DRIVING BROADBAND INNOVATION IN UAE; DU LTE EVOLUTION

Dr. Ayman ElnasharSr. Director - Wireless Broadband &

Site Sharing EITC (du) - UAE

Agenda Driving Wireless Broadband Innovation

in UAE: du Broadband Portfolio Why LTE (Data Evolution)

Speed Enhancement Latency Reduction Rich QoS capability All IP Simple flat architecture

LTE Evolution Spectrum Options Deployment Strategy Trial Results

du Broadband PortfolioC

over

age/

Mob

ility

Data Speeds (Kbps)

Loca

l Are

aFi

xed

Wire

less

Wid

e A

rea

Mob

ileM

etro

Are

aN

omad

ic

Fixed xDSL & Fiber ‘Ultra Broadband’

3.X G2G

Fixed Wireless

2.5G 3G

802.11b/a/g/n

Broadband everywhere

du WiFi Hotspots

Fixed Wireless Broadband services using OFDM (PTP &

PTMP) high capacity Links with up to 300Mbps for SME and

Enterprise customers

du Fixed network Services

du UAE Nationwide Mobile Network

Nationwide Mobile BroadbandHSPA+/DC-HSPA+ (42Mbps)*

3

* Du is the 1st in UAE to deploy the DC-HSPA+ nationwide and UAE is the 6th nation globally to deploy this technology thanks to du.

802.16dWiMax in 3.5GHz for

small SME

LTE Evolution

TDD Technologies

FDD Technologies

4

Why LTE?

5

3GPP Evolutions; HSPA + & LTE

Page 6

Bandwidth1.4Mhz

Thro

ughp

ut

5Mhz

1

MIMORx/Tx

10Mhz 20Mhz

LTE326Mbps

24

LTEDL:5Mbps

LTE (OFDMA) scales linearily in

bandwidth (single carrier) and in single user-MIMO

factors (max. 4x4)

HSPA+ (WCDMA) scales linearily

in bandwidth (multi carrier) and proportionally in

single user -MIMO (max. 2x2)

HSPA+DL:21MbpsUL:11Mbps

86Mbps43Mbps

LTE 173Mbps86Mbps

LTE43Mbps21Mbps

HSPA+42Mbps11Mbps

LTE86Mbps43Mbps

HSPA+(DC)84Mbps*22Mbps*

LTE43Mbps21Mbps

HSPA+ vs. LTE Peak Data Rates DL/UL

* Chipset Roadmap delayed for 2012 and we may need additional carrier to get the peak

throughput as MIMO will not add any gain for voice (R99).

HSPA+ vs. LTEHSPA+ LTE

Peak Rate 84Mbps@10MHz172Mbps@20Mhz (2x2)

326.4Mbps@20MHz(4x4)

Spectrum Efficiency (Peak)

8.4bps/Hz (Peak for DC+ MIMO + 64QAM)

8.6bps/Hz (Peak for 2x2 MIMO)

Spectrum Efficiency (Average cell

throughput) (DL/UL)1.424/0.6 (MIMO+64QAM)

1.717/0.99 (2x2 MIMO)20% improvement in DL

65% improvement in the UL

Transmission bandwidth

Full system bandwidth Variable up to full system bandwidth

Suitability for MIMO (i.e., MIMO Gain)

Requires significant computingpower due to signal beingdefined in the time domain and on top of spreading (frequency selective channel)

Ideal for MIMO due to signalrepresentation in the frequency domain and possibility of narrowband allocation to follow real-time variations in the channel(Frequency nonselective channel)

7

Page 8

HSPA+ vs. LTE Latency ImprovementLatency

800

100

55

40

13

1800

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

HSPA

HSPA+

LTE

Del ay (ms)

Control plane Idle -> active

User plane latency (RTT)

For web site access response, LTE requires ¼ of time of HSPA+ and 1/8 of HSPA

Delay to access a 60kByte web page

2350

1200

300

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

HSPA HSPA+ LTE

Del

ay (m

s)

HSPA

HSPA+

LTE

WOW

LTE versus DC-HSPA+: LTE will Bring Significant improvements

LTE is the next step in the user experience and essential to take mobile broadband to the mass market

LTE Brings More New Data Services than HSPA+

Page 10

Data application GPRS/EDGE UMTS LTESMS ★ ★ ★

Ring back Tone ★ ★ ★Basic online Gaming ★ ★ ★

MMS ★ ★ ★WAP browsing ★ ★ ★

Email ★ ★ ★“Classic” WEB browsing ★ ★ ★Video Ring Back Tone ★ ★

High-end Gaming ★ ★High quality online video ★ ★

Video telephony ★ ★“Super-fast” WEB browsing ★ ★

Broadcast Mobile TV (MBMS) ★ ★Corporate VPN, intranet ★ ★

true on-demand television ★Video-based mobile advertising ★

Wireless DSL ★Mobile WEB2.0 (social community, P2P) ★

High quality online gaming (consistent experience with fix network) ★

LTE Brings Better MBB Experience than HSPA+Technology(Cell Throughput)

EDGE56kbps

UMTS512kbps

HSPA2Mbps

HSPA8mbps

DC-HSPA+42Mbps

LTE100Mbps

Web surfing (response time)

36 Seconds 4 Seconds 1 Second 0.3 Second 0.1 Seconds 0.025 Second

Download 5M Music

12 Minutes 1Minutes18 seconds

20 Seconds 5 Seconds 2 Seconds 0.5 Second

Download 25M Video

1 Hour 6Minutes31Seconds

1 Minute40Seconds

25 Seconds 8 Seconds 2 Seconds

Download 750M HD movie

29 Hours 3 Hours15 Minutes

50 Minutes

12 Minutes30 Seconds

4 Minutes10 Seconds

1 Minutes20 Seconds

12

LTE Network: A Simple Architecture leads to lower cost per bit

Simplified/Flat All IP Architecture: CS core network removed – PS only UMTS RNC “removed”, RNC functionalities moved to the eNodeB eNodeB connected directly to the Evolved Packet Core (EPC)

QoE Expectations and Performance Requirements by Service Type

13

3GPP QoS Parameters: QCI QCI

Resource Type

PriorityPacket Delay Budget

Packet Loss Rate

Example Services

1

GBR

2 100ms 10-2 Conversational Voice

2 4 150ms 10-3 Conversational Video (live streaming)

3 3 50ms 10-3 Real Time Gaming

4 5 300ms 10-6 Non-conversational Video (buffered streaming)

5

Non-GBR

1 100ms 10-6 IMS Signalling

6 6 300ms 10-6Video (Buffered Streaming); TCP-based (e.g. www, e-mail, chat, ftp, p2p file sharing, progressive video, etc.)

7 7 100ms 10-3 Voice, Video (Live Streaming), Interactive Gaming

8 8300ms 10-6

Video (Buffered Streaming); TCP-based (e.g. www, e-mail, chat, ftp, p2p file sharing, progressive video, etc.)9 9

The QCI is further used within the LTE access network to define the control packet-forwarding treatment from an end-to-end perspective.

It also ensures a minimum standard level of QoS to ease the interworking between the LTE networks mainly in roaming cases and in multi-vendor environments

PDB defines an upper bound delay that a packet is allowed to experience between UE & PCEF

LTE Evolution

15

16

Key Technologies of LTE

17

OFDM, the state-of-the-art Radio Access Technology:Moving from Time Domain to Frequency Domain

18

Why OFDM/SC-FDMA Robustness against multipath which makes it

suitable for broadband systems compared to TDMA/CDMA techniques.

SC-FDMA brings additional benefit of low peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) making it suitable for uplink transmission and then extend UE battery life.

Receiver design is very simple thanks to frequency non-selective (i.e., flat fading) channel.

OFDM is inherently susceptible to channel dispersion since OFDM symbol time is much larger than the typical channel dispersion.

19

2x2 MIMOeNodeB UE 1

1x2 SIMOeNodeB UE 1

In typical urban area: 15%~28% gain over SIMO @ Macro ~50% gain over SIMO @ Micro

MIMO: the Key to Improve Cell Throughput

Page 20

All IP Flat Architecture

Gateway

Scalable Bandwidth

Increasing Bandwidth Decreasing Latency

Simplified Architecture IP Core: flat, scalable Backhaul based on IP / MPLS

transport Fits with IMS, VoIP, SIPImproved spectral efficiency Orthogonal Frequency Division

Multiple Access (OFDMA) for Downlink (DL) and Single Carrier Frequency Division Multiple Access (SC-FDMA) for Uplink (UL)

Robust modulation in dense environments Increased spectral efficiency Simplified Receiver design

cheaper terminal Scalable - go beyond 5 MHz

limitation MIMO (Multiple-Input, Multiple-

Output) for UL& DL Increased link capacity Multi-Users MIMO (UL) Overcome multi-path interference

Refarm 2G

Refarm 3G New Spectrum10 MHz 15 MHz 20 MHz3 MHz 5 MHz1.4 MHz

LTE key features

Spectrum Options

21

Page 22

LTE Spectrum and Re-farming Options

New Bands well suited for LTE to avoid refarming when introducing new technology 2.6GHz spectrum mainly for LTE “Digital Dividend” (e.g. 800MHz/700MHz bands): Trend is to use it for LTE

2.1GHz spectrum: bandwidth mostly for UMTS/HSPA/HSPA+ and few countries for LTE 900MHz, 1800MHz, AWS re-farming is needed before UMTS/HSPA or LTE usage

900MHz refarming already started for UMTS usage => may not be possible to use it for LTE in most of countries

1800MHz will be re-farmed directly to LTE AWS is planned for LTE use in North America

Possible rollout scenarios: LTE 2.6GHz/AWS/1.8GHz/DD vs. HSPA+ 2.1GHz/900MHz

20102008 2015 2025

2.6 GHz

2.1 GHz

1800 MHz

900 MHz

DD

GSM

GSM

Freq. Bands

LTE

LTE?

2020

WiMAX3.5 GHz LTE?

WiMAX? LTE

LTE

LTEUMTS / HSPAUMTS / HSPA?

UMTS / HSPA?

23

Why LTE 1800 Coverage area is about 2X larger than LTE2.6GHz

with better indoor penetration. 35% improvement in cell edge throughput

compared to LTE2.6GHz. Reduction of Extra sites results in quick delivery of

the LTE to market. Reuse of existing GSM1800 coverage polygons and

possibility to share antenna system of GSM1800. Reuse of existing IBS system without upgrade to

support 2.6GHz and without coverage degradation.

LTE1800: promising and available for mass market

Deployment Strategy

24

25

Horizontal Distance: 0.5m

2/3G band x LTE band x

Vertical Distance: 0.2m

2/3G band x

LTE band x

Horizontal 0.5m or vertical 0.2m antennas separation is the minimum requirement

Antennas Separation and Guard Band Requirement for Co-Existing System

Guard band Requirement for Co-existing Systems ( MHz )

Co-existing SystemsLTE Bandwidth

5MHz 10MHz 15MHz 20MHzLTE1800 + GSM1800 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

LTE Band X + LTE Band Y 0 0 0 0

LTE FDD + LTE TDD 10 10 10 10

26

27

Download Volume Speed (1GB and 10GB )

28

Thank You