 5
BLER
percentage
4 3 2 1 0 19:11:55 19:12:00 19:12:05 19:12:10 19:12:15 19:12:20 19:12:25 19:12:30 19:12:35 19:12:40 19:12:45 19:12:50 19:12:55 19:13:00 19:13:05 19:13:10 19:13:15
26
27
27
Mobility
Implementation Unexpected RRC related drops and RACH failures may need to be investigated Several RAN limitations exist Scheduler limitations must be addressed before demand increases
28
Data Performance
Insufficient backhaul can reduce DL throughput Sporadic packet discards in Core Network Correct MTU size enforcement on all devices
28
Thank you
29