- 1 - POSITIONING EDGE IN THE MOBILE NETWORK EVOLUTION TIK Research Seminar on Telecommunications Business II

- 2 - GSM evolution towards 3G Introduction to GSM EDGE (Rel’99) EDGE performance in theory GERAN Rel’5 EDGE services EDGE investments for an operator EDGE network planning EDGE performance in real life networks What is the future of GSM EDGE? Conclusions Positioning EDGE in the mobile network evolution

- 3 - GSM Evolution paths towards 3G GSM 9.6kbps UMTS <2Mbps HSCSD 57.6kbps GPRS 115kbps EDGE 384kbps

- 4 - What is GSM EDGE ? EDGE = Enhanced Datarates for GSM Evolution –GSM2+ specification accepted 3G standard by 3GPP and ITU –GSM/EDGE RAN = GERAN –GERAN Rel’5: In the future common 3G core with same I u - interfaces for multiradio GSM/EDGE/WCDMA RAN Improved GSM air-interface performance –8-PSK modulation method –New modulation & coding schemes (1-9) –Incremental Redundancy (IR) –Link Adaptation (LA) Enhancements –In the near future: AMR

- 5 - Assuming CS1&2 Average C/I from tested networks (-> 11,5 kbps/TS) BCCH re-use 12 TCH re-use 3 EDGE performance in theory (1) Spectral efficiency Kbps / MHz GPRS Assuming MCS5-8 Average C/I from tested networks (-> 34,2 kbps/TS) BCCH re-use 12 TCH re-use 3 EDGE Assuming Max load of 75% Orthgonality of 0,6 15% of DL power to CCCHs Frequency re-use efficiency of 60% WCDMA

- 6 - EDGE performance in theory (2) In theory EDGE offers 3-4 x higher data bit rates for end-users than GPRS Improved voice capacity via enhanced data capabilities (+ later AMR) Average x C/I Kbps/ TS E-GPRS GPRS CS

- 7 - Incremental redundancy –Incremental Redundancy gives additional 2-3 dB to radio link –IR adjusts the code rate of the transmission to true channel conditions with incremental transmissions of the redundant information until the decoding is successful –Utilises ARQ protocol Link Adaptation –Link Adaptation is used to select the best MCS for the radio link conditions –LA algorithms compare the estimated channel quality to threshold values -> optimised throughput –In EDGE LA works more effectively than in GPRS, because of IR gives better re-transmission performance EDGE performance in theory (3)

- 8 - GERAN Rel’5 Goals Performance enhancements for existing services. Adoption of the UMTS Iu interface and UMTS quality of service (QoS) architecture –Enable GERAN to the same 3G CN (core network) as UTRAN –Enable GERAN to provide the same set of services as UTRAN –Support for conversational and streaming service classes as defined for WCDMA  First steps towards efficient resource optimizations in multi-radio networks  Making the radio technology invisible to the end-user, while allowing operators to efficiently manage the available spectrum.  Significant modifications to the existing GERAN radio protocols –increases the complexity of radio interface protocols.

- 9 - GERAN Rel’5 Features Enhancements for speech and data services: –Iu interface (GERAN can be directly connected to IMS) –Header adaptation mechanism (RTP/UDP/IP) –Wideband AMR (quality) –Half-rate 8-PSK (capacity) –Fast power control for speech –Location service enhancements for Gb and Iu –Network assisted cell change (NACC) Rel´5 supports –A true multi-vendor environment –Backward compatibility (support of services for Release 99 terminals)

GERAN Rel’5 Architecture BSS RNC Um GERAN UTRAN BSC BTS GSM/WCDMA Core Network MS Iur-g A Gb Iu Iur-g (Halonen et al 2002)

Network elements of combined UMTS and GSM EDGE networks IP Network HLR MSC/VLR SGSN RNC BTS PSTN GGSN UTRAN Network Subsystem GPRS-backbone BTS EDGE BS BSCBTS GPRS/EDGERadio Network Core Network UMTS Radio Network

EDGE Services (1) QoS classes for UMTS and EDGE Rel´5 No significant changes in achievable services before GERAN Rel’5 -> Iu interface and UMTS QoS classes

EDGE Services (2) Service QoS Requirements for Bearers, Data rates and Services 2003 [Auramo 2002]

Latin America: Will eventually follow US. US+Canada: EDGE roll-outs on the way and EDGE will be deployed during 2003 APAC: Market follows global trends. “Ongoing technology standard war”. Also public commitments to EDGE China: Political commitments to every technology. No rush to 3G. No public EDGE commitments yet Europe: WCDMA technology commitment. Strong need for delaying UMTS roll-outs Growing interest towards EDGE, but no public commitments yet. Global EDGE Status

EDGE from network investments point of view (1) European 3G -market could be divided as follows: In the current market situation Operators have to decide how to divide their network investments between WCDMA and EDGE 2H20021H20032H20031H2004 2H “Early WCDMA” markets “Early EDGE” markets “WCDMA follower” markets “Complimentary WCDMA & EDGE” markets Heavily influenced by the UMTS delays and availability of EDGE/UMTS terminals

EDGE from network investments point of view (2) What’s required to go for EDGE? GSM BS Depending on the age and manufacturer of the GSM BS: EDGE TRX:s must be introduced EDGE BSS/NSS software acquired Possible baseband units obtained In worst case new EDGE compatible BS:s introduced Transmission What’s required to go for WCDMA? A complete Radio Access Network… and possible updates to GPRS core + transmission

EDGE from network investments point of view (3) Compared to WCDMA the investments in EDGE are smaller for an operator with moderate traffic growth The feasibility of EDGE depends on the amount of traffic : With moderate traffic, EDGE is clearly more cost efficient With higher traffic WCDMA becomes more feasible network CAPEX Traffic ~1 Mbps* per base station Traffic ~2 Mbps** per base station EDGE WCDMA * Equals approx GPRS thrput ** Equals approx WCDMA thrput (2,4Mbps)

Total CAPEX, EDGE vs WCDMA EDGE from network investments point of view (4) Traffic (kbps/ site) WCDMA EDGE Point of equal CAPEX for both technologies to support the required traffic

The cheapest way to implement EDGE is to replace or add one (or several) GSM TRXs with EDGE TRXs in most feasible site locations. EDGE from network investments point of view (5) EDGE TRX CAPEX per site (k€) Traffic (kbps/ site) Only one EDGE TRX needed per site to support the required traffic The needed amount of EDGE TRXs increase as the required traffic grows Feasibility of replace strategy depends on the amount of EDGE capable BSs Replacing more than one TRX is more complex

When compared to investments needed for WCDMA to support the same amount of traffic per site… EDGE from network investments point of view (6) CAPEX per site (k€) Traffic (kbps/ site) WCDMA EDGE Assumed only EDGE TRX costs and total WCDMA site CAPEX Assumed total EDGE site CAPEX after more than one EDGE TRX must be implemented Significantly higher investments needed for WCDMA

Provide more cost-effective coverage in wide area WCDMA focus on urban areas and license requirements Minimal service differentitation between GSM and UMTS network -> services easier to plan EDGE as a stepping stone to UMTS EDGE and WCDMA co-exist but for different user segments EDGE as a complementary solution to WCDMA: Different Coverage areas EDGE to provide ”3G like” data services prior to large scale WCDMA deployment ”US style” mobile evolution Both WCDMA and EDGE deployed in cities and EDGE also elsewhere EDGE positioned clearly to different market segment than WCDMA: “GPRS enhancer” EDGE from network investments point of view (7) – investment strategies

As GPRS, EDGE performance is dependent on the achievable C/I (and RXlev) in the network EDGE from network planning perspective (1) The most effective means to gain this is to come up with a optimised frequency plan Propagation estimations Coverage Analysis Interference matrix co-channel adjacent channel Frequency plan Separation constraints TRX requirements Help from automation in large networks required

Example case from a live network, EDGE throughput measured based on network C/I and Rxlev: EDGE from network planning perspective (2) Frequency plan optimisation can make a significant difference for the achievable throughput 29,9 kbps 34,7 kbps Average throughput per TS over the network with “old” frequency plan Average throughput per TS over the network with optimised frequency plan

EDGE deployment doesn’t bring dramatical changes to radio network planning with GPRS Main concerns the allocation of capacity and steering of traffic to wanted layer/cell/TRX EDGE from network planning perspective (3) Features such as LA should be utilised optimally Upcoming 2G/2,5G/3G parameterisation challenges Changes to transmission capacity will be needed, if larger scale EDGE deployment per cell/area is done

The easiest way to implement EDGE from network planning point of view is the TRX replacing strategy new frequency plan not mandatory The replacing can be done for every 1-3 rd site EDGE from network planning perspective (4) E.g. hotspots or rural can be selected for EDGE, but limited amount of data throughput

EDGE from network planning perspective (5) Higher data amounts with EDGE can be offered if it is implemented by Bringing an additional EDGE TRX dedicated to data usage to (some of) the cells in the network Reserving more timeslots for the use of EDGE data users from the TRXs (-> decrease in the GoS experienced by the speech users ) In real life these actions are not always possible to perform and they will require significant amount more implementation and planning work In order to utilise EDGE performance in full, a totally new frequency plan and possibly new GSM cell structure are required

EDGE performance in live networks (2) Achievable EDGE throughput per TS versus GPRS (DL in kbit/s) Approx. 2,5 times higher throughput to end users European small/medium and larger size GSM networks

The future of EDGE Traffic growth UMTS timetable EDGE terminals Operator business cases EDGE capable infrastructure How has the GPRS traffic evolved in the network ? How does the GSM capacity respond to this ? Do we believe in short term mobile data take off ?

The future of EDGE Traffic growth UMTS timetable EDGE terminals Operator business cases EDGE capable infrastructure What is the operators strategic/ financial UMTS commitment ? Launch dates are postponed in Europe How ready is the UMTS infrastructure ? Would EDGE offer competitive advantage before UMTS is widely deployed ? When to start utilising the enormous capacity of WCDMA ?

The future of EDGE Traffic growth UMTS timetable EDGE terminals Operator business cases EDGE capable infrastructure E2002 in US, but when in Europe ? Classical chicken-and- egg problem again Asian EDGE commitment will guarantee EDGE terminals to 900/1800 bands ? What is the vendors’ commitment and ability to take risks ? Multimode UMTS/EDGE terminals the best bet ?

The future of EDGE Traffic growth UMTS timetable EDGE terminals Operator business cases EDGE capable infrastructure When will the saturation point of current network technology be reached ? How should the network investments be planned for next 5 years ? Roll-out strategy for EDGE and UMTS Service strategy for EDGE and UMTS

The future of EDGE Traffic growth UMTS timetable EDGE terminals Operator business cases EDGE capable infrastructure What is the EDGE capability of current network infrastructure ? How is that capability spread over the network ? Capacity extensions done with EDGE HW ? Geographical swap ?

Conclusions EDGE would be the best network evolution for GSM operators on the road to UMTS (as in US) The needed investments are a lot smaller than in WCDMA Planning/deployment complexity is a fraction of that of WCDMA EDGE provides ~2,5 times the performance of GPRS and enables similar services than UMTS EDGE is been specified by the 3GPP to fully meet UMTS QoS in the future with Iu-interface + common 3G core network The feasibility of EDGE is network specific EDGE will live alongside of WCDMA, but who is ready to drive the market and set the role of EDGE in 3G field for the future? The scale of EDGE deployment is highly dependant on early UMTS success

Thank you!