www.hcltech.

com

Unlicensed LTE

WHITE paper
Table of Contents

Abstract 3

Executive Summary 3

Introduction 5

LTE Unlicensed 8

LTE vs. Wi-Fi – a comparison 9

Co-Channel Co-existence 11

One step ahead with LWA 13

Market Trends, offerings and challenges 14

Abbreviations 16

References 17
Abstract

As the data demand continues to explode, problems of frequent call drops, poor indoor coverage, and low
throughput spoils the user experience for the ubiquitous connectivity service. ‘Spectrum Crunch’ - This
situation is due to lack of sufficient radio frequencies to cater to the growing number of mobile user base
and proliferation of smart phones in the mass. Hence, telecom service providers are looking for better
radio/modem technology, better spectral efficiency, and more radio spectrum. In this context, the relevance
and value that unlicensed spectrum is going to add to the telecom network cannot be underestimated.
Using LTE (long-term evolution) – a spectrally efficient cellular technology over the unlicensed spectrum is a
potential solution to this grave problem!

LTE unlicensed is an emerging topic in research, standardization, and deployment of 3GPP (3rd Generation
Partnership Project) networks. It propagates the benefits of LTE and LTE-A to unlicensed spectrum, and
enables mobile operators to offload mobile data to unlicensed frequencies more effectively and efficiently.
Mobile consumers experience better cellular coverage and higher download speeds. With spectrum being
a scarce resource, LTE-U has emerged as a profitable option for operators to increase capacity without any
additional spectrum licensing cost. ‘Big-Data’ will need bigger and fatter pipes to flow, and LTE-Unlicensed
would play an important role in achieving that. It is also important to discuss the challenges for co-existence
and available solutions, to achieve the harmony and ensure fair access to the spectrum users. LTE-U forum
and Wi-Fi forum have to come together and join hands to make this possible.

After briefing on ISM (Industrial, Scientific, and Medical) bands, this paper describes two flavors of LTE
unlicensed access, LTE-U and LAA (Licensed Assisted Access). Depending on the regulation restrictions in
different geographies, either LTE-U or LAA will be deployed. Comparing LTE and Wi-Fi over a few major
aspects, it outlines the problems of co-existence, and discusses various medium access mechanisms to
ensure harmony. An alternate solution called LWA (LTE Wi-Fi Aggregation) has also been briefly introduced.
Later, the paper provides insight on market trends, market offerings, and the challenges existing for market
players in the battlefield of unlicensed LTE.

Executive Summary

With the advancements in telecommunication industry, the provision of ‘ubiquitous’ connectivity to the
users is no more a daydream. The massive shift from wireline traffic to wireless traffic in the past decade
shows that mobile traffic is gaining increasing attention. However, this gain has the associated problem of
‘Radio Spectrum Crunch’ to cater to the exponential growth of user data demands. LTE Unlicensed is a
potential technology, which makes use of LTE protocol over the unlicensed spectrum. The ISM (Industrial,
Scientific and Medical) band, mainly considered for this solution is 5GHz unlicensed band, as the 2.4GHz
ISM band is already congested. Cordless Phones, Bluetooth, ZigBee, NFC Devices take advantage of
unlicensed spectrum for short-range communication. The WLAN protocol – Wi-Fi also operates in
unlicensed bands to provide superior indoor-coverage. With LTE Unlicensed, the ISM band will have LTE as
an additional contender sharing the same resource-pie. As LTE protocol is designed for licensed band, the
channel access mechanism here is synchronous, whereas Wi-Fi is asynchronous in nature. The major
difference in channel access mechanism of both the technologies leads to serious problems like ‘Interfer-
ence’ and ‘Starvation’ when they co-exist. Wi-Fi, being the major user of unlicensed band, the supporters
of this upcoming technology - LTE Unlicensed are facing strong oppositions from the Wi-Fi Alliance mem-
bers like Apple, Google, Comcast, and Microsoft.
This paper describes primarily two flavors of Unlicensed LTE technology – 1. LTE-U (LTE-Unlicensed) and
2. LAA (Licensed Assisted Access). Implementation for both of these requires an ‘anchor’ in licensed spec-
trum. LTE-U, is based on 3GPP Release 10 (LTE-Advanced) feature named Carrier Aggregation, whose
standards are already in place. Regions like USA, China, and Korea will see early deployments of LTE-U.
However, a much global solution, the LAA based on Release 13 specifications, mandates the implementa-
tion of LBT (Listen Before Talk) technique, will be commercialized later due to ongoing standardization.
When LBT is enabled, each device or access point would scan the channel to detect any activity on this
channel and transmit only when it finds the medium unused. Thus it ensures fair co-existence of other
technologies and devices operating in the same spectrum. LBT being a global approach, this would be
compliant with regulatory requirements of most countries like Europe and Japan. The reason behind adopt-
ing Unlicensed LTE is not to overpower the reign of Wi-Fi, but to enhance spectral efficiency and capacity
of 5GHz band by co-existing harmoniously and ensuring fair medium access.

There is no doubt that these LTE and Wi-Fi technologies with their rich and complementing features will
continue to converge with the goals of giving users ‘Anytime’ & ‘Anywhere’ connectivity and required band-
width. Users do not care which underlying technology is being used to cater to their services, as long as it
is fast, affordable, and reliable. As these two (licensed and unlicensed) worlds cater to some conflicts of
interest, understanding the differences between discussed approaches is important. This helps in realizing
that there is no right or wrong, just difference of choices.

Currently, the future looks bright for carrier grade Wi-Fi technology and LTE Small Cells. LTE-U, LAA, LWA
are different approaches for converging the best of both worlds together and probably other options will
emerge as well. Like everything, the market is the only Ultimatum! It will decide what works best and when.
Introduction

Motivation
The massive shift from wireline traffic to wireless traffic in the past decade shows that the mobile traffic is
gaining increasing attention. The use of wireless data services gives consumers the freedom of mobility.
Today wireless traffic accounts for more than half of the IP traffic and most of them is not cellular, but Wi-Fi,
according to Cisco’s VNI data.

Global IP traffic
Wireless traffic Wireless traffic
59% 75%

24%
41%

61%
55%

4% 15%
2013 2018
Cellular Wi-Fi Fixed IP

Fig. 1: Wireless Traffic Scene, Source: Cisco VNI

Traditional Cellular providers find it challenging to provide good indoor-coverage. Hence, Wi-Fi dominates
in most of the residential and enterprise setups for indoor data services. People spend 80-90% of their time
indoors. Network analytics shows that the majority of mobile data usage, close to 80%, is indoor and not
truly mobile. Hence, there is a growing pressure on mobile operators to provide those users fast and seam-
less connectivity with the existing problem of Spectrum Crunch. At the same time, it can be seen as a great
business opportunity for the MNOs to increase their indoor customer count with enhanced indoor cover-
age. Fixed line operators can get a better level of management layer from the cellular operators and can
provide a good amount of bandwidth even to users who are away from the amplifiers.

The 3GPP LTE technology is a 4G cellular wireless technology, and offers high-speed wireless cellular
network connectivity through mobile devices. Wi-Fi is a wireless technology that enables several types of
computing devices, including personal computers and mobile phones, to connect to a wireless network
through a router. Blending the goodness of both the technologies gave birth to the next generation network
technology – Unlicensed-LTE. The reason behind adopting Unlicensed LTE is not to overpower the reign
of Wi-Fi, but to enhance the spectral efficiency and capacity of 5GHz band by co-existing harmoniously and
ensuring fair medium access.
ISM bands

The unlicensed spectrum bands in the scope of LTE-U technology are the ISM bands in 2.4 GHz and 5
GHz. Of particular interest is the 5GHz band, where large bandwidths are freely available in many regions of
the world. In recent times, the fastest growing use of these bands has been for short-range low power
communication systems. Cordless Phones, Bluetooth, ZigBee, NFC Devices, and Wi-Fi take advantage of
unlicensed spectrum for short-range communication.

FM
Broadcast
AM
Audio IV 5 GHz
Broadcast
IEEE 802.11a

Extremely Very Very Ultra Super

Low Medium High Infrared Visible UV X-Rays
Low Low High High High

2.4 - 2.4835 GHz

83.5 MHz
IEEE 802.11b/g

Fig. 2 : Radio Spectrum highlighting ISM bands

The rules to access these ISM bands vary from country to country. In the US, FCC defines these rules,
whereas, in Europe ETSI is the governing body. In 1985, the US FCC opened the ISM band for radio com-
munication and wireless LANs [1].

What is so special about unlicensed 5GHz band?

The 2.4 GHz band all alone has for long time served the wireless world with 100MHz allocated to it. Initially
established as an ISM band by ITU in 1947, it has been a powerful enabler to prove the benefits of
unlicensed spectrum – in terms of high spectral efficiency & wider broadband access (see Table 1).

Criterion 2.4 GHz 5GHz

Range and Performance
Number of non-overlapping
channels
Range is higher than that of
5GHz, as waves attenuate
much faster at higher frequencies.
It has fewer channel options, only
3 non-overlapping.
Wavelength is half of 2.4GHz,
hence has a narrower range. It
requires more output power to cover
the same distance as 2.4 GHz
It has 23 non-overlapping channels.

Available spectrum Approximately ~100MHz >300MHz in most of the markets

Interference It has higher interference compared It has fewer interference sources.

to 5GHz

Supported Wi-Fi Version 802.11b/g/n 802.11ac

Table 1 : Differences between two ISM bands - 2.4GHz and 5GHz

As the growing use of 2.4GHz has already congested it, the 5GHz band is now seen as a buffer band in the
unlicensed spectrum with IEEE latest Wi-Fi version - 802.11ac working exclusively in this band. Like
2.4GHz, 5GHz is available worldwide with different band boundaries and different regulations. (See Fig. 3)

USA
5150 5350 5470 5850

Europe
& Japan
5150 5350 5470 5725

China
5150 5350 5725 5850

5GHz has one major benefit over 2.4GHz with wider spectrum of > 300MHz in most
of the markets.
• In USA, the 5GHz band has approximately 580MHz
• In Europe around 455 MHz
• In China around 325MHz

Fig. 3 : Spectrum allocation of 5GHz band across different countries

Benefits of using LTE in unlicensed spectrum

The main advantages for LTE-U over Wi-Fi as an access technology, stem from better link performance,
scheduled medium access control, mobility management, and excellent coverage. These benefits com-
bined with the vast amount of available spectrum (> 300MHz) in the 5GHz band make LTE-U a promising
radio access technology in the unlicensed arena.

Some of the obvious benefits to the operators are:

Increased Bandwidth to Improved user experience with

serve more number of users, rich quality of service,

Low CAPEX cost for operator as Unlicensed LTE is fully transparent to the LTE
no license fee charged for its use, core network, avoiding the need to upgrade any
of the Evolved Packet Core (EPC) elements.
LTE Unlicensed - Various approaches & related terminology

There are different proposals on how to use LTE in unlicensed band and these variants has given rise to lot
of confusion in the terminology used around this topic. We use “Unlicensed LTE” as an umbrella term which
covers all approaches of LTE in the 5GHz unlicensed band. Two such approaches are being developed and
investigated in parallel – LTE-U and LAA. Their acceptance and deployment would depend on how 3GPP
specification would mature around them.

Characteristics of LTE-U and LAA

• Both of these versions would rely majorly on Release 10 feature of LTE-Advanced called carrier
Aggregation.
• Both of these versions shall use licensed channel as a primary or Anchor channel which would majorly
carry all signalling and control information (See Fig. 8). Whereas, the unlicensed band would be used as
a secondary carrier component to augment the data path in only DL (Supplemental DL) or in UL+DL.
Table 2 summarizes the differences between two modes of operation.

Criterion LTE-U LAA

Integration with Licensed Supplemental Downlink (Carrier Carrier Aggregation in UL and DL,
LTE Aggregation in Uplink not needed) using TDD

Co-existence with Wi-Fi - Dynamic Channel Selection - Dynamic Channel Selection

- CSAT based on LTE duty Cycle - LBT operation is mandatory
- LBT support not needed

3GPP Release Based on Release 10, 11 & 12 Based on Release 13

Regions supported USA, China, Korea , India Europe, Japan. Being a global
approach, this would be compliant
with regulatory requirements of most
countries.

Commercialization Early deployment possible Will be commercialized later, due to

ongoing standardization

Table 2: Difference between two approaches - LTE-U and LAA

The regulatory norms of different countries to access unlicensed spectrum has given rise to two separate
markets. They vary in the channel access techniques applied.

1. LBT Market - Europe, Japan: shall follow LAA protocols. The 3GPP is working to standardize LTE-U,
under the name LAA (Licensed Assisted Access) in Release 13, which supports LBT in addition to CA.
LAA is set to become a global standard, as it targets to meet the regulatory requirements persisting
worldwide.
2. Non-LBT Market – US, China, South Korea, and India: Here LBT is not mandated, hence operators can
roll out LTE-U deployments earlier using 3GPP Release 10/11/12 based specifications.
These markets would follow Carrier Aggregation feature of 3GPP Release 10/11/12, which needs
changes in LTE Physical layer and does not mandate the support of LBT.
LTE-U, The ready to deploy solution for operators
In 2013, Qualcomm and Ericsson proposed this version of unlicensed LTE. LTE-U implementation has its
basic roots in 3GPP Rel. 10 feature - Carrier Aggregation (CA) with small-cell enhancements in Release 11
and 12. Thus, LTE-U relies on 3GPP Release 10/11/12 functionality with specification designed and defined
by LTE-U Forum, an organization established by Verizon in collaboration with ALU, Ericsson, Qualcomm,
and Samsung. As it requires fewer modifications from the licensed LTE, LTE-U would be first and the earliest
version of unlicensed LTE available to operators.

LAA (License Assisted Access), Will it be a fair play?

LAA is a global solution adhering to LBT standards of Wi-Fi operation, promising fairness between Wi-Fi
and LTE spectrum use. The Release 13 3GPP standardization will integrate LBT with existing licensed
implementations. Hence, it would take longer to reach the stage of commercial deployments. Fairness
comes at a cost! The integration of LBT will cause degradation in LTE performance similar to the one Wi-Fi
suffers from. As the majority of supporters of LAA are telecom vendors and the standardization body -
3GPP too represents them, there have been serious concerns in the industry that LAA would be more
favorable to LTE than to Wi-Fi. Beyond all these concerns, there is a serious commitment to find a robust
solution for co-existence, where LAA does not levy a detrimental impact over Wi-Fi.

The Standalone Version – Outlook into the future

Currently, the unlicensed access is always anchored in licensed LTE, hence LTE assisted. The standalone
version would aim LTE protocol completely utilizing unlicensed band without a licensed anchor. This
solution is being promoted as ‘MuLTEfire’. The technology now has its own support group in the form of
the MulteFire Alliance. However, 3GPP’s long-term aim is to standardize a core technology, which must be,
as far as possible, frequency agnostic, so that it can be adapted for other frequencies if needed.

Unlicensed LTE timelines for standardization and product

LTE-U, implemented based on Carrier Aggregation, was introduced in 3GPP Release 10, where ISM carrier
can be considered as one Carrier Component. LAA is being studied in 3GPP to standardize a mechanism
that guarantees the fair coexistence of LTE with normal users of ISM spectrum.
LAA specifications are under development by 3GPP. The estimated timelines as projected by CableLabs'
based on recent 3GPP activity with key stakeholders shows that –
• 3GPP LTE Release 13 standardization will go till mid 2016
• Chipset standardization expected between 2016-2017
• Device standardization expected to get complete by 2017
• Infrastructure of LTE/Wi-Fi Integrated Small Cells shall start from mid 2017 till end of 2018

LTE vs. Wi-Fi – a comparison

Throughput and Range

LTE provides user data throughput between 100 Mbps and 1 Gbps. The Wi-Fi standards define data rates
between 11 Mbps and 600 Mbps. The LTE standards enable connected devices with widespread network
coverage, typically nationwide. Wi-Fi computing devices must remain within 300 feet of a wireless router to
maintain wireless network functionality.

Channel Access
In LTE – Synchronous Access
In terms of channel access, LTE is synchronous and centralized in nature. As it is designed for licensed
spectrum, where exclusive use of the spectrum is guaranteed, it is much more efficient than Wi-Fi. Its radio
frame duration is 10ms (See Fig. 4). Each radio frame is divided into 10 sub-frames of 1ms duration. Again,
each sub-frame is divided into 2 slots of 0.5ms each, which consists of a set of time symbols called OFDM
symbols.
All LTE transmissions within a cell, both Uplink and Downlink, are assigned to these slots by the LTE
base-station scheduler. As scheduling is carried out in a centralized fashion, the UEs belonging to the same
cell must be tightly synchronized, both in time and frequency domain. LTE uses the orthogonal frequency
division multiple access (OFDMA) the channel access mechanism, which allows simultaneous transmission
for multiple users. LTE does not perform carrier sensing like Wi-Fi.
1 Frame (10 msec)

1 Sub-Frame (10 msec) 1 Slot (0.5 msec)

0 1 2 3 10 11 19

Fig. 4: LTE Frame format

In Wi-Fi – Asynchronous Access (CSMA/CA)

Unlike LTE, Wi-Fi takes a decentralized approach to schedule transmissions from different devices. The
principle is (1) listen before you talk, (2) if you collide by speaking at the same time with someone else, wait
a random time before you try again. Therefore, when a Wi-Fi device wants to make a transmission, it senses
the medium and performs a clear channel assessment (CCA) check. If the channel is detected free for, a
period (referred to as Distributed Inter-Frame Space DIFS), the transmission proceeds. Otherwise, the Wi-Fi
device draws a random number, between 0 and 16 (or between 0 and 32 for 802.11b/g), starts a counter
and backs-off the transmission during periods when the channel is detected busy. When the counter reach-
es zero, the device attempting to transmit gets hold of the channel and starts transmission. However, if
other devices were also sensing the carrier at the same time and tries to transmit, a collision occurs. When
a transmission fails, (which is detected by the absence of an ACK from the receiver), a random back-off
number is drawn and the process repeats. With every back off the random counter value is doubled, i.e.,
increasing as 16, 32, 64 etc. This random access process, referred to as CSMA/CA, is illustrated in Fig. 5.

Data
Device A

Medium Medium Free

Busy Data
Device B
(attempts to Random Back
Carrier Sensing DIFS
send) off

Medium Medium Free Medium

Busy Busy
Device C
(attempts to Random Back
send) Carrier Sensing DIFS
off

Collision
Fig. 5: Wi-Fi channel Access, CSMA/CA

• Device C has longer Back-off than Device B.

• In addition, when the medium is detected busy, the back-off timer is suspended.
Co-Channel Co-existence – is it easy to achieve that harmony?
The comparison between the two technologies shows that access mechanism in LTE is more “aggressive”
than in Wi-Fi. Wi-Fi being asynchronous tends to be more “polite” in its spectrum usage whereas LTE
allocates the time and frequency resource optimally. Thus,
1. Wi-Fi transmissions are generally not synchronized with LTE transmissions; hence can cause
Interference with LTE frames.
2. In addition, if the channel is busy – Wi-Fi will defer its transmission leading to starved access.

With respect to these two major problems, it becomes necessary to take extra measure to ensure that LTE
co-exists reasonably fairly with Wi-Fi while using unlicensed band. Since Wi-Fi devices are already wide-
spread in the 5GHz unlicensed band, there is a need that LTE-U deployments use low power transmission
in order to cause low interference to their Wi-Fi neighbors. Hence, early LTE-U deployments shall focus on
Small Cell (SC) solutions for harmonious co-existence.

To achieve this harmony, two main approaches are under consideration and are discussed in the following
chapter.

LTE-Unlicensed (Non-LBT markets)

Coexistence mechanism for non-LBT markets

As the channel is shared by all the devices/technologies, co-existence is the main concern. Without modify-
ing Rel. 10/11/12 LTE PHY/MAC standards, 3 mechanisms can be used to safeguard that LTE is a “good
neighbor” in unlicensed bands (See Fig. 6). Typically, co-channel coexistence techniques in unlicensed
bands such as LBT and CSMA (carrier sense multiple access) used by Wi-Fi are based on the concept of
contention based access. In these techniques, transmitters are expected to sense the medium and make
sure that it is free before starting any transmission. The goal of these algorithms then is to provide coexis-
tence across different technologies in a TDM fashion.
1. Channel selection enables small cells to choose the cleanest channel based on Wi-Fi and LTE
measurements. This ensures that interference is avoided between the small cell and its neighboring
Wi-Fi devices and other LTE-U Small Cells, provided an unused channel is available. The channel
selection algorithm monitors the status of the operating channel on an on-going base, and if needed,
will change and select a more suitable one.

Secondary Cell Opportunistic

Channel Selection SCell Switch-OFF
DTx

Fig. 6: : Co-existence mechanism for non-LBT markets (Recommended by: LTE-U forum)
2. In case when no clean channel is available, secondary Cell (S-Cell) /secondary carrier DTX is applied for
adaptive or static TDM for LTE-U Small Cell transmissions based on 10-200ms of carrier sensing of
co-channel Wi-Fi activities. This ensures that even in dense deployments, the LTE-U nodes can share
channel fairly with the Wi-Fi neighbors.
3. In addition, opportunistic S-Cell switch off can reduce interference to Wi-Fi caused due to cell reference
signal (CRS) of S-Cells, when their bandwidth is not needed. This decision can be made based on traffic
in-activity of users associated with unlicensed band compared to what P-Cell can provide. It is possible
since the primary carrier is always operating in the licensed band.

CSAT mechanism, an example

LTE in unlicensed spectrum uses a mechanism called CSAT (Carrier Sense Adaptive Transmission), which
is also in line with the same concept of coexistence based on medium sensing. In CSAT, the small cell
senses the medium for longer (than CSMA) duration (around 10msec to 200msec), hence creating longer
gaps between transmissions, so that other Wi-Fi devices can detect the medium free and transmit achiev-
ing relative fairness amongst the spectrum users. On the other hand, according to the observed medium
activities, the algorithm increases or decreases LTE duty cycles proportionally and adapts to the channel
conditions.(See Fig. 7)
CSAT, in this spirit, is similar to CSMA, except that it has a longer latency.
For e.g. in LTE, the base-station may decide to transmit on every other radio frame, which means transmit-
ting in one 10ms frame and then leaving the channel idle for next 10ms with 50% on-off LTE duty cycle. The
carrier can be sensed at the granularity of sub-frame level to enhance performance. A modified version of
an Almost Blank sub-frame (ABS) feature can be used to implement CSAT when LTE decides no-transmis-
sions. Thus, CSAT is compatible to Release 10/11/12 LTE standards, making early deployment possible in
the U.S. markets where LBT is not mandatory.

Listen before Talk (LBT) / LAA – A global solution

To address the concerns from Wi-Fi stakeholders, it is crucial to implement LBT for the success of LTE
using unlicensed spectrum. With LBT enabled, each device or access point operating at a given location
would scan the channel to detect any activity on this channel and transmit only when it finds the medium
unused. This allows different technologies and devices to operate in the same spectrum. There are different
ways how LBT can be implemented. For instance, the period between the scans of network activity defined
in LAA plays an important role to decide – how the traffic will be split between Wi-Fi and LAA. For the same
reasons, LAA is supposed to go beyond regulatory norms to achieve the industrial consensus by proving
that the impact of a LAA Small Cell is not bigger than that of a Wi-Fi-AP neighbor.

LTE in OFF period LAA - senses

CCA success
senses channel
utilization by Wi-Fi Channel
APs Availability
Channel access
by Wi-Fi, when
LTE off CCA failed LAA frame

time
CCA CCA
failed Success

LTE ON LTE OFF LTE ON LTE OFF Wi-Fi Wi-Fi

time
Random
Duty Cycle time
Backoff

Fig. 7: CSAT and LBT

Co-existence Evaluation (by LTE-U forum)
Multiple outdoor and indoor simulations were carried out by LTE-U forum and the results from three compa-
nies were evaluated. The exact mechanisms applied for co-existence in different scenarios, conditions for
S-Cell turn-off and selection of adaptive or static duty cycle were left to company’s discretion. During analy-
sis of these evaluations, it was observed that LTE, when deployed in unlicensed spectrum without any
coexistence mechanism, caused significant performance degradation on coexisting Wi-Fi networks. How-
ever, when deployed with reasonable coexistence mechanisms, LTE-U behaves as a comparable or better
neighbor to Wi-Fi while the total system performance is significantly outperforming a pure Wi-Fi deployment
[4.2]

One step ahead with LWA (LTE + Wi-Fi link Aggregation –

Release 13)

An alternative to using LTE over unlicensed spectrum that could be much more acceptable to Wi-Fi stake-
holders and the broader industry is “LWA”. This solution targets to enhance LTE performance, thus
overcoming the existing disputes between 3GPP and Wi-Fi Alliance over LTE-U/LAA deployments. Qual-
comm is strongly promoting this solution. This approach reaches very similar results / goals as set by LTE-U
and LAA, by using a different concept. In this, the LTE payload is split and some traffic is tunneled over Wi-Fi
and rest is sent over the native LTE connection.
LWA uses Wi-Fi APs to augment LTE RAN by tunneling LTE data in 802.11 MAC frame, so that it looks like
Wi-Fi frame to another network, though it is actually carrying LTE data. By this method, both technologies
operate in their respective spectrum i.e. Wi-Fi runs on an unlicensed band, LTE continues to run on a
licensed band, and they are combined in such a way that there are no changes in their respective access
mechanisms. This is the significant difference compared to LTE-unlicensed.

Link Aggregation
LTE via licensed spectrum
2.4 GHz & 5 GHz Additional link by LTE via WiFi via ISM spectrum
tunnelling LTE msg
via WiFi
ISM 2.4 & 5GHz Spectrum
LW
A
LTE Spectrum
Licensed
spectrum as
anchor
LTE-U
USA, Korea, India
LTE Spectrum
400MHz - 3.8GHz
Component Carrier
ISM 5GHz Spectrum A
(LTE using ISM LA pa
n
spectrum) , Ja
pe
Euro
Carrier Aggregation
LTE used in both spectrums

Fig. 8: LTE-U/LAA & LTE-Wi-Fi link Aggregation

Required Changes
Unlike LTE-U, that requires new network hardware and new smartphones, LWA would need only software
up gradation on user side. User equipment should power up both radios and split the data plane traffic, so
that some LTE traffic is tunneled over Wi-Fi and the rest runs natively over LTE. The traffic flowing over Wi-Fi
is received at Wi-Fi AP and then tunneled back to LTE Small Cell, which anchors the session. The flows are
combined at LTE Small Cell and sent to EPC in UL. Wi-Fi AP also needs to be software upgraded to
support LWA, in such a way that it continues to support non-LWA traffic on a separate Service Set Identifier
(SSID).
LTE-Wi-Fi link aggregation is under study and shall be a part of 3GPP Release 13.

Advantages
Wi-Fi traffic can benefit from the services provided by carrier operators’ EPC. Authentication, Billing, Deep
packet Inspection(DPI), Lawful interception, Policy and Rule enforcement, etc. LWA, thus, becomes a
solution that exploits existing Wi-Fi AP and improves indoor cellular performance.

Market Trends, offerings and challenges

Service Provider’s take towards LTE unlicensed

Any kind of addition to the cellular spectrum is always a welcoming step for the revenue generation of cellu-
lar service providers.
• The Federal Communication Commission has already granted Qualcomm, the permission for a
small-scale LTE Unlicensed trial at two Verizon Wireless locations in January 2016. FCC extended STA
(Special Temporary Authority) to Qualcomm in response to its request to test LTE-U equipment at the
Verizon trail locations in Oklahoma City and Raleigh, North Carolina [10].
• In another initiative, Korean wireless carrier LG Uplus showed its LTE-U trial achieving twice the speed of
its commercial LTE-A service, by combining 60 MHz of unlicensed 5.8 GHz spectrum with 20 MHz in
the licensed LTE spectrum.
• Verizon working with Ericsson to add small cells, sees positive results of LTE-U trials
• With tests conducted by Huawei and NTT DoCoMo, showing LAA delivers better performance in both
coverage and capacity, compared with current widely deployed Wi-Fi equipment based on the 802.11n
standard.

A new coalition named ‘EVOLVE’ was launched in Washington D.C. in September 2015. AT&T, Verizon,
T-Mobile, Alcatel Lucent, Competitive Carrier Association (CCA), and Qualcomm are the backers of this
group. They have formed this coalition to promote the benefits of new technologies like LTE-U and LAA
operating on unlicensed spectrum.

On the other hand, controversy debates are taking place at regulatory level at FCC over LTE-U Access
between Wi-Fi Alliance and LTE-U supporters. Apple, Google, Comcast, and Microsoft who are members
of the Wi-Fi Alliance including the cable industry R&D body CableLabs, went to the extent of proposing
FCC with certification process for LTE-U operators from Wi-Fi Alliance for deploying LTE-U. Their claims are
LTE-U was developed in private, in contrast to LAA and in contrast to standard development methods.
Thus, more challenges are lining up for LTE-U than LAA deployments.

In spite of all these concerns, market growth is predicted in LTE-U Small Cells deployment.
LTE-U Small Cell solution will see early entry in the LTE-U market; a new report indicates that spending on
LTE-U Small Cells is expected to reach nearly $2 Billion by the end of 2020 [8]
As wireless vendors aggregate more unlicensed spectrum bands, the demand for LTE-U small cells is
expected to rise at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 80% between 2016 and 2020, according to
the SNS telecom research report. Several large companies operating within the LTE standard, including
Verizon Wireless, Alcatel-Lucent, Ericsson, and Qualcomm, will support this growth.
OEM’s take towards LTE unlicensed
Equipment manufacturers take different approaches in their way towards making unlicensed spectrum
available to mobile operators to augment their available spectrum.

Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. (QTI)

• The giant chipset manufacturer is promoting and investing into almost all approaches for making
unlicensed spectrum available to LTE operators. QTI is moving forward in terms of technology thought
leadership. In early 2015, Qualcomm announced support for LTE-U in non-LBT regions for both
small-cell and UE products.
• QTI announced the WTR 3950 RF transceiver, which supports LTE-Advanced carrier aggregation with
support for up-to 40MHz channels on handset side. It has announced integration of LTE-U in its
FSM99xx SoC, and the availability of the FTR8950 RF transceiver for small cells.
• For LBT regions, Qualcomm has announced to meet 3GPP standards for LTE-LAA once the
specifications are finalized.
• Qualcomm’s new Snapdragon 820 chipset is expected to enable LTE-U in many flagship smartphones
in 2016 with upgraded modem (X12 LTE) technology which is designed to choose automatically
between LTE and Wi-Fi, depending on signal quality, end-to-end speed, and Internet reachability. It
supports LTE Category 12, with theoretical peak downlink speeds of 600 Mbps, and LTE Category 13
theoretical peak uplink speeds of up to 150 Mbps.
• Overall, Qualcomm is very bullish in its take towards the efficiencies of LTE-U that would improve
wholesome user experience and security, while working alongside Wi-Fi as a fair player.
• At the 2016 Mobile World Congress, Qualcomm showcased LWA, LTE-U, as well as MulteFire.

Cisco Systems Inc.

• Cisco, being a manufacturer of both LTE small cells that utilize licensed carrier bands, as well as
unlicensed Wi-Fi technology, follows neutral approach.
• Targeting to the service provider and enterprise markets ‘Cisco’ says that its view is that ‘Both Wi-Fi and
LTE-U/LAA utilize the band, without significant negative consequences to users of either technology.’
• Cisco views 3GPPs LAA mechanism using LBT with exponential back off as a very positive
development and promises to support the work in 3GPP standardization.

Broadcom
• Broadcom has been active in both comments to the FCC and in work in standardization bodies, but is
not a part of the LTE-U Forum. Broadcom does not believe that LTE-U as envisioned by the LTE-U Forum
meets the normal criteria of a standard [7.3].
• Participation in this group is restricted; detailed specifications are not provided, and sharing algorithms
are proprietary. Broadcom believes that LAA is likely to be standardized in 2016 and priority focus for
3GPP is supplemental downlink, and that supplemental uplink will be considered in the future.
Abbreviations

Sl. No. Acronyms Expansion

1. UNII Unlicensed national information infrastructure
2. ISM Industrial, Scientific and Medical
3. FCC Federal communication commission
4. ETSI European Telecommunication Standard Institute
5. LBT Listen before talk
6. CCA Clear Channel Assessment
7. LTE-U LTE Unlicensed
8. LAA License assisted access
9. NFC Near Field communication
10. RFID Radio Frequency Identification
11. DIFS Distributed Inter-frame Space
12. VNI Virtual Networking Index
13. ARPU Average Revenue per user
14. CSAT Carrier Sense Adaptive transmission
15. CSMA/CA Carrier sense multiple access/collision avoidance
16. S-Cell/P-Cell Secondary Cell / Primary Cell
17. DTX Discontinuous Transmission
18. TDM Time Division Multiplexing
19. STA Special Temporary Authority
References

[1] https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2007-title47-vol1/pdf/CFR-2007-title47-vol1.pdf
[2]https://www.qualcomm.com/#/invention/research/
projects/lte-unlicensed/r13-laa-licensed-assisted-access
[2.1] Qualcomm (2013): Extending LTE-Advanced to unlicensed spectrum.
[2.2] Qualcomm (2013): Introducing LTE in unlicensed spectrum.
[2.3] Qualcomm research (2014) LTE in unlicensed spectrum: Harmonious coexistence with Wi-Fi
[3]http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/wireless
/wi-fi/80211-channels-number-frequencies-bandwidth.php
[4] http://lteuforum.org/
[4.1] LTE-U forum (2015) LTE-U SDL Coexistence Specification
[4.2] LTE-U forum (2015) LTE-U Technical Report, Coexistence SDL Coexistence Specification
[5] 3GPP TR 36.889 V13.0.0; Study on Licensed-Assisted Access to Unlicensed Spectrum; (Release 13)
[6] http://www.rethink-wireless.com/2015/09/01/wifi-3gpp-relations-thaw-lte-laa-lte-u.htm
[7] http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/ & http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view. -
[7.1] FCC (2015) Office of Engineering, Technology, and Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
seek Information on Current Trends in LTE-U and LAA Technology. ET Docket No. 15-105.
[7.2] WBA’s responses to FCC on seek of information on current trends in LTE-U and LAA.
[7.3] Broadcom’s responses to FCC on seek of information on current trends in LTE-U and LAA
[7.4] Cisco’s responses to FCC on seek of information on current trends in LTE-U and LAA
[7.5] Google’s responses to FCC on seek of information on current trends in LTE-U and LAA
[7.6] ALU’s responses to FCC on seek of information on current trends in LTE-U and LAA
[7.7] Qualcomm’s responses to FCC on seek of information on current trends in LTE-U and LAA
[8] http://www.snstelecom.com/wireless-network-infrastructure
[8.1]http://www.marketresearch.com/Signals-and-Systems-
Telecom-v3882/HetNet-Ecosystem-Small-Cells-Carrier-9043353/
[9]http://www.rcrwireless.com/20150701/test-and-
measurement/lte-u-testing-5-studies-and-their-results-tag6
[10] https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=172096&x
Author Info

Sonika Bengani

Sonika joined HCL over 4 years ago in the Engineering and R&D (ERS) Telecom
and networks division. She has 10+ years of experience in Radio protocol
design & development of 3G and 4G technology. Her research areas are
focussed on future 5G networks, IoT connectivity infrastructure, and their
use-cases.

Mirko Naumann

Mirko joined HCLs Engineering and R&D (ERS) Telecom and networks division
end of 2013. Since then, he is heading HCL’s LTE Center of Excellence. Mirko
has 18+ years experience in telecommunication with a strong focus on
wireless. He works in research and development for mobile devices and mobile
networks in 3G, 4G, and 5G technology for more than 15 years.

Hello, I’m from HCL’s Engineering and R&D Services. We enable technology led organizations to go to market with innovative
products and solutions. We partner with our customers in building world class products and creating associated solution deliver
ecosystems to help bring market leadership. We develop engineering products, solutions and platforms across Aerospace and
Defense, Automotive, Consumer Electronics, Software, Online, Industrial Manufacturing, Medical Devices, Networking and
Telecom, Office Automation, Semiconductors and Servers & Storage for our customers.
TM