White paper

Designing, Operating and Optimizing Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Executive summary
Contents 2. Executive summary 3.  The pressures of booming mobile broadband use 4.  Heterogeneous network deployment and expansion roadmaps 6.  Heterogeneous network optimization 6.  Traffic steering and mobility management 8.  Interference management 10. Energy saving
HSPA / LTE HSPA+ / LTE GSM / HSPA HSPA+ Femto LTE Femto

Growing demand for low-cost mobile broadband connectivity is driving the development of heterogeneous cellular networks. A range of different radio access technologies (RATs) and WiFi will all co-exist, and macro cells will be complemented by a multitude of smaller cells, such as micro, pico and femto cells. Such heterogeneous systems will be significantly more complex to manage than todays networks and therefore require fully Self Organizing Networks (SON). This white paper gives an overview of the key challenges inherent in the design, operation and optimization

of heterogeneous networks and explains how Nokia Siemens Networks can help communications service providers (CSPs) address them. It discusses how to design roadmaps for expansion and how to optimize systems to manage traffic steering and mobility, interference and energy saving. It also explains how to automate configuration and fault management in order to keep OPEX under control. Its clear that a unified approach to managing heterogeneous networks is essential to achieve the necessary flexibility and costefficiency while delivering the kind of seamless broadband connectivity that consumers increasingly demand.

11.  Heterogeneous network configuration 12.  Heterogeneous network fault management 13. The future of networks 14. Meeting the challenge

GSM

WiFi

Wide area

Medium area

Hot spots

Indoor

Figure 1. Heterogeneous networks combine a range of radio access technologies.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

The pressures of booming mobile broadband use

A combination of exponentially growing demand for mobile data and flat-lining average revenue per user (ARPU) makes it tough for CSPs looking to evolve their mobile communications networks. The rules of the game are changing, as mobile indoor capacity becomes more valuable and machine-tomachine (M2M) communications take off and create demand for more diverse services. At the same time, factors such as energy efficiency are emerging as crucial KPIs. Increasing traffic, novel services, cost and energy considerations will all lead to significantly more diverse cellular networks in the future:  Multi-RAT (sometimes the result of legacy infrastructure, catering for multiple cellular standards and fixed-mobile convergence).  Multi-layered (with macro, micro, pico and femto cells of different size).  Multi-vendor (where different access points have been provided by different vendors). This means that the design, operation and optimization of future networks present novel challenges and require new methodologies. While a lot of hype has already been generated around specific topics such as interference management or SON, the aim of this white paper is to look at the big picture regarding heterogeneous systems in general. There are two key questions:  What will drive particular heterogeneous deployments and how can a CSP determine which is the right roadmap for expansion?  What are the key challenges inherent in operating and optimizing complex heterogeneous systems and how can CSPs address them?

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

 Heterogeneous network deployment and expansion roadmaps

Multi-RAT The reason for multi-RAT deployments is simple. Typically, CSPs already have wide-area GSM coverage and WCDMA/ HSPA in densely populated urban areas. Theyre probably deploying LTE in hotspots or (in, e.g., the case of Germany) in rural areas in order to exploit the digital dividend. They may also consider re-farming existing GSM frequency bands to WCDMA/HSPA or LTE, so they can update their equipment gradually to more spectrally efficient radio standards. Its likely that GSM, WCDMA/HSPA and LTE will continue to coexist and evolve in the long term for several reasons:  GSM may be the only system providing ubiquitous voice coverage and may be used for M2M.  Investments in HSPA may not yet be amortized.  Long-term spectrum licenses may require CSPs to use a particular RAT.  A large population of legacy terminals can force CSPs to keep legacy air interfaces running. The cellular standards already mentioned will also coexist with technologies such as WiFi. In fact, offloading data traffic from cellular air interfaces to WiFi is highly attractive for CSPs from a cost point of view, allowing them to reduce traffic in 3G/4G networks and use comparatively inexpensive backhaul infrastructure. A mobile CSP that also owns the WiFi access infrastructure can deliver a seamless data experience for end users. Multi-layer Many networks will include an overlay of cells of different sizes using a single RAT. For instance, outdoor terminals may be served by a combination of micro and macro cells. Pico cells may provide both outdoor and indoor coverage in hotspots such as train stations or shopping malls with a typical cell radius of up to 200 meters. Femto cells are used indoors in cells of no more than 10-25m radius. While pico cells are deployed by a CSP, femto cells are typically userdeployed in the form of private home base stations, often denoted as home (e)NBs or H(e)NBs. Theres also a distinction between open and closed subscriber group (OSG/CSG) femto cells, where CSG cells serve a constrained set of users. Figure 2 shows a typical multi-layer network. The trend towards multi-layer deployments is driven by the need to provide better indoor services and respond to heterogeneous traffic demands, as well as by cost and energy efficiency considerations.

Indoors

Femto cell

Indoors

Femto cell

Cell radius Macro cell Micro cell Pico cell Femto cell > 300m 100-300m < 200m 10-25m

Tx power 46 dBm 40 dBm > 24 dBm < 20 dBm

Figure 2. Illustration of a typical multi-layer setup.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Relaying is an interesting option in cases where a wired backhaul connection between the base station and the network is uneconomical or technically unfeasible, and where an in-band or out-band backhaul overthe-air to the donor cell is preferable. Terminals typically experience relay cells as individual layers in the system. How can CSPs determine the right expansion roadmap? An optimal network expansion roadmap depends on various CSPand location-specific parameters and assumptions, such as:  existing legacy infrastructure in terms of sites, base stations and backhaul.  the availability of spectrum and terminals for specific RATs.

 traffic demand, user mobility and revenue forecast for a particular area.  cost-related aspects (such as backhaul infrastructure cost, site rental, labor and energy).  general strategic decisions regarding services to be provided and the metric to be optimized (such as ubiquitous connectivity anytime and for anybody vs. peak data rates for certain consumers). Establishing an expansion roadmap requires sophisticated performance evaluation methodology, detailed cost models and measurement data. The impact of the uncertainty inherent in parameters such as traffic forecasts can be mitigated by investing in flexible base stations, where changes can be made later on via a software upgrade.

Figure 3 shows an example of an expansion roadmap. The traffic distribution can vary widely throughout a given network. This, combined with the practical deployment limitations of different upgrade options, means that CSPs may pursue several expansion paths simultaneously in one network. CSPs need an automated process to identify which parts of the network need which upgrade. In the long run, many CSPs will also be managing networks in which equipment from different vendors is used in the same geographical area. In this case, it is particularly important that all network management functions are multivendor-capable.

WCDMA/HSPA

Existing macro sites

Upgrade to 2nd carrier Upgrade to 6-sector Add HSPA macro sites

Upgrade to 3rd carrier

Add HSPA micro cells

LTE

New LTE RAT at existing HSPA sites The take-up time of LTE strongly depends on spectrum and LTE terminal availability

Upgrade to the 2nd carrier

Upgrade to 6-sector Add LTE micro cells (new or reused HSPA micro sites)

Figure 3. An expansion roadmap for an urban scenario with strongly increasing traffic.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Heterogeneous network optimization

Operating and optimizing complex heterogeneous systems presents several key challenges, such as how to distribute traffic efficiently between cells, RATs and layers while guaranteeing seamless user mobility, how to alleviate the impact of interference and how to adapt the system efficiently to meet changing traffic demand.  Absolute priorities can be assigned for intra- or inter-RAT carriers to terminals.  Cell barring forbids terminals from camping on any cells that are included on a black list. In a connected state, the network is responsible for triggering a handover between cells, RATs or layers. Hand-over decisions are usually based on terminal measurements, but WCDMA/HSPA and LTE networks have various options to influence the scope of these measurements. The challenge is to balance the need to let terminals take enough measurements to ensure maximum offload and smooth mobility without taking so many that the measurements drain the terminal batteries and degrade network performance. In general, all the traffic steering and mobility management concepts used for idle and connected state terminals have to be well-aligned. Further, mobility robustness optimization (MRO) is required to identify the root cause of any radio link failures and call drops, and to adjust traffic steering and mobility management parameters as a result. Femto cells present special challenges, since they may be deployed in large numbers and are typically outside the CSPs control. A user can move or turn off a femto base station at any time, for example. Mobility is also difficult in the context of closed subscriber group (CSG) femtos, and there may be confusion over cell identities in very dense deployments owing to limited sets of scrambling codes or physical cell identifiers. While both WCDMA/HSPA and LTE now provide various options to indicate femto proximity, CSG identification and disambiguation, mobility in dense deployments still calls for sophisticated proprietary solutions. Carrier aggregation techniques may make it possible to schedule traffic flexibly on multiple (co-located) layers using simple radio resource management rather than hand-overs. HSPA-LTE carrier aggregation will potentially enable a similar approach for multi-RAT traffic steering. Offloading as much traffic as possible to femto or WiFi cells and balancing the remaining load between the remaining layers and RATs helps CSPs to use their infrastructure efficiently and offer a homogeneous QoS for end users. Table 1 summarizes specific solutions for certain scenarios. The outlook for traffic steering and mobility management There are various ways of achieving traffic steering and mobility management in WCDMA/HSPA and LTE, but they all depend on networks performing well in two fundamental areas:  Networks must use the available resources efficiently and adjust biases and priorities appropriately. They must also provide terminals with up-to-date cell lists and black lists.  Networks should optimize the frequency at which terminals perform measurements. Clearly, both of these issues require base stations to monitor their neighborhood. More than this, however, CSPs looking for end-toend traffic steering need a unified heterogeneous network management solution that spans all RATs and layers, as well as the backhaul infrastructure and core network. Future standardization work will focus on functions such as introducing speed-dependent black list configurations, enhancing the proximity indication procedure for CSG cells and adding cell type indicators to the mobility state definition.

Traffic steering and mobility management

Traffic steering allows CSPs to optimize their resources, improve the way users experience services and minimize power consumption by directing the traffic to a particular RAT or layer. Traffic steering is a tool for reducing OPEX and limiting or postponing CAPEX, especially in complex heterogeneous systems. It works hand-in-hand with mobility management to ensure a reasonable number of handovers and avoid radio link failures. It also needs to consider other factors such as the capabilities of the terminals and network, the delivery of services and quality of service (QoS), the load in different RATs and layers and power consumption. Traffic steering in different standards Both WCDMA/HSPA and LTE can perform traffic steering in various ways. These are typically divided into those that apply to terminals in the idle state and those that deal with the connected state. In the idle state, the terminals are responsible for measuring their environment and deciding which RAT or layer to camp on. The network can influence these decisions by applying various means:  Basic biasing involves the provisioning of cell reselection hysteresis, (the signal power thresholds used to prompt cell reselection) and cell quality offsets to terminals.  Hierarchical cell structure in WCDMA/HSPA enables prioritization for cell reselection.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

 Scenario / use case  Macro-micro / macro-pico deployment Macro-femto deployment (CSG-aware terminals) Macro-femto deployment (Legacy WCDMA/UMTS terminals) Inter-RAT traffic steering between WCDMA/UMTS and LTE (Low LTE terminal penetration)

Recommended idle mode solution Use a scenario-specific extent of basic biasing to perform small cell range extensions and promote macro offload.

Recommended connected mode solution Apply cell-specific offsets to terminal measurements to enlarge small cell hand-over areas.

In WCDMA/UMTS: Primary scrambling code (PSC) ranges connected to femtos should be broadcast to terminals. In LTE: Physical cell identifier (PCI) ranges of CSG cells to be broadcasted to terminals.

Use of proximity indications to promote hand-over to femto cells with minimal terminal measurement.

Adjust biasing concepts and neighbor cell lists to incentivize terminals to or prevent them from measuring and accessing CSG femto cells.

Use absolute priorities to enforce offload to LTE.

Not applicable if all LTE-capable terminals are kept in LTE.

Inter-RAT traffic steering between Adjust absolute priorities according to load, WCDMA/UMTS and LTE ideally use dedicated absolute priorities (Medium/high LTE terminal penetration) (sent to terminals after connection release). WiFi offload

In WCDMA/UMTS: Adjust neighbor cell lists (NCLs) according to load. In LTE: Adjust black lists according to load.

End users want a seamless data service experience in which their device is always effortlessly connected to either cellular network or WiFi access point. Device management and automated network discovery functions allow CSPs to manage this aspect of traffic steering efficiently, and logically integrate WiFi networks into their core network.

Fast-moving terminals In WCDMA/UMTS: Terminals determine speed (i.e. preventing such terminals themselves, switch to high mobility state and from using small cells) refrain from using small cells via hierarchical cell structures. In LTE: Terminals determine speed themselves and obtain scaling factors influencing cell reselection.
Table 1: Recommended traffic steering and mobility management solutions.

In WCDMA/UMTS: Network shall estimate terminal speed based on previous hand-overs, then provide neighbor cell lists (NCLs) containing only macro cells to high-speed terminals. In LTE: Network shall estimate terminal speed via history information, restrict inter-frequency measurements and provide modified black lists accordingly.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Liq

Interference management
Inter-cell interference is already one of the limiting factors in todays mobile communications systems, especially in dense, urban deployments. The problem is even worse in the context of multi-layer networks, as illustrated in Figure 4. If both the macro cell and the smaller cell are using the same radio resources (so-called cochannel deployment), the following interference problems can occur:  In the downlink, a terminal assigned to the macro base station may see strong interference coming from a small cell, leading to a so-called macro layer coveragehole. This problem is particularly pronounced if the smaller cell serves a CSG, in which case a terminal may be very close to a small cell but not allowed to connect to it (case A). On the other hand, a terminal served by a small cell may see strong interference from a macro cell, in particular if a cell range extension is used to enforce offload (case B).  In the uplink, a terminal assigned to the macro cell but close to the cell-edge will typically create strong interference to the small cell (case C). However, this degradation of small cell performance is often acceptable,

since each terminal connected to a small cell typically accesses a much larger share of radio resources. A more problematic aspect is the uplink interference that a potentially large number of small cell terminals may generate towards one macro cell (case D). Interference can be attenuated or increased if the cell border is shifted towards the larger or smaller cell, for example, by traffic steering or mobility management. How can CSPs mitigate interference problems? Antenna downtilt is a common approach to avoid interference in a homogeneous macro deployment, where it can be achieved flexibly using smart antenna concepts. In a multi-layer context, however, downtilt optimization is rarely applicable, since CSPs need to ensure macro umbrella coverage and so tend to leave macro cell downtilt untouched. In addition, the antennas used for micro, pico and femto cells are often mounted at a low level, so that downtilt is not suitable. Smart resource reuse is required when interference cannot be avoided by physical means. It may be better to split interfering entities onto orthogonal resources (divided by time or frequency) and abandon the idea of fully using the resources in each

cell. An optimal scheme would let adjacent cells cooperatively decide upon resource usage, requiring complex signaling between cells. A more pragmatic approach is to employ static resource reuse concepts:  Reserve some resources for macro-only, small-cell-only or constrained usage - so-called fractional frequency reuse. Escape carrier concepts are a good example, where dedicated carriers are reserved for macro usage only. LTE Release 10 includes a feature that allows recurring time slots to be reserved for some layers, referred to as enhanced inter-cell interference coordination (eICIC). eICIC only works if base stations can be synchronized and terminals have good measurement capabilities.  Certain layers may be allowed to access some resources only with a reduced transmission power. This is called soft frequency reuse. Power control parameters can be adjusted to either define a power offset to be used by all the elements in a particular layer and/or to apply power capping. This is an effective way to trade the performance of some layers against others, for example, by improving macro cell-edge performance at the price of small cell performance.

B: Femto terminals seeing

DL macro interference, esp. under cell range extension Many pico cells

A: Macro terminal

seeing strong downlink interference from small cell

D: Many small cell

terminals creating uplink interference to macro cell

C: Macro terminal creating

strong uplink interference to small cell

Macro cell

Pico cell

Figure 4. Major interference problems in multi-layer configurations.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Optimized interference management solutions A combination of smart resource reuse and power control generally provides the best solution. Table 2 summarizes this best use of this approach in different scenarios. Figure 5 shows how a particular power control adaptation and escape carrier concept can trade femto for macro performance in the downlink. The outlook for interference management CSPs must take inter-layer interference into consideration in the operation and optimization of heterogeneous networks. While both WCDMA/UMTS and LTE provide the basic functionalities to address interference issues, efficient interference management requires a unified heterogeneous network solution that includes the entire network setup. It must also be well-aligned with traffic steering and mobility management. Several improvements are under consideration for LTE Release 11, including enhanced terminal receivers, improved eICIC and autonomous carrier-based interference management. Autonomous component carrier selection (ACCS)
Scenario / use case
0.5 Escape carrier + power control 0.4 5th percentile macro user throughput (Mbps) Low femto density High femto density

0.3 Escape carrier 0.2 Co-channel + power control

0.1

Co-channel 0 0 10 20 30 40

Median femto user throughput (Mbps)

Figure 5. The impact of power control adaptation and escape carrier concepts on downlink performance in LTE macro-femto scenarios (CSG case).

is being discussed, in which base stations sense the use of certain carriers in their neighborhood and adjust their resource consumption accordingly. Coordinated multipoint (CoMP) techniques are also
Recommended resource usage

being discussed for heterogeneous networks. These allow network operators to exploit interference as useful signal energy, rather than treating it as a burden.

Recommended power control adaptation Downlink: Femto power calibration based on network listener mode (NLM), where femtos sense the level of interference around them. Uplink: Power capping of WCDMA/UMTS femto terminals and customized power control setting for LTE femto terminals.

Macro-femto deployment Resource reuse (co-channel), but with one carrier free of femto CSG cells if possible.
Mobile voice (16kbps) Mobile tablet

Mobile laptop

Mobile handheld

Macro-micro or macro-pico deployment Dedicated micro or pico carrier is preferred, but co-channel operation is also feasible. In the latter case, eICIC should be used in the context of small cell range extension.

Downlink: No power control adaptation needed. Uplink: Power capping of WCDMA/ UMTS small cell terminals and customized power control setting for LTE small cell terminals for co-channel deployment.

Table 2: Recommended interference management schemes for multi-layer HSPA/LTE.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Energy saving Energy efficiency is increasingly important in terms of reducing both CO2 emissions and costs. Since the base stations consume the lions share of energy in a typical network, efficiency is particularly crucial in dense heterogeneous systems. Energy saving through turning off base stations While replacing old base stations with more power-efficient single-RAN equipment is the most intuitive option, major savings can also result from enabling systems to turn off access points when theyre not needed. In a homogeneous network of cells, all but a certain pattern of cells might be turned off, reducing the cell density and increasing the size of the remaining cells. In multi-layer deployments, CSPs may switch off the smaller layer of cells in off-peak situations, so that the larger cells can take over without changing the coverage area.

While it is straightforward to automatically turn off an access point when it experiences zero load for some time, deciding when to turn it on again could be trickier. There are several potential solutions:  Turn base stations on or off based on a predefined schedule generated from historical traffic statistics.  Periodically switch on all hotspots and then switch off those that experience low load.  Reactivate hotspots when a certain IoT (Interference over Thermal Noise) threshold is exceeded, since this indicates that nearby terminals are transmitting to an adjacent cell. An optimized approach to energy saving Looking at todays multi-RAT and emerging multi-layer networks, a centralized operations, administration and maintenance (OAM)-based solution is the most promising energy saving solution in the short and

medium term. However, this may be problematic in multi-vendor networks and in large networks where a distributed approach could react faster to changing traffic conditions. Hence, a fully standardized solution with local decisions taken by base stations and exchanged between them looks more promising in the long term.

10

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Heterogeneous network configuration

Efficient operation of heterogeneous networks requires each network element to be well defined in terms of its particular role and location within the network, and to be context-aware. Clearly, this should be automated as far as possible to control OPEX. Auto-connectivity and auto-commissioning Automatic provisioning and configuration of new network elements reduces the time and effort involved in getting newly installed hardware up and running. One simple solution is to use RFID site tags or GPS information to automatically keep track of equipment deployed at different sites and then obtain the required configuration information from the OAM system, as shown in Figure 6. An alternative approach for automatic relay-node configuration is for a relay to connect itself initially to an arbitrary base station as if it were a terminal in order to access the configuration data. It then sets up the feeder link to its donor base station and begins relaying. Automatic neighbor relations After configuration, a network element has to obtain and update information on its environment in order to adjust traffic steering, mobility management and interference management settings. In particular, it needs up-to-date knowledge of neighboring cells, since missing or newly added neighbors can result in poor performance and call drops. Automatic neighbor relations (ANR) depend on terminals to detect and report neighboring cells, providing a very efficient and always-on way of keeping base stations updated, even if radio conditions change. In the context of heterogeneous networks, WCDMA/HSPA and LTE use different techniques to let terminals discover different layers and RATs. The amount of information must be balanced carefully against the effort of making such measurements. Optimized ANR solutions While terminal-based environment discovery is certainly a very flexible and self-adapting mechanism in a changing network topology, it may be several years to establish a sufficient number of terminals capable of supporting ANR among the terminal population. Solutions based on network management systems are therefore still an attractive option. In this case neighbor cells identifier and related IP addresses are provided by the OAM system. Hybrid architectures can exploit both the information collected by terminals, which is specifically important in the context of user-deployed femto cells, and information from the OAM system.

Location / site info Location Network element HW-ID OAM system

Database Location / site info

or

HW-ID

HW-ID Site info (obtained through RFID) Config Data Config Data

Figure 6. Automatic site identification and hardware-to-site-mapping.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

11

Heterogeneous network fault management

A lot of man hours are already invested in fault detection, diagnosis and compensation in todays networks. This effort will become prohibitive in heterogeneous networks, to a point where the high number of network elements cannot be managed in a conventional way. Automatic cell degradation detection, diagnosis and healing functionality will be crucial for CSPs looking to control their OPEX. While the existence of multiple layers and RATs offers some redundancy to alleviate the need for automatic healing, the existence of user-deployed femto nodes will require novel fault management. Faults generally fall into one of two categories:  Obvious faults in hardware and software are easy to detect, since the equipment typically initiates an alarm.  Other faults are more difficult to detect, such as RF failures (antenna direction and connectivity issues, power amplifier degradation and so on), scheduling problems or persistent hand-over failures because of the wrong parameter settings. Sleeping cells are especially problematic. These cells are not functioning at all and accept no traffic, but create no alarm. The first step in fault management is to differentiate between normal and abnormal system behavior. Any symptoms of abnormal behavior are linked to a set of potential causes, in most cases based on empirical knowledge supplied to the system by human operators. In order to locate specific areas affected by a problem - such as interference around a new, user-placed base station, or hand-over problems in a certain area - CSPs should consider terminalcentric measurement data, including timestamps and location information. This enables them to focus on the problem from the terminal perspective. What happens when a failure is detected? Often, the most intuitive response to a failure will be to reset the affected cell and wait for it to start working again. If this does not resolve the problem, further action may be taken:  If a pico or femto cell fails, the macro layer of the same RAT or a different RAT may compensate. If the problem persists, the neighbor relationships of adjacent cells will have to be adapted.  If a macro cell fails, smaller cells may initially compensate for the reduced coverage, while in the long term so-called cell outage compensation (COC) may be used. This adjusts the transmit power or downtilt of adjacent macro cells to re-establish coverage.  If the behavior of a small cell degrades the performance of a macro cell, the long-term solution might be to turn the small cell off. The outlook for fault management In summary, the key to fault management in heterogeneous networks is to correlate the detection and configuration management information from across the different layers and RATs, diagnose the problem and decide on a solution. Often the quality of the decision is more important than the quality of the actual solution itself. A well-designed and aligned fault management function can significantly reduce the extent of human troubleshooting as well as the time required until a degradation is rectified, leading to potentially vast OPEX savings.

12

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

The future of networks

The arrival of coordinated multi-point (CoMP) techniques will add a new dimension to heterogeneous networks. CoMP techniques may be based on baseband pooling and hotelling, in which the signal processing for multiple cells is performed in a central location, or even virtualized in a cloud RAN. New cognitive concepts will add yet another dimension of flexible and optimized spectrum utilization to the game. These include ideas such as femto frequency and/or network sharing, in which multiple CSPs make use of the same femto access points, share parts of their core network or share the same spectrum bands in a flexible way. The introduction of smart sensing, geo-location and database information sharing will deliver more agile use of resources and increased overall spectrum utilization, both of which will help to drive down the total cost of ownership. All these developments will increase the complexity of operating and optimizing future cellular networks even further. This makes the need for truly unified heterogeneous network solutions even greater.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

13

Meeting the challenge

Mobile CSPs will undoubtedly be investing in heterogeneous networks over the next few years, complete with multiple RATs, multiple layers and multiple vendors. Traffic growth, ubiquitous demand for high-quality services, cost and energy efficiency considerations are all driving them that way. While this general trend is undeniable, the precise choice of technologies and the corresponding expansion roadmap that will best suit each CSPs situation are less obvious. Dense heterogeneous systems clearly present novel challenges, thanks to the high number of base stations (many of which may be userdeployed) and the resulting complex interdependencies. CSPs will meet these challenges with a co-ordinated set of modular solutions:  Plugnplay. It is essential for OPEX reduction that all base stations are self-configurable.  Neighborhood-aware base stations. Network elements must measure and share information about their neighborhood. This is best done through a hybrid solution based on a network management system in conjunction with ANR.  Smart and robust end-to-end traffic steering. Networks must rely on a range of context-aware, efficient and aligned traffic steering and mobility management strategies.  Minimization of terminal-based carrier and cell measurements. Such measurements must be minimized to prevent them from sucking the life out of batteries and impairing performance.  Smart resource reuse and advanced power control are essential to alleviate interference.  Smart energy management adapts the active cell density to traffic demand.  Automatic cell degradation detection and a network management system enable an effective response to failures. Nokia Siemens Networks supports CSPs as they wrestle with the increasing complexities of evolving networks. We build smart and unified heterogeneous networks that enable all network RATs and layers to be viewed as a logically unified network with automated management via the award winning Nokia Siemens Networks SON Suite, seamless interworking and an uncompromising quality of experience for end users even in a multi-vendor environment. In other words, we provide a unified approach that enables CSPs to serve the growing demand for mobile data while keeping costs firmly under control.

Unified Heterogeneous Network Approach Configuration Auto-Connectivity/ Commissioning Deployment Automatic Neighbour Relations Interference Management Optimization Traffic Steering & Mobility Management Fault Management

Energy Saving

Neighbourhoodaware base stations Plug n play

Smart energy management Smart power control and resource reuse

Minimization of UE-based measurement

Smart E2E traffic steering

Automatic cell degradation detection

Figure 7. Unified heterogeneous network key building blocks.

14

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Abbreviations
ACCS Autonomous Component Carrier Selection ANR Automatic Neighbor Relations ARPU Average Revenue Per User CAPEX Capital Expenditure COC Cell Outage Compensation CoMP Coordinated Multi-Point CSG Closed Subscriber Group CSP Communications Service Provider eICIC Enhanced Inter-Cell Interference Coordination (e)NB Enhanced Node B GSM  Global System for Mobile Communications H(e)NB Home Enhanced Node B HSPA High Speed Packet Access LTE Long-Term Evolution M2M Machine-to-Machine MRO Mobility Robustness Optimization NCL Neighbor Cell List NLM Network Listener Mode OAM  Operations, Administration and Maintenance OPEX Operating Expenditure PCI Physical Cell Identifier PSC Primary Scrambling Code QoS Quality of Service RAT Radio Access Technology SON Self-Organizing Network UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System WCDMA Wideband Code Division Multiple Access

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

15

Nokia Siemens Networks Corporation P.O. Box.1 FI-020022 NOKIA SIEMENS NETWORKS Finland Visiting address Karaportti 3, ESPOO, Finland Switchboard +358 71 400 4000

Product code: C401-00727-WP-201107-1-EN

Copyright 2011 Nokia Siemens Networks. All rights reserved. A license is hereby granted to download and print a copy of this document for personal use only. No other license to any other intellectual property rights is granted herein. Unless expressly permitted herein, reproduction, transfer, distribution or storage of part or all of the contents in any form without the prior written permission of Nokia Siemens Networks is prohibited. The content of this document is provided AS IS, without warranties of any kind with regards its accuracy or reliability, and specifically excluding all implied warranties, for example of merchantability, fitness for purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Nokia Siemens Networks be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages, or any damages whatsoever resulting form loss of use, data or profits, arising out of or in connection with the use of the document. Nokia Siemens Networks reserves the right to revise the document or withdraw it at any time without prior notice. Nokia is a registered trademark of Nokia Corporation, Siemens is a registered trademark of Siemens AG. The wave logo is a trademark of Nokia Siemens Networks Oy. Other company and product names mentioned in this document may be trademarks of their respective owners, and they are mentioned for identification purposes only.

www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com