Ultra-Dense Networks in 5G

A Survey Paper

Gaurav Verma(14244), Maniratnam Mandal(14365), Siddhant Rohela(14690)

Department of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur

Abstract—The extreme traffic load that future wireless
networks are expected to accommodate requires a re-thinking of
the system design. Initial estimations indicate that, different from
the evolutionary path of previous cellular generations that was
based on spectral efficiency improvements, the most substantial
amount of future system performance gains will be obtained by
means of network infrastructure densification. By increasing the
density of operator-deployed infrastructure elements, along with
incorporation of user-deployed access nodes and mobile user
devices acting as “infrastructure prosumers”, it is expected that
having one or more access nodes exclusively dedicated to each user
will become feasible, introducing the ultra-dense network (UDN)
paradigm. Although it is clear that UDNs are able to take
advantage of the significant benefits provided by proximal
transmissions and increased spatial reuse of system resources, at
the same time, large node density and irregular deployment
introduce new challenges, mainly due to the interference
environment characteristics that are vastly different from
previous cellular deployments. This article attempts to provide
insights on fundamental issues related to UDN deployment, such
as determining the infrastructure density required to support
given traffic load requirements and the benefits of network-wise
coordination, demonstrating the potential of UDNs for 5G wireless
networks.
I. INTRODUCTION
Over the next decade, the wireless traffic volume is expected
to increase thousand times over. To meet the demands, the fifth
generation (5G) cellular network is becoming a hot research
topic in telecommunication industries and academics.
Firstly, the massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)
technology was proposed to improve the spectrum efficiency of
mobile communication systems [1]. Secondly, the millimeter
wave communications was presented to extend the transmission
bandwidth for 5G mobile communication systems [2].
Furthermore, the small cell concept has been appeared to raise
the throughput and save the energy consumption in cellular
scenarios [3]. It is being planned that to ensure seamless
coverage, a larger number of small cells will be densely
deployed for 5G cellular networks. Since the study of ultra-
dense cellular networks is still in an initial stage, it becomes
important to to investigate the network architecture and cellular
densification limits for future 5G cellular networks.
In the 3G cellular networks, the densification of macro-cell
base stations (BSs) aims to improve the transmission rate in
partial areas, and the density of deployed macro-cell BSs is
about 4-5 BSs/km2. In the 4g cellular networks, where microcell
BSs have been deployed to satisfy the high speed transmission
in specified regions, the density of microcell BSs is
approximately 8-10 BSs/km2. In 3G and 4G cellular networks,
the aim of BSs densification is to improve the wireless
transmission rate in partial regions. In 5G cellular networks, the
massive MIMO antennas will be integrated into BSs, where
hundreds pf antennas are utilized for transmitting Gbits level
wireless traffic.
While the 5G BS transmission power is constrained at the
same level of 4G BS transmission power, every antenna
transmission power at 5G BS has to be decreased 10-20 times
compared with every antenna transmission power at 4G BS. To
satisfy the seamless coverage, the density of 5G BS is highly
anticipated to come up to 40-50 BS/km2. Therefore, the future
5G cellular network is an ultra-dense cellular network.
II. MOTIVATION
With the arrival of every new generation of wireless
communication, there has been a major overhaul in the
technology used to provide blazing fast speeds to an ever
increasing number of users around the planet. Up till the 4th
Generation (LTE) of wireless technology, the focus of research
has been on developing new and more robust components, as
well as on spectral efficiency and bandwidth improvements.
And this rigorous research has indeed borne astonishing results,
with every new generation being many times faster than its
predecessor. But the scenario is changing very rapidly. Our aim
to digitally connect virtually everything around the globe,
coupled with the fact that the volume of wireless traffic will
increase by at least a 1000 times in the next decade; has
compelled us to think along a different path. The attention has
shifted to the densification of network infrastructure. The idea
of densifying the infrastructure is not a new one. In fact,
throughout the development of previous generations, this
technique was employed as a ‘bonus’ to neutralize overloading
at certain locations, hence rendering it a very regional concept.

1
But now the time has arrived to bring the UDN technology to
the fore, in order to be able to meet the fantastic challenges that
5G has to offer.
Another strong motivation to employ UDN is its ability to
utilize User Equipment (UEs) as not just consumers, but as a
more comprehensive set of ‘infrastructure prosumers’
(producers + consumers). This is achieved by exploiting the
advanced capabilities of modern day mobile devices, and
handing them the role of infrastructure Access Nodes (ANs),
along with the traditional ones. This will dramatically increase
the number of active ANs, automatically amplifying the density
of the existing infrastructure. It is predicted that the number of
such ANs may even surpass the number of UEs in the coming
years.
III. IMPLEMENTATION
In theory, the UDN 5G Technology is capable of catering to
the ever increasing demands of the future generation of internet
users. However, a robust architecture is required to implement
this technology into actual use. For developing the UDN
network, we take inspiration from the Conventional Cellular
Network Architecture that is currently used for the LTE
Technology. In the conventional architecture, a tree network of
macro-cell Base-Station is embedded with a network (tree type)
of microcells, both sharing management data as well as the user
data traffic. Thus, the user has the freedom to choose between
microcell BS and macro-cell BS, as per their requirement.
Logically, the microcell BS is used in indoor scenarios, e.g.
hotspots.
Fig: The network is densified by deploying small cells indoors in buildings
and stores, and outdoors on trees, lampposts, and building walls. Small cell
networks coexist with macro-cells, either in the same spectrum or on a dedicated
carrier.
In the UDN architecture, it is extremely difficult to transmit
traffic via fiber links (which was the case with the conventional
network), partly due to the complex geography of urban areas
(where 5G is primarily expected to function) and partly due to
the high cost of installation. Instead, we use the millimeter wave
technology to transmit traffic wirelessly. However, the small cell
BSs using this technology have an effective range of
transmission of only about 100 meters or so. Thus, the need
arises to install a dense network of small cell Base-Stations, so
that the data can be effectively relayed without much
attenuation. Unlike the Conventional Network, the macro-cell
BS and the microcell BS do not overlap in terms of data
transmission. While the former takes care of transmitting the
management data, the latter is configured to solely transmit user
data. Depending on the number of gateways in the macro-cell
BS, there exist 2 types of network architectures:
A. UDNs with Single Gateway
In this type of architecture, only one gateway is installed at
the macro-cell BS. Along with it, large antennas (MIMO
millimeter wave) are also erected to receive backhaul traffic
from the microcell BSs. Whole of this backhaul traffic is the
ready to be forwarded to the core network. This time the
transmission occurs by Fiber to cell (FTTC) links.
B. UDNs with Multiple Gateways
Apart from the multiple ones at macro-cell BS, multiple
gateways are installed at several microcell BSs, which are
judiciously chosen based on their relative geographies. Here,
the traffic of small cells is transmitted to the multiple gateways
in the macro-cell. All the backhaul traffic from the chosen
microcell BSs and the macro-cell BS is collected and sent to the
core network via FTTC links.
Fig: Single Gateway Architecture
Fig: Multiple Gateways Architecture
The small cells in UDN can be classified into fully-functioning
base stations (BSs) (pico-cells and femtocells) and macro-
extension access points (relays and Remote Radio Heads
(RRHs)). The fully-functioning BS is capable of performing all
the functions of a macro-cell with a lower power in a smaller
coverage area. Specifically, the fully-function BS performs all
the functions of the entire protocol stack. The table in the next
page summarizes the features of different small cell types. In
what follows we explain the different types of small cells.
Horizontal and Vertical Densification
The densification of wireless networks takes place mainly by
the deployment of increasing number of small cells.
2
Accordingly, the network densification comes in two different
flavors, either horizontal densification or vertical densification.
In horizontal densification, the access nodes are densified in the
horizontal plane, e.g., in the streets or hotspots. On the other
hand the vertical densification evolves in the elevation plane
where the customers deploy BSs in their apartments, offices,
meeting rooms, and interior of buildings. The figure depicts
vertical and horizontal network densification. The
aforementioned classification highlights three major aspects of
the densification schemes, specifically, the modelling of the
densification scheme (vertical/horizontal) to consider
appropriate propagation models, the backhauling alternatives
for the different densification schemes, and the performance
evaluation of the corresponding densification scheme.
cellular networks with single gateway are cost efficient but the
backhaul capacity bottleneck maybe exists at the single
gateway. 5G ultra-dense cellular networks with multiply
gateways have to spend the high cost
in the small cell deployment. Compared with conventional
cellular networks, 5G ultra-dense cellular networks
performance will provide graceful degradation as the degree of
mobility increases. To overcome this challenge, the multi-cell
cooperative communication is a potential solution for 5G ultra-
dense cellular networks.
The comparison between the conventional cellular networks
and between Ultra Dense Networks implemented using single
gateway and multiple gateways has been summarized in the
following table:

Network Types Conventional UDNs with Single UDNs with

Networks Gateway Multiple
Gateways

Network Centralized Distributed Distributed

architecture architecture architecture architecture

Densification Macro-cells Small cells Small cells

deployment
target

Functions of same Macro-cells Macro-cells

IV. COMPARISON WITH CONVENTIONAL CELLULAR NETWORKS macro-cell and transmit transmit
microcell management management
data, microcells data, microcells
transmit user transmit user
The detailed differences between conventional cellular data data
networks and 5G ultra-dense cellular networks with
single/multiple gateways are explained as follows: Backhaul Backhaul traffic is Backhaul traffic is Backhaul traffic is
The architecture of conventional cellular networks is method directly relayed to the relayed to the
forwarded into gateway by multi- gateway by multi-
a centralized network architecture and some microcells are the core network hop wireless links hop wireless link
densely deployed at partial areas, for satisfying crowded people by gateway
communication requirements. When 5G small cell BSs
equipped with massive MIMO antennas and millimeter wave Number of One One Multiple
backhaul
communication technologies, the coverage of small cell has to gateway in a
be obviously reduced. macro-cell
To realize the seamless coverage, 5G cellular networks must
be densely deployed by a large number of small cells. In this Merit Flexible Ubiquitous and Ubiquitous and
deployment and high bit-rate high bit-rate
case, 5G ultra-dense cellular networks can provide the high bit- low cost
rate in all cellular coverage regions. Moreover, the architecture
of ultra-dense cellular networks is a distributed network Demerit Small cell partial Low mobility and Low mobility and
deployment, low there exists the high cost
architecture considering cost and geography deployment network capacity, backhaul capacity
requirements. Every BS in conventional cellular networks has uneven bottle-neck
the same function and the coverage between macro-cells and distribution of
the achievable
microcells is overlapped. For 5G ultra-dense cellular networks, data
macro-cell BSs transmit the management data and small cell
BSs take charge of the user data transmission. There does not
V. ADVANTAGES OF ULTRA-DENSE NETWORKS
exist the overlap for the function and the coverage between
macro-cell BSs and small cell BSs. Besides, 5G ultra-dense A data analysis of the Flickr social online network
(Scholz 2015).

3

This study shows that the network link structure changes
with increasing connectivity. Sparsely connected networks (left)
show the typical power-law (scale-free) node-degree
distribution in which most nodes have only few links while some
few nodes are extremely linked. By contrast, densely connected
networks (right), show a more “fair” distribution of less
differences between lowly and highly linked nodes.
Ultra-Dense Networks are able to take advantage of the
significant benefits provided by proximal transmissions and
increased spatial reuse of system resources. Their purpose is to
provide more capacity through offloading where needed. With
the advent of ultra-dense networks combined with the
diminished role of the legacy macro cell, handsets in close
vicinity of each other can communicate directly through device-
to-device links. UDNs bring with them a huge number of
advantages over existing technologies which extend from
minimized cost, extremely high speeds and operational
efficiency to group broadcast and mesh networking, to enhanced
security provided from the absence of intermediate network
routing.
A. Minimized Cost and Higher Speeds:
 Macro sites provide more capacity through multicarrier,
carrier aggregation and advanced antenna solutions using
available transmit power. Existing sites can be upgraded
to support more capacity at lower cost than establishing
new sites.
 Small cells to provide lower cost capacity and coverage
at outdoor hot spots.
 Small cells to offload the macro network and provide low
cost indoor capacity.
 Indoor DAS solutions can be upgraded to LTE for
seamless connectivity.
 A study conducted by Nokia in Tokyo concluded that
network capacity in a dense city can be increased up to
5-700x compared to 2010 using only outdoor
deployments. Basic coverage is provided by the existing
macro cells, street level capacity is provided with
outdoor small cells and high rise capacity with up-tilted
macro cells from existing sites.
Indoor deployments increases capacity even further, most
likely through evolution of both indoor small cell and outdoor
macro and small cell deployments. In its case study, Nokia
showed that 1000x capacity can be achieved using both outdoor
small cells and indoor small cells. 100 outdoor small cells
require 1,700 indoor small cells, while increasing the outdoor
small cells to 200 cuts indoor cells to 200. This allows a tradeoff
between indoor and outdoor deployments depending on local
factors. Wi-Fi was deployed indoors but LTE small cells would
perform similarly. The Tokyo deployment case corresponds to
the definition of UDN for 2020 and beyond. Figure shows an
example of the capacity of different indoor solutions in the
building, with each scenario providing 95 percent coverage. The
first case uses DAS for indoor coverage and the second uses the
DAS infrastructure with a small cell on every floor, doubling
capacity. Deploying further small cells improves capacity
significantly. The final case combines DAS in the common area
and small cells in the offices.
The indoor deployment with distributed small cells provides
significantly more capacity, with the same coverage as DAS, at
lower cost.
B. Operational Impact:
An operator in a medium sized country may have 8-10,000 base
station sites, but as the network becomes denser, the operator
may have more than 100,000 cells to manage in a complex
environment. With this increase comes an exponential rise in
network data. Yet the operator will need to keep operational
expenses low using the same number of engineering staff.
Solving this will involve analytics, extensive automation and
redesigning tasks and processes.
Failure of a macro site can affect many subscribers and requires
urgent attention of an expensive field engineer. However, with
small cells, the same type of fault can have a much smaller
impact on service availability because the problem is localized,
and the area may be served by other cells including the macro
umbrella. Operators that have adopted a Service Operations
Center (SOC) can use advanced service quality management
tools and processes to quickly establish the precise effects of the
fault. Instead of responding immediately to individual faults, it
may be possible to resolve these as part of a routine maintenance
call.
C. Group Broadcast and Mesh Networking:
In outdoor wireless networking, wireless mesh networks are the
third topology after point-to-point and point-to-multipoint in
order to build a wireless network infrastructure. The major
advantage of a wireless mesh networks is the intrinsic
4
redundancy and, consequently, reliability because a mesh
network is able to reroute traffic through multiple paths to cope
with link failures, interference, power failures or network device
failures. Each node in the network is referred to either as Mesh
Router (MR), Mesh Client (MC), or Mesh Gateway (MG)
depending on its role in the network. MRs are interconnected to
form a mesh backbone network, which can relay
communications service from MCs to the MG. The advantages
are given as:
 A broken node won’t distract the transmission of data in
a mesh network. Each node is connected to several other
nodes which make it easier to relay data. A broken
device will be ignored by the signals and will then find
a new one that is connected with the node.
 Additional devices in a mesh topology will not affect its
network connection. Hence it will improve the traffic in
the network. Mesh topology makes a large data center
that simulates useful information to its nodes.
 Can handle high amount of network traffic since every
additional device into the network is considered a node.
Interconnected devices can simultaneously transfer data
smoothly and will not complicate the network
connection.
 Because all nodes in a mesh are receiving and
translating information, there is some redundancy in a
mesh topology; however, you can also gain speed with
the excess bandwidth. If one route happens to be slow,
a mesh network could potentially find a better route and
optimize itself.
VI. SHORTCOMINGS AND CHALLENGES
As discussed in the above sections, massive MIMO antenna
and millimeter wave communication technologies paved the
way for ultra-dense cellular networks. Ultra-densification of
network is considered the main enabler for 5G wireless access.
The future envisioned scenarios involve average rates of more
than 100 Mbps/user in order to support video content, possibly
at an 8K resolution, or accessing multiplayer cloud gaming
systems. The UDN paradigm aspires to revolutionize current
cellular thinking by efficiently exploiting the advantages offered
by proximal communications and sets an ambitious goal of
increasing the capacity per area of current 4G network by 1000
fold. The main challenges that come with dense cell deployment
include interference, mobility, power consumption and
backhaul. In the ideal case, capacity should scale linearly with
TP density but issues including interference and mobility may
severely hamper the gain of densification. Moreover, practical
deployment and maintenance related aspects, such as backhaul
and energy provision, are also crucial for the feasibility of UDN.
The first challenge is the multi-hop relay optimization in 5G
ultra-dense cellular networks. In the distribution network
architecture, both the back-haul and front-haul traffic must be
relayed into the destination. The selection of relaying small cell
BS should be carefully considered in 5G ultra-dense cellular
networks. Hence, the wireless multi-hop routing algorithm is a
key challenge for 5G ultra-dense cellular networks. Although
the small cell BS equipped with massive MIMO antennas has
enough antennas for simultaneously transmitting backhaul
traffic and front-haul traffic, it is another important challenge
how to reasonably allocate massive antennas for backhaul and
front-haul transmissions.
The second challenge is to figure out how to organize
adjacent small cells for co-operative transmission. For example,
how to dynamically group small cells for seamlessly covering
the high-speed mobile user track is an open issue. The proportion
between the computation power and transmission power maybe
reversed at wireless transceivers adopting massive MIMO
antenna and millimeter wave communication technologies. In
this case, the computation power cannot be ignored for the BS
energy consumption. Considering the proportion change
between the computation power and the transmission power, the
new energy efficiency model need to be investigated for ultra-
dense cellular networks with massive MIMO antenna and
millimeter wave communication technologies.
Thirdly, as a perennial problem faced by every generation of
mobile communication system, interference is serious in LTE
since adjacent cells reuse the same frequency resource. To cope
with the interference between macro cells, some static and semi-
static methods can be proposed as of now. Static methods such
as cell planning and partial frequency reuse (PFR) use system
configurations to avoid interference. In semi-static methods,
eNBs exchange information for interference coordination via X2
interface with a period ranging from 20ms to 200ms. For
downlink, relative narrow band transmit power (RNTP) is
utilized to inform neighboring eNBs of the bands with high
power. For uplink, overload indicator (OI) signals measured
interference level while high interference indicator (HII) reports
the bands on which high power uplink transmission may be
scheduled.
Fourthly, Mobility is another important issue which is
usually handled by handover in mobile communication systems.
Handover is not expected to happen frequently as they were
initially designed for macro cells with large coverage in LTE.
Thus a complicated handover procedure with high signaling
overhead is adopted. Moreover, the hard handover mechanism
in LTE means connection to the source cell is released before
connecting to the destination cell. This disruption in
transmission may trigger the congestion control process of
transmission control protocol (TCP), leading to violent
fluctuation of data rate.
Lastly, energy consumption delivers a difficult challenge
when it comes to UDNs. Statistics show that mobile
communication industry produces 86 million tons of CO2 in
2007, accounting for 0.2% of global carbon footprint. Even with
an optimistic estimation, mobile communication carbon
emission is expected to triple by 2020. Since UDN means much
more small cells, the surge in energy consumption will be
considerable if the 4G energy efficiency is not improved. High
energy consumption not only leads to environmental damage but
also puts pressure on the already huge bills of the operators.
Moreover with the advent of green energy, green
communication is becoming a hot research topic and expectation
for 5G to be more energy efficient than previous technologies is
becoming a significant drive.
5
 VII. ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES AND NEW TRENDS mixture of various backhaul technologies is expected
Facing the aforementioned challenges, both academia and for 5G UDN, we still believe self-backhaul will play
industry devote a lot of resource to develop effective solutions. an important role. However, substantial work needs to
In this section, the technologies we view as the most promising be done to improve Release10 relay in terms of
components of 5G UDN are discussed. The important fact is capacity and flexibility.
that one technology may help in solving one or more challenges Several designs can be used to enhance the capacity of
to some extent. self-backhaul. In most UDN scenarios, radio link is
1. Cell and receiver virtualization: LoS due to short link distance or high carrier
Virtualization refers to network function virtualization frequency. Without sufficient multipath components,
(NFV), which virtualizes logical network entities on it is hard to transmit multiple data flows
general purpose hardware. While NFV is mainly
implemented in core network, similar concept may
also be applied to radio access network and the result
is cell and user virtualization.
As illustrated in the Fig, several TPs around a user can
form a virtual cell (VC) to provide service jointly. The
TPs transmitting to and receiving signal from UE are
called serving TPs. One master TP (MTP) is selected
to control the operations of a VC if centralized control
is adopted. It needs to be noted that MTP is not
necessarily a serving TP and a TP can join multiple
VCs simultaneously. MTPs of adjacent VCs can
negotiate on matters such as resource allocation to
enable the harmonious coexistence of different VCs.
Since cooperative TPs are in proximity, fast
coordination and negotiation are possible with self-
backhaul or device to device communication (D2D).
VC can help in various aspects using fast coordination,
such as interference management, mobility
management and energy conservation.
simultaneously to a receiver even when multiple
antennas are equipped. A strategy named BC
(broadcast channel)+MAC (multiple access channel)
is designed for this scenario and plotted in the figure.
Illustration and performances gain of BC+MAC

Network coding can also enhance the throughput of

Illustration of cell virtualization
self-backhaul and an example is provided in figure
below. The network coding scheme is conducted in
two steps. In the first step, both UE and dTP transmit
their signal to rTP. Normally rTP would forward the
message of UE to dTP and vice versa. Considering the
broadcast nature of wireless channel and the fact that
both UE and dTP know their own message, rTP can
simply transmit a XOR version of the two messages.
Utilizing the local message and received message, the
intended message can be reconstructed.

User virtualization with carrier sharing

2. Self-Backhaul:
Self-backhaul has the advantage of low cost,
controllable link quality and inherent support for semi-
planned or unplanned deployment. With the potential
of cutting the delay of inter-cell communication down Network coding for capacity enhancement in self-backhaul
to one sub-frame, self-backhaul can also facilitate
delay sensitive inter-cell coordination. Although a

6
3. Use-centric access:
In previous generations of mobile communication
system, system information and common signal are
broadcast to provide UE with access information.
Moreover, CRS broadcasted every sub-frame can take
up 14% of the overall OFDM symbols when four
antenna ports are used. In UDN, most cells will be
light loaded for a large portion of time. Periodic
broadcasting of these common signals not only wastes
energy but also causes strong inference to adjacent
cells.
In user-centric design, periodic transmitted signal is
minimized, which means only the information crucial
for initial access is broadcasted. Information such as
cell reselection and MBSFN setting is provided in an
on demand manner. UE can either require them in the
random access process or using uplink control channel
when connection is established. Another option is to
transmit system information in a hierarchical manner.
That is, the information common to a number of cells
and vital for initial access can be broadcasted in single
frequency network (SFN) manner by several TPs to
improve coverage and save energy. Cell-specific
information is broadcasted by each cell with the right
to override information broadcasted using SFN.
Traffic related and rarely used system information can
be provided only when required.
REFERENCES
[1] “Ultra Dense Network: Challenges, Enabling Technologies and New
Trends”: Hao Peng, Yan Xiao, Yu-Ngok Ruyue, Yuan Yifei, ZTE
Corporation Shenzhen, China, 2016
[2] “Ultra Dense Networks: The New Wireless Frontier for Enabling 5G
Access”: Antonis G. Gotsis, Stelios Stefanatos, and Angeliki Alexiou,
2015
[3] “5G Ultra-Dense Cellular Networks”: Xiaohu Ge, Senior Member, IEEE,
Song Tu, Guoqiang Mao, Senior Member, IEEE, Cheng-Xiang Wang,
Senior Member, IEEE, Tao Han, Member, IEEE, 2015
[4] “Supporting mobility in 5G: A comparison between massive MIMO and
continuous ultra dense networks”:2016 IEEE International Conference on
Communications (ICC), Written by: Petteri Kela; Xavier Gelabert; Jussi
Turkka; Mário Costa; Kari Heiska; Kari Leppänen; Christer Qvarfordt
[5] “User-Centric Ultra-Dense Networks for 5G: Challenges, Methodologies,
and Directions”: Shanzhi Chen, Fei Qin, Bo Hu, Xi Li, and Zhonglin
Chen, 2016
[6] “Ultra Dense Networks” White Paper- Nokia
[7] “Ultra-Dense Networks: A Survey”: Mahmoud Kamel, Student Member,
IEEE, Walaa Hamouda, Senior Member, IEEE, and Amr Youssef, Senior
Member, IEEE, 2016
[8] “Getting connected - The highly connected society”: Network-
Science.org
[9] “Wireless Mesh Networks”: fluidmesh.com
[10] “Mesh Router Selection to Maximize System Throughput in Dense
Wireless Mesh Networks”: Panu Avakul, Hiroki Nishiyama, Nei Kato,
Yoshitaka Shimizu, Tomoaki Kumagai, 2013
[11] “Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Mesh Topology”: networking-
basics.net