SMALL CELL FORUM

RELEASE Five scf.io/

RURAL & REMOTE

DOCUMENT

073.05.01
Multi technology (3G and LTE)
Whitepaper
December 2013

www.scf.io/ www.smallcellforum.org
SMALL CELL FORUM

RELEASE Five
Four

Small Cell Forum works to accelerate small cell adoption to change

the shape of mobile networks and maximize the potential of mobile
services.

We are not a standards organization but partner with organizations that inform
and determine standards development. We are a carrier-led organization. This
means our operator members establish requirements that drive the activities
and outputs of our technical groups.

Our track record speaks for itself: we have driven the standardization of key
elements of small cell technology including Iuh,FAPI/SCAPI, SON, the small cell
services API,TR‑069 evolution and the enhancement of the X2 interface.

At the time of writing, Small Cell Forum has more than 140 members, including
68 operators representing more than 3 billion mobile subscribers – 46 per
cent of the global total – as well as telecoms hardware and software vendors,
content providers and innovative start-ups.

This document forms part of Small Cell Forum’s Release Five: Rural &
Remote that considers the opportunities and perceived barriers associated
with the deployment of small cells in rural and remote scenarios, including
disaster recovery, military installations, as well as verticals such as oil and gas,
maritime, aviation and automotive.

The Small Cell Forum Release Program has now established business cases
and market drivers for all the main use cases, clarifying market needs and
addressing barriers to deployment for residential, enterprise and urban small
cells.

Small Cell Forum Release website can be found here: www.scf.io

All content in this document including links and references are for informational
purposes only and is provided “as is” with no warranties whatsoever including
any warranty of merchantability, fitness for any particular purpose, or any
warranty otherwise arising out of any proposal, specification, or sample.

No license, express or implied, to any intellectual property rights is granted or

intended hereby.

If you would like more information about Small Cell Forum or would
like to be included on our mailing list, please contact:

Email info@smallcellforum.org

Post Small Cell Forum, PO Box 23, GL11 5WA UK

Member Services memberservices@smallcellforum.org

Scope
This paper examines the co-existence of 3G and 4G technologies for multi-technology
small cell networks. More specifically, it addresses challenges and proposed solutions
for supporting multi-technology small cell networks. For Release Three we plan to
cover challenges related to combined backhaul solutions and unified product designs.
More importantly, the next iteration of the paper will also address the integration of
Wi-Fi technology.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01
Executive summary
Multi-technology small cell deployments will combine multiple radio systems such as
3G and 4G technologies or even 3G and 4G with integrated Wi-Fi connectivity. This is
in the aim that mobile network operators will be able to meet the increased traffic
demands of their customers’ data-hungry wireless devices and continue to support
legacy 3G handsets, while at the same time improve customers’ experience of offered
services and reduce overall networks costs.

This paper addresses the concept of combining two radio technologies 3G and 4G in
small cell networks by first highlighting the foreseen challenges in public space,
enterprise, and residential small cell deployments. Then exploring technology
synergies that can enable integrated solutions for multi-technology small cell
architectures, radio resource management systems, and traffic offload methods.

Four multi-technology small cell architectures are considered that operators can chose
from based on their legacy technology deployments and possible new technology
requirements:

• Architecture A: no shared functionality or interfaces between multiple

technologies (3G and 4G)
• Architecture B: single management system for multiple Technologies
• Architecture C: single security gateway with:

• separate IPsec tunnels for multiple technologies

• combined IPsec tunnel for multiple technologies

• Architecture D: single HNB/HeNB gateway for multiple technologies

HNB/HeNB gateway for multiple technologies (combination of Architecture B,
C and D)

In terms of multi-radio technology radio resource management (Multi-RAT RRM), the

paper discusses the expected benefits of using multi-RAT RRM, and possible Multi-RAT
RRM functions, procedure and deployment models. Multi-RAT RRM is expected to
improve system on the expense of possible increase in signalling overhead. To this
point, trade-offs between multi-RAT RRM architecture, performance, strategies and
signalling overhead are required to find the optimum solution.

Finally, traffic offload in multi-technology small cell networks is addressed for traffic
offload in the radio access networks and through the 3G and 4G gateways; and
benefits of traffic offload for operators and users are highlighted.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01
Contents
1. Introduction .....................................................................1
2 Case for multi-technology small cell networks .................3
2.1 Multi-technology deployment challenges................................. 3
2.1.1 Challenges in public space small cells deployment ................... 3
2.1.2 Challenges in enterprise multi-technology small cells
deployment ........................................................................ 3
2.1.3 Challenges in residential multi-technology small cells
deployment ........................................................................ 3
2.2 Addressing multi-technology deployments challenges .............. 4
3. Multi technology (3G and 4G) small cell network
architectures ....................................................................5
3.1 Architecture A – Separate 3G and 4G networks ....................... 5
3.2 Architecture B – Integrated element management system ........ 6
3.3 Architecture C – Integrated security gateway .......................... 7
3.4 Architecture D – Integrated 3G and 4G gateway ...................... 8
3.5 Conclusion .......................................................................... 9
4. Multi technology synergies: radio resource
management (RRM) .......................................................10
4.1 Need for multi-technology RRM ........................................... 10
4.2 Multi-RAT RRM benefits ...................................................... 11
4.3 Multi-RAT RRM functions and procedures .............................. 11
4.4 Multi-RAT RRM challenges .................................................. 12
4.5 Multi-RAT RRM interaction model and dependencies ............... 13
4.5.1 Multi-RAT RRM interaction model ......................................... 13
4.5.2 Multi-RAT RRM dependencies .............................................. 14
4.6 Multi-technology RRM implementation models and topologies . 15
4.6.1 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: single access point...................... 18
4.6.2 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: multi-access point ...................... 18
4.6.3 Server/cloud-based multi-RAT RRM: multi-access point .......... 19
4.6.4 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: UE-based .................................. 20
4.6.5 Hierarchical multi-tier architecture ....................................... 20
4.7 Conclusion ........................................................................ 21
5 Multi technology synergies: traffic offload .....................23
5.1 Traffic offload techniques.................................................... 23
5.1.1 Multi-mode small cell: offload vehicle ................................... 23
5.1.2 Offload in the radio access network ..................................... 23
5.1.3 Offload through 3G and 4G network gateways ...................... 24
5.2 Counting the benefits ......................................................... 24
6. Summary ........................................................................26
References ................................................................................27

Tables
Table 4-1 Various Multi-RAT RRM models and associated use cases ....................17

Figures
Figure 3-1 Architecture A – Separate 3G and 4G networks .................................. 6
Figure 3-2 Architecture B – Combined management system ................................ 7
Figure 3-3 Architecture C-1 – Integrated security gateway (with separate IPsec
Tunnels for luh and S1 interfaces)..................................................... 8
Figure 3-4 Architecture C-2 – Integrated security gateway (with a combined
IPsec Tunnel for luh and S1 interfaces) .............................................. 8
Figure 3-5 Architecture D – Integrated HNB/HeNB gateway ................................. 9
Figure 4-1 Multi-RAT RRM in a multi-standard HetNet ........................................10
Figure 4-2 Multi-RAT RRM functionalities and procedures ...................................12
Figure 4-3 Multi-RAT RRM architecture .............................................................13
Figure 4-4 Interaction between multi-RAT RRM and local RRM entities .................15
Figure 4-5 Single access point – Integrated multi-RAT RRM topology ...................18
Figure 4-6 Multiple access point – integrated Multi-RRM Topologies, (a)
integrated multi-RAT RRM in each intra-RAT AP, (b) integrated multi-
RAT RRM in some APs, and (c) integrated intra-RAT in Single AP with
integrated multi-RAT RRM in some APs. ............................................19
Figure 4-7 Multiple access point – server/cloud-based multi-RAT RRM topology ....20
Figure 4-8 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: UE-based scenario ..................................20
Figure 4-9 Generic multi-radio access technology - RRM topology .......................21
Figure 4-10 Multi-tier hierarchical inter-operator RRM topology .............................21
Figure 5-1 Local data offload (LIPA) at multi-mode ESCC/ESCG ..........................24
Abbreviations
2G Second generation
3G Third generation
3GPP 3rd generation partnership project
C-plane Control plane
eNodeB Evolved node B
eNB E-UTRAN node B
EMS Element management system
EPC Evolved packet core
EPS Evolved packet system
EUTRAN Evolved universal terrestrial radio access network
GERAN GSM and EDGE radio access network
GPRS General packet radio service
GSM Global system for mobile communications
HeNB Home eNB
HeNB-GW HeNB gateway
HeMS HeNB management system
HNB Home NB
HNB-GW HNB gateway
HMS HNB management system
LAC Location area code
LTE Long term evolution
LIPA Local IP access
L-GW Local gateway
MME Mobility management entity
MSC Mobile switching centre
NMS Node B management system
OAM Operation and maintenance
PGW Public data network (PDN) gateway
RAC Radio admission control
RAN Radio access network
RRM Radio resource management
S-GW Serving gateway
S1 Interface between eNB, MME, and S-GW
S11 Interface between MME and S-GW
S1-MME S1 for the control plane
S1-U S1 for the user plane
SeGW Security gateway
SGSN Serving general packet radio serving support node
SIPTO Selected IP traffic offload
TAC Tracking area code
UE User equipment
UTRAN Universal terrestrial radio access network
U-plane User plane
WLAN Wireless LAN
1. Introduction

Global mobile data traffic is expected to increase many-fold over the coming years.
This skyrocketing demand is fuelled by the proliferation of data-hungry wireless
devices (e.g., smartphones, tablets, laptops), that are accessing mobile networks
worldwide.

Faced by this new reality, mobile operators will seek ways to meet the traffic demand
while avoiding any possible increase in capital expenses (CAPEX) and operational
expenses (OPEX) of their networks.

Data offload to small cells has become a popular choice of mobile operators to
improve the cellular network capacity in highly congested areas, or extend user
coverage to problematic cell-edge areas. More specifically, small cell deployments
have indicated enhanced user quality of services and a possible overall saving in
networks CAPEX and OPEX for operators.

Nonetheless, recent small cells deployments (residential, enterprise, or public) have

nearly always supported one radio technology – usually either 3G or 4G depending on
the operator’s choice of service in different coverage areas. One apparent drawback of
the deployment of multiple small cells that belong to different radio technologies is the
possibility of the higher overhead in CAPEX and OPEX and added complexities involved
in procuring multiple sites or site licenses, radio frequency planning and multiple
backhaul connections. Additionally, for the service provider, the lack of methods to
jointly coordinate traffic between small cells (e.g., diverting traffic away from highly
congested cells), or jointly managing interference among small cells, may degrade the
overall system performance. To this end, the next generation of small cells
deployments must enable multi-technology in order to provide additional performance
and costs saving for both operators and end users. Such multi-technology small cells
deployments could combine 3G and 4G technology with integrated Wi-Fi connectivity
to ensure ubiquitous wireless connectivity to users with 3G, 4G, and Wi-Fi wireless
devices capabilities.

Clearly, the way forward for mobile operators in the race of multi-technology market
will mean overcoming significant challenges to the multi-technology small cell
deployments related to:

1. the architecture that will enable integration of multi-technology radio

networks and interoperability of multiple radio technologies (e.g., inter-RAT
mobility);
2. traffic offload mechanisms; and
3. integrated backhaul solution/management.

The key objective of this paper is to explore technology synergies that can enable
integrated solutions for multi-technology small cell deployments. More precisely,
Section 2 of this paper describes the case for multi-technology small cell networks and
foreseen challenges in public, enterprise, and residential deployments, and proposes
ways to address such challenges. Section 3, explores alternative multi-technology
small cell architectures and their pros and cons in terms of optimization of product
integration and signaling. Section 4 presents technology synergies for combined radio
resource management and possible implementation models. Section 5, investigates
solutions of traffic offload for multi-technology small cell deployments. Finally, Section
6 presents the summary of whitepaper.

Other technology integration aspects related to hardware, inter-RAT mobility, and

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 1
services have not been considered and are planned to be covered in the next release
of this multi-technology whitepaper series.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 2
2 Case for multi-technology small cell networks

Public, enterprise, and residential access networks will continue to see a mix of both
LTE and 3G handsets for quite some time ahead; and although 4G handset market
penetration will increase, 3G handsets shall continue to represent a major fraction of
total mobile handset market.

In this light, there is a great need for the deployment of multi-technology small cell
networks that will be able to efficiently manage available operators’ network resources
between 4G and 3G subscribers. Take for example, the efficient use of available
spectrum by using the 4G spectrum for data services, and the 3G spectrum for voice
services.

Additional multi-technology small cells will benefit from the possibility to share the
backhaul power, and real estate, and deploy a common gateway, in order to connect
to the core network and leverage a unified management interface framework.

It is imperative that the networks should support increased data capacity and speeds,
while lowering latency and power consumption, all at significantly lower costs. More
specifically, operators seek ways to reduce network costs related to manufacturing,
power consumption and service delivery, while intelligently using available 3G, 4G
networks and Wi-Fi connectivity to support macro-cellular traffic offload and selection
of networks based on delivered services.

2.1 Multi-technology deployment challenges

Future multi-technology small cell networks will face different challenges depending on
their deployment scenarios as public space, enterprise, or residential.

2.1.1 Challenges in public space small cells deployment

The main challenges in public space deployments are related to complexities in site
acquisitions, scaling of backhaul network, network/radio frequency planning, and
network management of large number of small cells. Other challenges are related to
managing spectrum choices based on location, subscriber services, and inter-
technology mobility.

2.1.2 Challenges in enterprise multi-technology small cells deployment

Enterprise multi-technology small cell deployments experience challenges due to in-

building interference management, integration of enterprise applications (e.g., PBX
and IT applications with the small cells), and planning and managing of a large in-
building network remotely. For example, on-site access to the enterprise building may
not always be possible. Minimizing the total cost of installation can also be a challenge
if separate installations of cables, power sources, and equipment are required for 3G
and 4G small cells.

2.1.3 Challenges in residential multi-technology small cells deployment

The challenges in residential small cell deployments are similar to those observed in
public and enterprise deployments. The prevalent issues are related to 3G and LTE
spectrum choices based on residential location and subscriber services. From the
subscriber point of view it is better to have one physical unit rather than having
multiple units catering for multiple technologies.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 3
2.2 Addressing multi-technology deployments challenges
Small Cell Forum believes that 3G and 4G small cells, sometimes combined with Wi-Fi
traffic offload, can deliver optimal benefits when deployed together (possibly even
integrated into the same unit) in heterogeneous network scenarios.

Lack of new site locations, cost of new deployment and backhaul related aspects are
leading operators to see these 3G and LTE small cells under the same enclosure
sharing location, and backhaul. One possible integration model in an outdoor
deployment is a multi-mode small cell that combines 3GPP RATs with Wi-Fi
connectivity.

3G networks are going to co-exist with 4G networks for quite some time. As operators
embrace LTE rollouts, supporting current 3G deployments remains a need. Thus
overhead is apparent in CAPEX and OPEX and the added complexities involved in
procuring multiple sites or multiple site licenses, Radio frequency planning, and
multiple backhaul connections for integrating a carrier’s 3G and 4G small cell offerings.
Taking this into consideration, the overhead of building and maintaining separate
small cell networks for 3G and 4G should, on the face of it, be significantly reduced by
using integrated 3G and 4G small cell solutions. [1].

Some of the possible means for addressing the challenges involved in the multi-
technology small cell deployments are described below:

• Single cable pull for LTE and 3G networks

• Single power source
• Common deployment architecture
• Unified network management
• Shared backhaul to the operator’s core network
• Packet prioritization, QoS, and policy rules regardless of access technology
• Integrated radio resource management
• Load balancing to enable mapping of applications to best access technology
• A unified SON interface to manage the 3G and 4G small cells
• Integrated traffic offload architecture
• Integrated IT management (enterprise small cells deployment)
• Application synergies based on type of devices, accounts, and services
• Unified small cell services

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 4
3. Multi technology (3G and 4G) small cell network
architectures

This section will present our view of alternative architectures for multi-technology
small cells. Those architectures will refer to the small cell as home eNode B (HeNB) for
4G or LTE small cells, and home node B (HNB) for 3G small cells.

3GPP already defines three possible variant options of network architecture for HeNB
Variant 1, 2, and 3 in [2], [3]. Those options differ in terms of whether a HeNB
gateway (HeNB-GW) is part of the network deployment or not, and if deployed
whether HeNB-GW aggregates both the control-plane (namely, C-Plane) and the user-
plane (namely, U-Plane), or it only aggregates the C-plane. More specifically, in
Variant 1 the HeNB-GW serves as a concentrator for the C-plane and also terminates
the U-plane towards the HeNB and serving gateway (S-GW). In Variant 2, the S1-U
interface of HeNB is terminated in S-GW and the S1-C interface is terminated directly
in mobility management entity (MME). HeNB may have connection to multiple
MME/serving gateway (S-GW). This represents the case of HeNB with S1-flex support.
In Variant 3, the HeNB-GW serves as a concentrator for the C-Plane only, and the S1-
U interface of HeNB is terminated in the S-GW.

Herein we discuss the multi technology 3G/LTE small cell network architecture options
considering all the three LTE architecture variants [4].

Note, the choice of which LTE architecture variant adopted by an operator may
be influenced by the requirements to support network sharing, as described in
[5].

The following four possible options for 3G/LTE small cell network architectures are
identified:

1. Architecture A: No technology synergy

2. Architecture B: Single management system for multiple technologies
3. Architecture C: Single security gateway

a. C-1: with separate IPsec tunnels for multiple technologies

b. C-2: with a combined IPsec tunnel for multiple technologies

4. Architecture D: Single HNB/HeNB gateway for multiple technologies

The following sections will describe Architectures A, B, C, and D in more detail. Any of
the three LTE architecture variants (1, 2, and 3) is applicable for these architectures.

3.1 Architecture A – Separate 3G and 4G networks

In this option there is no functionality or interface that is shared between the different
technologies (LTE and 3G) as depicted in Figure 3-1. There is a need to identify and
separate the two types of traffic originating from LTE or 3G small cells. The combined
small cell will typically be allocated two separate IP addresses, one for use by the 3G
small cell (shown as HNB in the figure) and the other for use by the LTE small cell
(shown as HeNB in the figure)

In terms of mobility management, in all examples it is assumed that the core network
is able to support idle mode signalling reduction (ISR) incorporating the LAC/RAC
allocated to the 3G small cell and TAC allocated to the LTE small cell.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 5
 Note: The HMS/HeMS interface towards HNB/HeNB may be inside or outside of
the IPsec tunnel.

Figure 3-1 Architecture A – Separate 3G and 4G networks

3.2 Architecture B – Integrated element management system

In this option a single management system for 3G and LTE is assumed, as illustrated
in Figure 3-2. This assumption fits within the current direction of the Broadband Forum
towards creating a unified way of managing multiple technologies [6]. A management
server provides the common FQDN for combined serving HMS/HeMS to HNB/HeNB for
the actual provisioning during this pre provisioning phase.

Combining the HNB management system (HMS) and HeNB management system
(HeMS) provides enhanced SON functionality and coordination between 3G and LTE
small cells, as the management system will have visibility into both the 3G and LTE
small cell networks. In particular, the combined management system is able to co-
ordinate neighbor cell lists (NCL) provisioned on both the 3G small cell and the LTE
small cell. This offers the management system a more complete view of the radio
access network (RAN) to make its decisions.

This architecture option could be applicable for the scenario where the element
management system (EMS) is perhaps already deployed for 3G and can additionally
support 4G requirements.

Note: The HMS/HeMS interface towards HNB/HeNB may be inside or outside of

the IPsec tunnel.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 6
Figure 3-2 Architecture B – Combined management system

3.3 Architecture C – Integrated security gateway

In this option a single security gateway (SeGW) is deployed for both 3G and LTE small
cells networks, as illustrated in Figure 3-3 (Architecture C-1) and Figure 3-4
(Architecture C-2). The common HMS/HeMS provisions the HNB and HeNB with a
common SeGW during the provisioning phase.

Similar to Architecture B (Figure 3-2), in Architecture C the security gateway has to be

able to have a way to identify and route traffic destined for the separate 3G and 4G
networks. One possible solution is to consider whether to deploy separate IPsec
tunnels (Architecture C-1, shown in Figure 3-3), or combined IPsec tunnels
(Architecture C-2, shown in Figure 3-4). Take for example, the case of using a multi-
mode small cell that supports both 3G and LTE networks, then Architectures C-2 and
C-1 would still be valid options to deliver the separation of 3G and 4G traffic. On the
other hand, the deployment of 3G and 4G small cells that use different physical
equipment may limit their multi-technology deployment to Architecture C-1 (shown in
Figure 3-3).

Note: The HMS/HeMS interface towards HNB/HeNB may be inside or outside of

the IPsec tunnel.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 7
Figure 3-3 Architecture C-1 – Integrated security gateway (with separate IPsec Tunnels for
luh and S1 interfaces)

Figure 3-4 Architecture C-2 – Integrated security gateway (with a combined IPsec Tunnel for
luh and S1 interfaces)

3.4 Architecture D – Integrated 3G and 4G gateway

In this architecture a single HNB/HeNB gateway is deployed for both 3G and LTE small
cells networks, as illustrated in Figure 3-5. The common HMS/HeMS provisions the
HNB and HeNB with a combined HNB-GW/HeNB-GW during the provisioning phase.
Architecture D should be more suitable for operators who already have a legacy 3G
deployment and plan to migrate towards LTE in order to provide the necessary cost
savings and hardware reuse flexibility.

Note: The HMS/HeMS interface towards HNB/HeNB may be inside or outside of

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 8
 the IPsec tunnel.

Figure 3-5 Architecture D – Integrated HNB/HeNB gateway

3.5 Conclusion

For multi technology deployments, operators can either choose a single identified
architecture or combine the architectures described in this whitepaper based on their
legacy technology deployments and possible new technology requirements. For
example:

• Having a single security gateway and a single management system for

multiple technologies (combination of Architecture B and C)
• Having a single security gateway, a single management system and a single
HNB/HeNB gateway for multiple technologies (combination of Architecture B,
C and D)

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 9
4. Multi technology synergies: radio resource management
(RRM)

4.1 Need for multi-technology RRM

The next generation mobile wireless communication services are envisioned to be

supported by heterogeneous networks, often labeled HetNets, accommodating a
variety of Radio Access Technologies (RATs), as shown in Figure 4-1. Most of the
existing radio resource management (RRM) strategies and algorithms are RAT-specific
and they are implemented separately for given access networks. Heterogeneous
networks require efficient use of multi-technology RRM strategies to optimally
coordinate and manage radio resources among multiplicity of RATs.

Multi-technology radio resource management (multi-RAT RRM) functions constitute

assignment, control and sharing of radio resources among the users across such
multi-standard HetNet. The placement, design and the distribution of multi-technology
RRM strategies are highly dependent on the integration, harmonization, and
optimization of the following multi-level network architectures and services:

• Multi-access technology: 4G, 3G (UMTS/HSPA), GPRS/EDGE, and WLAN

• Multi-layer topology: macro cell, metro cell, and small cell
• Multi-band spectrum: regional and global spectrum fragmentation
• Multi-vendor RAN: interface for seamless interworking
• Multi-services: diverse and often conflicting QoS requirements for services

Figure 4-1 Use case of multi-RAT RRM in a multi-standard HeNet.

Figure 4-1 Multi-RAT RRM in a multi-standard HetNet

Overall multi-RAT RRM model should exploit the presence of the synergy between
multi-layer, multi-band, multi-vendor, multi-technology, and multi-service diversity in
a HetNet environment.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 10
4.2 Multi-RAT RRM benefits

A key aspect of heterogeneous systems is the implementation of efficient joint radio

resource management mechanisms through the coexistence of a variety of radio
access technologies with different, but also complementary, technical characteristics
and performance.

Multi-RAT RRM is expected to bring benefits in heterogeneous networks. Some of the

key benefits include:

• Multi-RAT RRM methods can outperform existing local-based RRM methods in

terms of call blocking probability and capacity gains, in both real-time and
non-real time services [7].
• Multi-RAT RRM can provide improved scalability and efficiencies for operators
depending on planned implementation or topology approach [8].
• Multi-RAT RRM can provide improved load balancing and interference
mitigation [9].

4.3 Multi-RAT RRM functions and procedures

The ultimate multi-technology RRM objective is to satisfy the QoS requirements of the
individual radio bearers and to optimize the pool of available radio resources among a
variety of the multi-access technologies at the smallest possible cost for the network.
The trends in next-gen wireless network evolution indicate a desire to integrate a
variety of wireless access technologies for an ‘always best connected’ environment for
mobile users. This can be accomplished through efficient use of resources (for new
and existing users) through achieving the best QoS by minimizing call blocking,
dropped call rates and handover failures and maximizing overall network performance,
capacity and coverage at the minimum cost to the operators.

Multi-technology RRM functionalities can be split into the following three procedures,
as shown in Figure 4-2:

• Measurement, monitoring, and reporting

• Multi-RAT RRM functionalities, strategies, and algorithms
• Decision making and execution

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 11
Figure 4-2 Multi-RAT RRM functionalities and procedures

Examining the RRM functions shows that a high degree of common information is
shared by each RRM function across multi-RAT access points. In particular, a good
portion of measurements, reporting, and monitoring pool of resource procedures is
RAT agnostic. Note that, in multi-RAT RRM the decision enforcement procedure may
result in triggering other RRM functionalities. For example, handling the task of
uneven distribution (load balancing) of the traffic load over multiple inter-frequency
and inter-RAT cells can lead to handover and/or cell reselection decisions. Figure 4-3
illustrates the main functions and procedures of a multi-RAT RRM.

Although from the topology point of view, multi-RAT SON and multi-RAT RRM
implementation models might have a seemingly similar topologies in a HetNet, SON
functionality is more to do with the ‘self-’ configuration, optimization and maintenance
aspects of multi-cell/multi-RAT networks.

4.4 Multi-RAT RRM challenges

Efficient implementation of multi-RAT RRM strategies within multi-standard networks

is vital for a proper operation of a HetNet. The utmost challenge is to provide the
desired QoS level with the minimum resources, minimizing operators’ investment
while meeting the network design requirements. Some of the key challenges for the
management and coordination of radio resources in a multi-standard HetNet
environment are:

• Every RAT is based on a specific multiple access mechanism (e.g., WCDMA,

OFDMA, Wi-Fi).
• Multi-RAT network traffic may exhibit significant spatial and temporal
variations over different cells, and unless suitable load balancing techniques

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 12
 are considered, it could result in underutilization or overutilization of radio
resources at certain cells.
• Joint optimization across multi-RAT networks of functionalities related to
layer balancing, interference management, link adaptation, and dynamic
scheduling.
• Local RAT-specific RRM mechanisms are needed for every RAT used in the
network (e.g., RRM-eUTRAN).
• Multi-RAT RRM entities are required to control and manage a pool of radio
resources that belong to multiplicity of RATs available at various layers in a
multi-standard HetNet.
• Intelligent management of service delays due to possible increase in signaling
overhead in multi-RAT small cell networks.
• Measurements and information reports exchanged between technologies
(intra and inter-RAT access-points) need to be well defined.
• A Unified approach is needed for multi-RAT RRM performance, verification,
testing, and optimization.

4.5 Multi-RAT RRM interaction model and dependencies

4.5.1 Multi-RAT RRM interaction model

One possible architecture for efficient multi-RAT RRM is a two-tier RRM architecture
similar to that shown in Figure 4-3.

Local RRM: this RRM entity physically resides within each access point (AP) or User
equipment (UE). It manages, allocates, and de-allocates RAT-specific radio resources
for the given radio technology network [10].

Multi-RAT RRM: this common RAT or controlling RRM entity has the knowledge of the
overall radio resource pool, and is responsible for efficient management of multiple
local RRM entities as well as exchanging information reporting with other multi-RAT
RRMs

Figure 4-3 Multi-RAT RRM architecture

Based on the degree of interaction between local RRM and multi-RAM entities, the
following functions can be performed by either local RRM or multi-RAT RRM entities:

1. Information reporting and exchanging function:

a. Static cell information: QoS, cell relations, capabilities, priorities,

capacities, buffer delay, buffer size, maximum bit rate for a given
service, policies, etc.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 13
 b. Dynamic cell information: TX power, RX power, layer load, and
interference measurements

2. Decision making function:

a. Multi-RRM centred decision-making: Multi-RRM entity makes decision

and informs local RRM to execute those decisions.
b. Local RRM centred decision-making: Final decisions are made by the
local RRM entities. Multi-RRMs only advise local RRMs.

In general, the multi-RAT RRM and the local RRM will work in a hierarchical manner,
where the resources managed by the local RRM will depend on the assignments
performed by the multi-RAT RRM, which will depend on feedback information coming
from the local RRM and external policies.

The level of granularity of local RRM, which typically contains the scheduler, will be
usually smaller than the multi-RAT RRM. For example, LTE and LTE-A can define
scheduling decisions in the order of 1ms (TTI) that is more appropriate to be
implemented in local RRMs. Multi-RAT RRM is typically operational in seconds or
minutes granularity.

The use of a multi-RAT RRM as a central entity could only be required and used when
the local RRM entities are not able to further fulfil the network and user requirements.

4.5.2 Multi-RAT RRM dependencies

Most of the interactions between local RRMs and multi-RAT RRMs are on the low or
intermediate time-scale levels. This allows the multi-RAT RRM entity to perform
functions such as RAT selection, vertical handover (inter-RAT), admission control, and
congestion control functions. A higher degree of interaction between local RRM and
multi-RAT RRM entities can achieve more efficient resource management. However, it
requires more frequent interactions between these entities, which may lead to a
higher amount of signalling overhead.

The interaction between the local RRM and multi-RAT RRM is not directly related to the
coupling topologies between radio access networks. Nevertheless, for frequent local
RRM and multi-RAT RRM interactions, tight coupling topologies are required in order to
reduce the delays in communications between levels of hierarchies. Various degrees of
coupling between multi-RAT RRM and local RRM entities in terms of short/long-term
time scales ranging from less than 1ms (e.g., inner loop power control in WCDMA) to
thousands of frames (e.g., admission control, Handover or outer loop power control)
can occur. In general, the more frequent interactions between multi-RAT RRM and
local RRM, the tighter the coupling architectures are required, as illustrated in Figure
4-4. The lowest degree of interaction occurs when the multi-RAT RRM is only
responsible for dictating operator’s policy enforcement as various configurations for
lower local RRM functions.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 14
Figure 4-4 Interaction between multi-RAT RRM and local RRM entities

4.6 Multi-technology RRM implementation models and topologies

From the implementation point of view and coupling architectures, the simplest
solution for heterogeneous networks integration is the so-called ‘loose coupling’
architecture. In this implementation, different networks are connected together
through gateways, while still maintaining their independence. In general, a number of
possible configurations can be considered for multi-RAT RRM implementations:

• Centralized RRM

• Resides in a small number of (network and/or domain management)

locations such as OAM, NMS, EMS, GW, controller, servers.
• More control for the operators
• Less scalable
• Slower reaction, potentially less accurate

• Distributed RRM

• Resides in many locations.

• Algorithms are executed at the network elements (e.g., eNB, HeNB,
APC).
• Offer less control for the operator.
• More scalable

• Localized RRM

• Distributed but autonomous

• No control for the operators
• Decisions are made totally autonomously
• Most scalable option

• Hybrid RRM

• Some RRM resides in the operation and maintenance (OAM) servers and
some on network management (that is, in eNB).

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 15
 • Operator can move to the distributed option as they become more
confident about multi-vendor Interoperability.

In general, distributed or hybrid approaches are favoured since they enable lower
delay, less signalling, and lower cost, even though they risk losing some performance
gains compared to their centralized counterparts.

The Multi-RAT RRM topologies can be, possibly, split into the following models based
on the implementation constraints and the use cases as shown in Error! Reference
source not found.:

1. Integrated single access point (AP): Localized, AP centric

2. Integrated multi-access point: Single tier, distributed, AP centric
3. Server-based multi-access point: Multi-tier, centralized, server/cloud/network
centric
4. Integrated UE-based: UE centric, centralized
5. Hybrid multi-RRM: Hierarchical/distributed

Use
Multi-RAT RRM
Case Description Implications
implementation models
#
• Integrated single • Localized • No new interface/standard is
access point multi-RRM required within the APs
• Cell or AP centric • All multi- • Decision processes are made
technology locally
stacks are in • New interfaces may be required
1
the same for information reposting across
access point APs (inter-RAT)
• Dynamic RRM handling, requiring
frequent signal exchanges

• Integrated multi- • Distributed • New interfaces may be required

access point multi-RRM • The existing I/F may not be
• Single horizontal tier • Local multi- adequate:
RRM RRMs with • eUTRAN: X2, S1
• Cell or AP centric peer-to-peer • UTRAN: Iuh, Iub, Iur, Iuhr
communicati • WLAN: IuWLAN, CAPWAP,
on ANDSF, ANQP, IFOM
2
• Multi- • Standardized Itf-N/Itf-S (3GPP
technology type 1/2 OAM)
stacks are in • Dynamic RRM handling, requiring
multiple frequent signal exchanges
access points
• No enterprise
controller
• Server based multi- • Centralized • Same as case 2
access point (multi- multi-RRM • Signalling delays
RRM controller) • Enterprise • Suited for long-term RRM
• Multi-tier RRM controller functions (overall network load
3 • Network/server/cloud • Cloud balancing)
centric controller • Additional cost
• Server/cloud • Intra/inter-AP Communication
based
management

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 16
Use
Multi-RAT RRM
Case Description Implications
implementation models
#
• Integrated multi-RRM • Centralized • Same as case 1
• UE Based RRM Multi-RRM • UE-centric RRM assigns
4 • UE centric • Localized resources to users first
RRM in UE • Bottom-up
and AP
• Hybrid (hierarchical) • Hybrid Multi- • Same as cases 2 and 3
RRM RRM • Trade-off between integrated
and server-based multi-RAT RRM
5 • Top-down RAN global
optimization
• System-centric RRM

Table 4-1 Various Multi-RAT RRM models and associated use cases

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 17
4.6.1 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: single access point

In an integrated multi-RAT RRM single access point, the execution of the multi-RRM
functions can be performed locally between various RATs rather than through multiple
APs or CNs. In this topology, no additional delays will be incurred. Since the RRM
decision processes between RATs are co-located within the same physical entities, the
support functions do not need to be standardized and no new open interfaces need to
be defined. The entire RRM process is a cell or a single access point (AP) centric
(intra-AP communication). See Figure 4-5 for an integrated multi-RAT RRM topology.

Figure 4-5 Single access point – Integrated multi-RAT RRM topology

4.6.2 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: multi-access point

In this topology, an integrated multi-RAT RRM functionality may be included in each

AP or only in some of the APs. This means that the intra-AP RRM decision processes
are performed locally in the same physical entities. However, in this case, the
reporting information functions and interfaces between different multi-RRMs (inter-
RAT) entities must be standardized.

Figure 4-6 shows various possible scenarios for an integrated multi-RAT RRM across
inter-RAT APs. In scenario (a), the reporting information between intra-RAT can be
communicated through standard interfaces such as X2, Iur. In the case of inter-RAT
RRMs such as UTRAN and GERAN, the communication between BSC and radio network
controller (RNC) NC can be performed through the MSC of the core network. One the
other hand, in the case (b), where multi-RRM entities are not included in some of the
access points, either new interfaces need to be defined or the communication between
the multi-RRMs should be performed through the core network, using the existing
interfaces that are defined in the 3GPP standards (e.g., S1,Iu, Iuh, Iur-g, Gb). Finally,
in the case (c), a combination of an integrated inter-RAT RRM in a single AP and
another inter-RAT in another AP is shown. Note that the dashed-line interface
connections may or may not exist. In case that the dashed interfaces are missing the
communications between APs are performed through the core network (or using a
cloud RAN).

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 18
Figure 4-6 Multiple access point – integrated Multi-RRM Topologies, (a) integrated multi-RAT
RRM in each intra-RAT AP, (b) integrated multi-RAT RRM in some APs, and (c)
integrated intra-RAT in Single AP with integrated multi-RAT RRM in some APs.

4.6.3 Server/cloud-based multi-RAT RRM: multi-access point

In a server-based multi-RAT RRM topology, a server may reside in the core network.
The server-based multi-RAT RRM is centralized and common to multiple technologies

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 19
(eUTRAN, UTRAN, GERAN, WLAN), as shown in Figure 4-7. Multi-RAT RRMs and local
RRMs are located in different physical nodes and are inter-connected from the server
towards the access points through a set of defined (open) interfaces. Since the multi-
RRMs can collect the information from all available RATs, layers and nodes, they can
provide a more optimal decision in cases of call admission control or inter-system
handover.

Figure 4-7 Multiple access point – server/cloud-based multi-RAT RRM topology

4.6.4 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: UE-based

This topology allows a greater part of the RRM decisions to be assigned to the UE
including making the RAT selection decisions. User-centric RRM typically assigns
resources to users first and then to radio ports. This approach requires more
computation and power consumption from the UE, in addition to information from the
RAN and core network. Figure 4-8 illustrates a UE-centric multi-RAT RRM topology.

Figure 4-8 Integrated multi-RAT RRM: UE-based scenario

4.6.5 Hierarchical multi-tier architecture

A generic (canonical) topology for a multi-RAT RRM can consist of a hierarchical-mesh

topology. The multi-tier RRM can be distributed at UEs, access points, and/or core
networks. In general, the upper layers control and coordinate a number of lower
layers. This topology is in effect a trade-off between the centralized and distributed
topologies.

The advantage of having a hierarchical RRM is that it allows the lower-level entities in
the hierarchy to perform and communicate the RRM decisions faster and with less
overhead than in a scheme that only depends on a central RRM entity. However, in
the case of low network load or low number of local RRM entities, the use of multi-RAT
RRM can be avoided if the local RRMs are available and capable of managing the

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 20
resources autonomously. The concept of a multi-technology RRM model based on a
multi-tier RRM architecture is shown in Figure 4-9.

Figure 4-9 Generic multi-radio access technology - RRM topology

Another scenario in a multi-tier hierarchical topology could be in the case where

operators A and B are sharing the spectrum in a given region [11]. This allows
operators to access underutilized spectrum on a shared basis, without interfering with
incumbent spectrum holders. This proposed authorized shared access (ASA) can
potentially unlock hundreds of MHz of high-quality spectrum suitable for (LTE) small
cell deployment. In this case, an entity(s) will be in charge of coordinating and
managing the spectrum sharing between the different operators, as shown in Figure
4-10. The speed at which the spectrum is dynamically shared between operators will
be slower than for the multi-RAT RRM and local RRM.

Figure 4-10 Multi-tier hierarchical inter-operator RRM topology

4.7 Conclusion

Multi-RAT RRM can bring significant benefits in the heterogeneous network including
load balancing, reduced interference distribution, minimized unnecessary handovers,

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 21
and lower probability of call dropping/blocking in both licensed and unlicensed
spectrum.

Depending on the topology and the coupling interaction between local RRM and multi-
RAT RRM, the amount of signaling overhead may increase. To this point, trade-offs
between multi-RAT RRM architecture, performance, strategies and signaling overhead
are required to find the optimum solution.

Although the Multi-RAT RRM algorithms do not need to be standardized, the issue of
the interoperability between multi-vendors and multi-RAT RANs could be addressed
through a set of defined (open) interfaces for a full deployment of always best connect
future networks.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 22
5 Multi technology synergies: traffic offload

5.1 Traffic offload techniques

5.1.1 Multi-mode small cell: offload vehicle

Small cells in the form of femtocells, picocells, or microcells are strategically placed to
offer data offload from the existing macro network and provide coverage and capacity
improvement.

Multi-technology small cells could enable traffic offload with effective resource
handling, and load balance across multiple accesses.

Multi-technology small cells offer additional use cases for traffic offload and traffic
steering: case in point, use of 3G for voice calls, prioritizing of traffic for premium
services/users.

5.1.2 Offload in the radio access network

Local IP access (namely, LIPA) enables an UE connected via a small cell to access
other IP-capable devices in the same residential/enterprise IP network without the
user plane traversing the mobile operator’s network except the small cell subsystem.
The local IP Access is achieved using a local GW (L-GW) collocated with the small cell.

The enterprise small cell network architecture, that includes an optional enterprise
small cell gateway (E-SCG) for enabling offload of enterprise traffic directly onto the
Intranet, is described in details in [12]. The E-SCG incorporates the 3GPP defined
local GW (L-GW) functionality.

For multi-technology small cells, a single instance of E-SCG can offer LIPA functionality
for both 3G and 4G technologies. Figure 5-1 shows an example LIPA for multi-mode
small cells.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 23
Figure 5-1 Local data offload (LIPA) at multi-mode ESCC/ESCG

5.1.3 Offload through 3G and 4G network gateways

Selected IP traffic offload (namely, SIPTO) functionality allows an IP capable UE to

connect to the Internet without having to traverse the mobile network operator’s core
network. That is, SIPTO offloads traffic at (or above) the RAN, including at small cells.
One option for traffic offload above the RAN is by using Traffic offload gateways, which
can be deployed closer to the RAN.

Network offload gateways provide a managed traffic offload option for operators that
use the principle of offloading heaviest traffic before it reaches the core network.

For Multi-technology small cells, a single instance of network offload gateway can offer
SIPTO functionality for both 3G and 4G technologies. This mechanism can be offered
as an edge functionality to deliver capability as value-add to gateways deployed at the
edge of the network. As we review the multi-mode network architecture, this offload
function can be at the common small cell GW for 3G/LTE enabling traffic offload.

Note: For more insight into L-GW and SIPTO capabilities refer to Error!
Reference source not found..

5.2 Counting the benefits

Traffic offload in multi-technology small cell provides following benefits:

• Operator benefits:

• Reducing cost structure by decreasing the core network loading. This is

achieved via 3G and 4G Traffic offload gateway (e.g., SIPTO) and
combined L-GW for LIPA at small cell gateway.
• Capacity increase and load balancing across available resources. This is
achieved indirectly via optimal utilization of both 3G and 4G access and
core networks.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 24
 • User benefits:

• Greater service functionality achieved by providing both 3G and 4G

access and allowing operators to deploy different services on 3G and 4G.

• Operator and user benefits:

• Segregate 3G and LTE to offer varying grades of service or user types.

• Tiered admission control and resource management

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 25
6. Summary

This paper explores possible technology synergies that could serve as integrated
solutions for future multi-technology small cell deployments. This includes feasible
multi-technology small cell architectures and their pros and cons in terms of
optimization of product integration and signalling, system robustness, security,
flexibility and scalability for future upgrade, and networks saving in CAPEX and OPEX.
Trade-offs between multi-RAT RRM architecture, performance, strategies and
signalling overhead are required to find the optimum multi-RAT RRM solution for
future multi-technology small cell networks. The integrated multi-RAT radio resource
management solution, highlighted in this paper, could be proposed for future multi-
technology small cell deployments. Nonetheless, any foreseen benefits to the use of
this solution in terms of load balancing, interference mitigation, or possible reduction
in signalling overhead, etc., shall be evaluated based on individual operator’s
deployment use cases and offered services. In terms of traffic offload, the paper
proposes possible multi-technology small cells deployments that enable traffic offload
with effective resource handling, optimal mobility and load balancing capability across
multiple access networks.

In summary, going forward, multi-technology small cells will represent an important

opportunity for mobile operators to meet the skyrocketing mobile data traffic
demands. Having said that, the mobile industry will need to overcome formidable
challenges before this next generation of small cells becomes a reality. To this end,
the next release of this paper plans to cover in details any remaining multi-technology
small cell networks challenges that are related to suitable hardware designs of small
cell equipment that enable the use of multi-RAT technologies in a single product (small
cell unit). Also, the challenge of providing scalable software solutions that can serve in
multiple products. More importantly, finding suitable backhaul solutions that can meet
the operational requirements of multi-technology small cell networks; and finally,
solving the mobility challenge between different radio networks.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 26
References
1 [SCF062] ‘The Business Case for Enterprise Small Cells’, Small Cell Forum, Dec.
2013.
2 3GPP TS 36.300: ‘Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA) and
Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN); Overall
description’, Stage 2.
3 3GPP TR 23.830:’Architecture aspects of Home NodeB and Home eNodeB’
4 ‘HeNB (LTE Femto) Network Architecture’, The Femto Forum, May 2011.
5 [SCF069] ‘Enterprise and Multi-Operator Small Cells’, Small Cell Forum.
6 Broadband Forum TR-196, ‘Femto Access Point Service Data Model’.
7 M. Coupechoux, et al, ‘Network Controlled Joint Resource Management for
Heterogeneous Networks, IEEE Vehicular Tech. Conf, Singapore, May 2008.
8 S. Vandris, K. U. Killiches, ‘Power Optimization in Wireless Heterogeneous
Networks’. Available online:
http://www.lsi.com/downloads/Public/Communication%20Processors/Axxia%20C
ommunication%20Processor/LSI_WP_Optimizing_HetNet.pdf
9 G. Piao, ‘Radio Resource Management for Integrated Services in Multi-radio
Access Networks’. Available online: http://www.uni-
kassel.de/upress/online/frei/978-3-89958-269-7.volltext.frei.pdf
10 Jordi Perez-Romero, Oriol Sallent, Ramon Agusti and Miguel Angel Dıaz-Guerra,
Radio Resource Management Strategies in UMTS, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2005.
11 Ian F. Akyildiz, David M. Gutierrez-Estevez and Elias Chavarria Reyes, ‘The
evolution to 4G cellular systems: LTE-Advanced,’ Physical Communications Vol. 3,
Issue 4, Dec. 2010.
12 [SCF067] ‘Enterprise Small Cell Architecture’, Small Cell Forum.

Report title: Multi technology (3G and LTE) small cells

Issue date: 01 December 2013
Version: 073.05.01 27