Slide 1

cbnl_logo_left
ppt_background
Backhaul on demand

v2 6thOctober 2010

LTE Traffic WebinarC:\\Users\\juliusr\\Documents\\_JR_Documents\\Activities\\Career\\06 Portraits Passport\\JuliusRobson_v2_300x400.jpg
Lance Hiley,

VP Marketing

Julius Robson

Wireless Technology Consultant

C:\\Users\\juliusr\\Desktop\\Lance.jpg

Slide 2

cbnl_logo_left
Cambridge Broadband Networks

Founded in 2000, Headquarters,
Research and product design in
Cambridge UKMarket-driven, world classtechnology:
more than $100M shipped to dateDelivery logistics by Benchmark
Electronics Inc, a Fortune 500 contract
manufacturerLargest carrier-class PMP vendor, four-
fold increase in sales 2007 to 2009:
Further growth expected in 2010First backhaul vendor to join the NGMN
Alliancecbnl_shouse_plinth
CB-031858_crop_no_backgnd_sm

Slide 3

cbnl_logo_left
Some Questions....

LTEWhy do we need yet another generation of mobile technology?
What are the key drivers to change?
How much traffic will LTE base stations generate?
What are its characteristics?
What are the different options for backhauling LTE traffic?
How do they compare?
Backhaul
?http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:iUCDRIevJV2p9M:http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc198/nick9283/lte-logo.jpg&t=1

Slide 4

cbnl_logo_left
Drivers for LTE: Increased Demand

.Smartphones, donglesand
flat rate tariffs have catalysed
adoption of mobile broadband
.Forecasts show demand will
continue to grow
exponentially.
.Demand is created by1) More users2) More traffic per user
.Extra capacity will be provided
through a combination of:
.More spectrum
.Smaller cells
.A new technology: LTE




1.1 Exabyte/month0.5 Exabyte/month
Demand for Global Mobile Broadband

EB = Exabyte (1000 PB) PB = Petabyte (1000 TB)
TB = Terabyte (1000 GB)
Slide 5

cbnl_logo_left
Drivers for LTE: ￡Price Per Bit

How much do we pay per bit?

Service

Data Volume

Price*

Price per MB, ￡

Voice

10 kbit/sec

20p/min

￡ 2.67

SMS

160 Bytes

10p

￡ 625.00

Video

384 kbit/sec

35p/min

￡ 0.12

Data

-

￡20for 3GB

￡ 0.01



.Today.s cellular systems were designedto deliver bitswhich can
be sold profitably for at least ￡2.50 (4$) per MB
.Consumers aren.t prepared to pay more than 1p per MB for data
.LTE needs to significantly reduce cost per delivered bit


*source: UK operator tariffs
Slide 6

cbnl_logo_left
What do you think....

What is the most important reason to
deploy LTE?
Is it:
.Faster download speeds for consumers
.Higher spectral efficiency
.Lower Cost-per-bit for operators
.All equally important
.Another reason





Slide 7

cbnl_logo_left
Overview of LTE / EPC Solution
More Spectrally Efficient = more capacity per cell site per Hz of spectrum
.OFDM helps system to make the most of different radio conditions
.Native MIMO and Adaptive ModulationLower Cost Per Bit
.Flatter core architecture = fewer boxes
.All IP, can use low cost Ethernet transport
.Separate User and Control Plane: independent scaling of connections & trafficHigher Performance = better broadband user experience
.Faster connection, lower E2E latency, higher peak data rates
.E2E QoSenables real time services during congestion




eNodeB

Serving
GatewayPDNGatewayMobility Management Entity
HSS

UserEquipment
External

Packet Data
Networks

Last Mile

Ethernet Backhaul

nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn

Slide 8

cbnl_logo_left
How Much Backhaul Traffic will LTE Generate?
S1 User plane traffic(for 3 cells)
+Control Plane

+X2 U and C-plane+OA&M, Sync, etc+Transport protocol overhead
+IPsecoverhead (optional)

Backhaul
pipe
Core networkLTE RAN
.User traffic is the largest component, which we will now analyse...
.We will assume a .vanilla. 10MHz bandwidth 2x2 MIMO downlink


.Each LTE eNodeB generates a number of
traffic components to be backhauled:



Slide 9

cbnl_logo_left
What determines Cell Traffic?

User Throughput is determined by:

1) Quality of Radio Link to eNodeB

.Near in LTE Devices with high signal quality can
use 64QAM and MIMO to transfer more bits/sec per Hz
.Cell edge LTE Devices with poor signal quality can only transfer at low rates per
Hz




2) Other users sharing the cell

.Spectrum is divided amongst users in a cell




CellThroughputis the sum of all User Throughputs

Note: A typical Macro eNodeBcontrols 3 cells

eNodeB

cell

UE

cell

backhaul
Slide 10

cbnl_logo_left
Cell Traffic during busy & quiet times...
Busy Time
Many

UEs

Quiet Time

UE1


Slide 11

cbnl_logo_left
Cell Traffic during busy & quiet times...

Spectral

Efficiency

bps/Hz

Bandwidth, Hz
64QAM
16QAM

QPSK
cell
average

Busy TimeMore averaging
UE1
UE2

UE3

:

:

:

Many
UEs
Quiet TimeMore variation
UE1

a) Many LTE Devices
/ cell

.At busy time, cell Throughput is averaged over many LTE
Devices



Slide 12

cbnl_logo_left
Busy Time

Many

UEs

Quiet Time
UE1Cell Traffic during busy & quiet times...
Spectral
Efficiency

bps/Hz

Bandwidth, Hz

64QAM
16QAM

QPSK

cell
average
UE1
UE2
UE3
:

:

:

64QAM

Cell average

UE1

bps/Hz

QPSK
Cell average

UE1
bps/Hz
HzHz
a) Many LTE Devices / cellb) One LTE Device with a
good link

c) One LTE Device,
weak link

.At busy time, cell Throughput is averaged over many UEs
.At quiet times, cell Throughput varies more



Slide 13

cbnl_logo_left
Cell Traffic during busy & quiet times...

time
Cell Tput

Busy timeSeveral active UEs
sharing the cellQuiet timeOne UE at a timeCell Tput=UE Tput
During busy times several users will be sharing each cell, there will be
small variations about the busy time mean cell throughput

During quiet times, one user may have the whole cell to themselves.
This is when peak LTE Deviceand cell throughput will occur

.There will also be less other cell interference at these times




peakBusy timemean
For illustration purposes only

peak


Slide 14

cbnl_logo_left
0102030405060024681012User Throughput, MbpsLoad: Average Served Cell Tput, Mbps95%ile (Peak)
Mean5%ile (Cell edge)
Results from NEC Simulations
.The higher the load, the less throughput each individual user gets
.At the maximum capacity of 12Mbps/cell, users get close to zero
throughput
.A more sensible operating point would be 10Mbps
.During quiet times, peak throughputs of 55Mbps are possible


Source:

“A Simulation Study to Examine
Various Deployment Scenarios
for LTE”, Dr H. Falaki, NEC
Europe, LTE World Summit,
May 2010

Assumptions:

2.1GHz carrier

10MHz bandwidth

Downlink 2x2 MIMO

Fixed filesizeFTP traffic
(not full buffers)

BusytimeQuiet
time
Operating

point


Slide 15

cbnl_logo_left
Adding it all Up: Backhaul per eNodeB
S1 User plane traffic(for 3 cells)

+Control Plane

+X2 U and C-plane+OA&M, Sync, etc+Transport protocol overhead
+IPsecoverhead (optional)

Backhaul


pipe


Mean 3x10Mbps

Peak: 55Mbps

Negligible3% of S1 (does not apply to peak)
+10%
+14%
Negligible
Mean 34 Mbps

Peak: 61 Mbps

Mean 39 Mbps

Peak: 69 Mbps

Backhaul rates are ~13% more than user trafficIPsecincreases the overhead to ~30%
(assumes largeIP packets)
LTE RAN


Slide 16

cbnl_logo_left
Backhaul Provisioning for Multiple eNodeBs

Provisioning for N eNodeBs = Max (N x busy time mean, peak)

0

50
100
150
200
250
300

350

400

450
500

0

1

2

345

678910
TricelleNodeBs, N

DL 2x2, 10MHz IPsec

DL 2x2, 10MHz no IPsec

LTE2x2 DL, 10MHz eNodeBs = Max (N x 34Mbps, 61 Mbps)

Backhaul

Traffic

Mbps


Slide 17

cbnl_logo_left
Backhaul Options

0
50
100

150
200
0

1

2

3

4

5

Backhaul Traffic MbpsTricell eNodeBs
LTE Traffic for One or More eNodeBs

What are the options for
Backhauling LTE Traffic?

C:\\Users\\juliusr\\Desktop\\Lance.jpg

Slide 18

cbnl_logo_left
Microwaveand the backhaul challenge

.Microwave connects 50% of the world\'s base
stations
.Copper has low cost but becomes unwieldy
for higher bandwidth connections
.Fibre build costs are high and deployment
time is often an issue. Low cost leased fibre
is not available in many markets
.Microwave is a low-cost option that is quickly
deployable and meets future network
capacity requirements
.Microwave hybrid network support can be a
key part of an all-IP network migration
strategy
.Microwave is small in size and is energy
efficient
.Cost effective


Microwave continues to increase
share while Fibre backhaul grows
at the expense of copper

(Source: Infonetics2010)


0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
CY06CY07CY08CY09CY10CY11CY12CY13Percent of Mobile Backhaul ConnectionsAirFiberCopper
(Source: Infonetics2010)

Mobile Backhaul Market Share

Fibre

Microwave

Copper20062013


Slide 19

cbnl_logo_left
What do you think....

What do you think is the fastest way to get
backhaul to new cellsitesor to upgrade old
ones?
Will it be:
.Leased fibre
.Leased copper
.Microwave
.Managed service





Slide 20

cbnl_logo_left
Microwave Backhaul Options

nc_comp_tower
Point to PointProvision4x61 Mbps = 244Mbps
0

50

100

150

200

0

1

2

3

4

5
Mbps

Tricell eNodeBs
PTP

4x61Mbps

Transport capacity provisioning

eNodeBs


Slide 21

cbnl_logo_left
Microwave Backhaul Options

nc_comp_tower
Point to Point

Provision4x61 Mbps = 244Mbps

nc_comp_tower
nc_ap_left_ogn
Provision1x136Mbps

Point-to-Multipoint

0

50

100

150

200

0

1

2

3

4

5

Mbps

Tricell eNodeBs

PMP:
1x136Mbps

PTP

4x61Mbps

Transport capacity provisioning


Slide 22

cbnl_logo_left
Microwave Backhaul Options

nc_comp_tower
Point-to-Point

Provision4x61 Mbps = 244Mbps

0

50

100

150

200

0

1

2

3

4

5

Mbps

Tricell eNodeBs

PMP:
1x136Mbps

PTP

4x61Mbps

Transport capacity provisioning

nc_comp_tower
nc_ap_left_ogn
Provision1x136Mbps

Point-to-Multipoint

Point-to-Multipoint is more efficient at backhauling
bursty LTE traffic than Point-to-Point


Slide 23

cbnl_logo_left
Unique PMP Radios:

Highest spectral efficiency

5 bits/s/Hz net throughput (data)

All outdoor zero footprint design

Powerful integrated processor

Hitless Dynamic Adaptive Modulation

Incorporates trellis-code modulation

Supports PtP& PMP architectures

Hardware acceleration ensures low
latency

VectaStar Terminal
.150Mb/s Ethernet
.Gigabit interface
.Hybrid support via indoor unit
.LTE Ready


VectaStar Hub
.Gigabit Ethernet
.Hybrid and Optimisation
support via radio controller
.Deploy as PtP or PMP
.LTE Ready


PMP Backhaul by VectaStar

Extremely simple, cost effective microwave backhaul platform

CB-031848_no_background_ty
Gigabit Ethernet ODU

Outdoor

Indoor

-48V DC

Supply

IP/Ethernet
Network

CB-031826_tny
IP/Ethernet
Network

Gigabit Ethernet Sector

Outdoor

Indoor

-48V DC

Supply

nc_comp_tower
nc_ap_left_ogn

Slide 24

cbnl_logo_left
The Topology of VectaStar Backhaul

The LTE Radio Access Network:

LTE devicesare served by cellswhich are controlled by eNodeBs.

LTE Devices (UEs)

LTE cell

eNodeB


Slide 25

cbnl_logo_left
nc_comp_tower
The Topology of VectaStar Backhaul

The LTE Radio Access Network:

LTE devicesare served by cellswhich are controlled by eNodeBs.

The Backhaul Network:

eNodeB traffic is backhauled from the VectaStarTerminalto an AccessPoint

A VectaStarHubcontrols multiple AccessPoints, each covering a sector

nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
LTE cell

eNodeB

Sector

VectaStar Hub

(Aggregation point)

nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
nc_ap_left_ogn
VectaStar Terminal

One per eNodeB

Access Points

LTE Devices (UEs)


Slide 26

cbnl_logo_left
Dimensioning VectaStar Backhaul for LTE

Number of 10MHz eNodeBs

Supported by a VectaStar Sector

Each VectaStar sector already supports four 10MHz eNodeBs

As LTE rollout gathers momentum, higher capacities will be available

0

100

200

300
400

500

600

Previous PMP

systems

Single VectaStar

Sector

Protected VectaStar

Sector

Future VectaStar

4

8

17

Sector
Capacity

Mbps

sector

Each hub sitecan support

multiple sectors

terminals


Slide 27

cbnl_logo_left
Case Study: LTE backhaul for London

Home
LTE-ready PMP Backhaul
solution for London:
.400 sq. Km
.112MHz spectrum
.364 Cell sites
.28 Hub sites
.150Mb/s Peak
.30Mb/s Mean
.Comparison showed that at
100Mbps, PtP exhausted
available spectrum.
.VectaStar used less than
half the spectrum needed
for PtP
.Entire network is single
hop for lowest and most
reliable latency





Slide 28

cbnl_logo_left
Another angle: The Informa Cost Analysis

The LTE traffic analysis shows PMP is more efficient than PTP.

Now we consider a completely different approach, and look at a cost
modelling exercise performed recently by infoma....

Western European Operators .Grading of Principle Backhaul OptionsGrading 1 .5 where 1 is very poor and 5 is excellent
Informa Telecoms and Media: “Last Mile Backhaul Options for
West European Mobile Operators”


Slide 29

cbnl_logo_left
Results of Informa Cost Analysis

PMP has the lowest
microwave OPEX

PMP has the
lowest CAPEX

Informa Telecoms and Media: “Last Mile Backhaul Options for
West European Mobile Operators”

Source: Informa Telecoms & Media

Backhaul Performance
Cost of Installation

Cost of Operation


Slide 30

cbnl_logo_left
Conclusions

10
AP bluesky.JPG
.LTE has been designed for lower cost per bit,
and copes with bursty broadband traffic with
a fully packet switched access, where many
users share a fat pipe
.The shift to broadband data has affected
backhaul traffic in a similar way:
LTE backhaul traffic is also very bursty
.Applying the shared fat pipe concept to the
backhaul gives us Point-to-Multipoint,
microwave which is more efficient than Point
to Point for backhauling LTE traffic
.The VectaStar system can today support 8 x
10MHz eNodeBs per sector, with further
capacity increases planned as LTE rollout
gathers momentum
.A cost modelling exercise by Informa comes
from a different angle, but arrives at the same
result: PMP is a very low cost option for
backhauling LTE.



Slide 31

cbnl_logo_left
Thank you for listening

Any Questions?

A recording of this webinar will be made available on the Eurocommswebsite within 24 hours

For further information please contact Lance, or visit www.cbnl.com

C:\\Users\\juliusr\\Documents\\_JR_Documents\\Activities\\Career\\06 Portraits Passport\\JuliusRobson_v2_300x400.jpg
Lance Hiley,

VP Marketing

Lhiley@cbnl.com

Julius Robson

Wireless Technology Consultant

C:\\Users\\juliusr\\Desktop\\Lance.jpg