NETMANIAS

TECH-BLOG

Please visit www.netmanias.com to view more posts

Evolution of Mobile RAN Architecture in LTE/LTEAdvanced Era

April 16, 2014 | By Dr. Michelle M. Do and Dr. Harrison J. Son (tech@netmanias.com)

1. Traditional RAN Architecture and Issues

1.1 Issue No. 1: Degraded service quality and network performance due to inter-cell interference
1.2 Issue No. 2: Increased costs of building and operating cell sites
2. Degradation of service quality and network performance due to inter-cell interference: Prevented
by reducing X2 distance
3. Costs of building and operating cell sites: Reduced by BBU Centralization (C-RAN)
The past few years have seen smartphones rapidly gain popularity and become one of the most loved daily
essentials, especially with all of their ever-advancing multimedia processing features. Due to these advanced
technologies behind mobile devices, the size of contents (video, music, picture, etc.) that users can enjoy on
the devices are growing bigger and bigger every day (e.g. for videos, resolution SD (480p) HD (720p)
now Full HD (1080p), and encoding rates, 500Kbps 1Mbps 2Mbps now 4~8Mbps).
Because of this growth, data traffic in mobile operators' network is soaring, and will do even more so from
now on (This is not the same with voice traffic, which has already declined drastically compared to data traffic
that is big-sized and steadily increasing).
Then what about the network?
In the previous voice traffic-centric networks, securing coverage for uninterrupted voice services (so that
phones can pick up signals) was the most important issue. However, in today's LTE/LTE-A networks that put
more focus on data traffic, increasing network capacity to ensure reliable and high data throughputs (rate,
Mbps) has become the No. 1 priority. So, now it's clear. It's not coverage, but capacity.
To cover soaring data traffic, network capacity
needs to grow as well.1 To this end, LTE/LTE-A
macro cells are getting smaller (In some
metropolitan cities of Korea, the radius of an
LTE/LTE-A cell is merely several hundred meters
long).
And this results in:
more inter-cell interference, and
higher cost (Capex/Opex) of building and
operating smaller and more cell sites.

2Km

2Km

Legacy Macro Cell

in Seoul

LTE/LTE-A Macro Cell

in Seoul

With these changes, mobile network architectures have evolved to deliver reliable and high quality services to
users, and at the same time to reduce the costs of investment in networks.
So, it would be worthwhile to look into these trends here in this post.

Netmanias Tech-Blog: Evolution of Mobile RAN Architecture in LTE/LTE-Advanced Era

1. Traditional RAN Architecture and Issues

Cell Site

Base Station 1
BBU
RRH
RRH
RRH

AC
Power
(UPS)

Base Station 2

CSG

CO

UE1: CSI=10

CS
I=1
CSG
0

t1

t1

UE1

CoMP

AC
Power
(UPS)

t1
t

Physical X2
connection

Base Station 3

UE1

IP/MPLS

t2

UE1

4 10

2
CSG

C
1:
UE

At t2, the actual

UE1
CSI of UE1 is
much different
t2 from the CSI that
Base Station 3
assumed

10
SI=

Base Station 3
receives UE1's
CSI at t2

t2=t1+tBH
CSI = 10

SAE-GW

IP Edge

UE1's CSI at t1

CSI = 10

t2=t1+tBH
CSI = 4

- BBU, RRH, A/C, UPS (power), transport, etc. are all installed at cell
sites (located in leased spaces)
- High costs of lease, installation, utilities, and maintenance

Base Station 2 sends

AC
Power
(UPS)

Issue No. 2: Increased cell site costs (Capex/Opex)

SONET, MSPP, PTN, Carrier Ethernet, etc.

Issue No. 1: Degraded service quality and network

performance due to inter-cell interference
- Very low latency between base stations, as low as 1~2 msec, is
required in order for CoMP to improve performance at cell edges.
- Hairpin in IP edge of backbone networks: Long X2 distance (several ~
several tens of msec)
- CoMP not working properly (degraded service quality and network
performance)
- Then, why this architecture was used? Before LTE, no communication
Between base stations was needed. So, a line (circuit/virtual circuit,
e.g. T1/VLAN) was given for every base station in IP edge.

Base Station

Edge Router

SAE-GW

Tens of Km or sometimes over 100 Kms

Point-to-point circuit/virtual circuit

IP/MPLS

Backhaul

Figure 1. Traditional RAN Architecture and Issues

1.1 Issue No. 1: Degraded service quality and network performance due to inter-cell interference
In LTE/LTE-A networks that use OFDM for wireless access, a mobile device in the border areas of cells,
experiences inter-cell interference caused among the neighbor cells that use the same frequency. This of
course results in quality degradation.
In order to prevent such quality degradation, CoMP (Coordinated MultiPoint) technology is employed in LTE-A
networks. This technology allows each base station to schedule its radio resources in a way that minimizes
interference, by exchanging current status information about its devices with its neighbor stations in real time
over X2 interface. As a result, the service quality of the device as well as the network performance can be
upgraded.

Netmanias Tech-Blog: Evolution of Mobile RAN Architecture in LTE/LTE-Advanced Era

In order for the CoMP to work as designed, a base station must deliver the Channel State Information (CSI) of
all the devices in each cell within the station's coverage (for example, information on what radio resources are
currently used by each device, how strong or weak the signal that the base station sent is received by each
device, and how severely each device is interfered by its neighbor cells, etc.) to the neighbor base stations in
real time. If it is not delivered in time, the station's scheduling would be based on outdated and thus
meaningless information, failing to achieve significant quality improvement (In the example in Figure 1, 410.
If so, it would rather be better not to use CoMP).
Especially while a mobile device is moving from place to place, this CSI value changes very fast. So, the latency
caused when two base stations exchange the information over X2 interface (X2 delay) should be minimized.
As radio resource scheduling is performed at an interval of 1 ms (which corresponds to the LTE subframe
duration), X2 delay of 1 ms would work the best, theoretically.
In the traditional RAN architecture as seen in Figure 1, base stations are located at cell sites, and layer 1 or
layer 2 backhaul network, such as TDM, MSPP, PTN, carrier Ethernet etc., aggregates base station traffic to IP
edge (e.g., router)
In a network with this type of architecture, X2 traffic generated at one base station must be sent through this
long backhaul network, and on to IP edge. Then there, the traffic is routed to a base station in the neighbor
cell site through the same backhaul network. In general, a base station is tens of Kms or sometimes over 100
Kms away from IP edge, and there are many hops between them for the traffic to pass.
Thus, X2 delay in this architecture can easily be as high as several ~ tens of msecs, making it very unlikely for
CoMP to improve performance at cell edges.
Being based on a long X2 delay is like assuming today's weather will be nice because it was so a week ago, and
being based on a short X2 delay is like assuming the same because it was so yesterday.
Therefore, in LTE-A networks, it is inevitable to re-design the backhaul network architecture to ensure
minimized the X2 delay.
1.2 Issue No. 2: Increased costs of building and operating cell sites
The traditional RAN has a standalone base station where both Digital Unit (DU) and Radio Unit (RU) are
installed at a cell site. Also it is generally installed inside of the medium or large scaled building for stable
power supply and air conditioning.
Because of these natures, each cell site must have a base station installed, AND each station must have its
own power supply system, A/C, etc. Of course, the more devices and facilities there are, the more spaces and
thus the higher costs are required.
In addition to that, installation costs (civil works, labor charges) are increased, network installation takes
longer, and monthly electric bill climbs as well.
It will cost N (No. of cell sites) times more.

Netmanias Tech-Blog: Evolution of Mobile RAN Architecture in LTE/LTE-Advanced Era

And that means soaring Capex/Opex costs for building and operating a nation-wide network are unavoidable.
Besides, as the network evolves into 4G, 5G and so on, the size of each cell is becoming smaller. Smaller cells
mean, to mobile operators, more cell sites to build and operate. And more cell sites means more money.
Let's take a look at the RAN architecture that is designed to reduce X2 delay for improved LTE-A radio
performance.

2. Degradation of service quality and network performance due to inter-cell interference:

Prevented by reducing X2 distance
The CoMP technology is designed to improve service quality on mobile devices and network performance by
controlling inter-cell interference. In order for the technology to do its job, X2 distance should be minimized.
And this can be achieved by placing routers as close as possible to their associated base station as seen in
Figure 2.
X2 delay reduced by placing routers closer to base station

Base Station 1

Placing routers closer to base station

BBU
RRH
RRH
RRH

AC
Power
(UPS)

IP/MPLS
1

Base Station 2

UE1's CSI at t1

AC

CO

Power
(UPS)

10

At t2, the actual

CSI of UE1 is
pretty close to the
CSI that Base
Station 3 assumed

CSI
UE1

10

Base Station 3
receives UE1's
CSI at t2

t2=t1+tBH

Base Station

Physical X2
connection

UE
1:

AC

CS
I=1
0

CoMP

Base Station 3

t2=t1+tBH

t1

UE1 t2

CSI 10
UE1

SAE-GW

IP/MPLS

CS
I=1
0

t1

IP Edge

UE1: CSI=10

Power
(UPS)

CSI
UE1

Base Station 2 sends

In LTE/LTE-A, the distance between a base station and CO is ranging

from hundreds of meters to several kilometers. If delivered via fiber,
it takes 5 sec for data to travel 1 km. So, X2 delay (the period of
time needed to send data from one base station to another, e.g.
from Base Station 2 to Base Station 3 in the figure) will be
significantly reduced as low as several secs, or tens of secs at
most.

Edge Router

hundreds of meters to
several Kms

SAE-GW

Backhaul (IP/MPLS)

Figure 2. Switching backhaul network to L3 routing network for reduced X2 delay

Netmanias Tech-Blog: Evolution of Mobile RAN Architecture in LTE/LTE-Advanced Era

In LTE/LTE-A, the distance between a base station and CO is ranging from hundreds of meters to several
kilometers. If delivered via fiber, it takes 5 sec for data to travel 1 km. So, X2 delay (the period of time
needed to send data from one base station to another, e.g. from Base Station 2 to Base Station 3 in the figure)
will be significantly reduced as low as several sec, or tens of sec at most.
So, mobile operators in many countries tend to choose to place L3 hop as close as possible to base stations.

3. Costs of building and operating cell sites: Reduced by BBU Centralization (C-RAN)
As macro cells have become even smaller to provide increased network capacity, more cell sites were required.
To build and operate more sites, high costs were inevitable. To address this cost issue, a new RAN architecture,
C-RAN (Centralized/Cloud RAN), was introduced.
C-RAN allows operators to separate BBU and RRH in each cell site, and move all BBUs to a centralized location.
Operators can then leave only RRHs and antennas unmoved at each cell site where actual radio signal
reception is taken place.
BBUs and RRHs, now located in different places away from each other, are connected using fiber cables
(Dedicated Fiber per RRH or Dedicated per RRH).
RRHs, designed for outdoor use, are simple but very hardened devices that run well without A/C facilities,
which means no indoor space to rent. So, operators can minimize their rental costs as they only need rooftop
spaces for RRHs and antennas. This also means reduced electricity bills as they only need to supply power for
RRHs.

Netmanias Tech-Blog: Evolution of Mobile RAN Architecture in LTE/LTE-Advanced Era

BBU Centralization (C-RAN)

C-RAN allows operators to separate BBU and RRH in each cell site,
and move all BBUs to a centralized location. Operators can then
leave only RRHs and antennas unmoved at each cell site where
actual radio signal reception is taken place.
RRHs, designed for outdoor use, are simple but very hardened
devices that run well without A/C facilities, which means no indoor
BBU
space to rent. So, operators can minimize their rental costs as they
centralized only need rooftop spaces for RRHs and antennas. This also means
at CO
reduced electricity bills as they only need to supply power for RRHs.

RRHs
(Outdoor)

BBU

RRHs
(Outdoor)

IP Edge

CPRI

SAE-GW

CO

X2

BBU

IP/MPLS
BBU

UE1

Physical X2
connection
RRHs
(Outdoor)

RRH

BBU

Fronthaul (CPRI)

IP/MPLS

BBU

Backhaul (IP/MPLS)

SAE-GW

Figure 3. Reducing costs of building and operating cell sites: C-RAN (Centralized/Cloud-RAN)
In summary, for efficient accommodation of soaring data traffic, mobile network architectures have recently
evolved as follows:
i) IP layer has been placed as close as possible to base stations so that shorter X2 delay is ensured and by that
degradation of service quality and network performance caused by inter-cell interference is prevented.
ii) To minimize costs of building and operating cell sites, BBUs are removed from each cell site and are moved
upward (to mobile operator's CO or master cell site).

Footnotes
1. The advent of small cells intended to increase network capacity has made the two issues even worse. This
HetNet environment will be discussed later in another post, and only homogeneous networks will be
concerned here.

Netmanias Research and Consulting Scope

99

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

eMBMS/Mobile IPTV
CDN/Mobile CDN
Transparent Caching
BSS/OSS

Services

Cable TPS
Voice/Video Quality
IMS
Policy Control/PCRF
IPTV/TPS
LTE

Mobile
Network

Mobile WiMAX
Carrier WiFi
LTE Backaul
Data Center Migration
Carrier Ethernet
FTTH

Wireline
Network

Data Center
Metro Ethernet
MPLS
IP Routing

CDN
Transparent
Caching

Analysis

Networks

eMBMS

LTE
IMS
Infrastructure Services

Analyze trends, technologies and market

Report
Technical documents
Blog
One-Shot gallery

Concept Design
DRM

POC

Training

Wi-Fi

We design the future

protocols

IP/MPLS

We design the future

Carrier Ethernet

We design the future

Consulting

Visit http://www.netmanias.com to view and download more technical documents.

Future

About NMC Consulting Group (www.netmanias.com)

NMC Consulting Group is an advanced and professional network consulting company, specializing in IP network areas (e.g., FTTH, Metro Ethernet and IP/MPLS), service
areas (e.g., IPTV, IMS and CDN), and wireless network areas (e.g., Mobile WiMAX, LTE and Wi-Fi) since 2002.
Copyright 2002-2014 NMC Consulting Group. All rights reserved.