Mikael Prytz, Olof Lundström Ericsson Research, Wireless Access Networks

EIC 2005 - Ericsson Mikael Prytz2005-02-17 1

Soon, you can do whatever you want, wherever you want

Ericsson and KTH turn Mobile Internet up-side-down

Mikael Prytz, Olof Lundström

Ericsson Research, Wireless Access Networks

Klas Johansson, Miguel Berg, Johan Hultell, Jan Markendahl, KTH

Jonas Lind and Niklas Kviselius, SSE


Mobile Communication Systems

mobile phone, laptop

wireless (mobile) link

base station (BS)

fixed transmission link

terribly complicated magical box

other networks,e.g., Internetservice area = Aservice


Cost of Mobile Systems

• cost(total) Nuser*cost( ) + cost(system)

• cost(system) NBS *(cost( ) + cost( to BS)) + other( )

NBS

Wuser = average user capacity to produce service

Wsystem = maximum capacity per base station

Rmax = maximum base station cell radius

system

useruserservice

W

WN

R

A,max

2max

Note: cost = PV(CAPEX) + PV(OPEX)


Future Growth – The Cost Barrier

• Wuser likely grows 10-100’fold for future mobile services

=> NBS increases

=> cost(system) increases

• Who pays for all the fun? Ultimately the end users.Issue: ARPU(future) ARPU(now) (Average Revenue Per User)

=> lower the cost of infrastructure


Actors in Today’s Mobile Networks

• End users

• Operators– integrated scope: mobile services, mobility, wireless connectivity– wide area coverage (national, multi-national, c.f., Vodafone)

• Regulators


• Observation: Fixed broadband access penetration in homes, small businesses, building societies, etc. is high

Local Access Points (LAP) Integrated in Mobile Networks:– end users deploy small base stations, Local Access Points (LAP)– LAPs are connected to the existing fixed broadband connections– other operator subscribers are allowed to use the LAPs

• LAPs give mobile network operators extra capacity at low cost for less critical services in densely populated areas

Research Concept: Local Access Points (LAP) Integrated in Mobile Networks


LAP Deployment

Residential area

Business district

LAP

Macro BS

Micro BS

Micro BS Micro BS

LAP

LAP


LAP Network Architecture

Business district

Residential area

Micro BS

Micro BS

Micro BS

LAP

LAP

LAP

Internet

Macro BS

Core network

LAP-C

LAP-C


LAP Technical Features

• LAP cheap, simple to use black box– zero-configuration– automatic integration into operator network on installation– supports multiple radio access technologies (e.g., 3G, WLAN)

• end users supply power and space for the LAP• no or very low quality-of-service guarantees• partly autonomous, but controlled by operator network:

– authentication, authorization, accounting– mobility management– charging schemes


OK, but...

• LAPs turn end users into operators, or...?– What are the new business roles/actors here?

• Is there a business case for operators and end users?• Incentives and guarantees for end users to let other users

in on the private broadband access?• Is it secure?

– for end users deploying LAP– for other users using LAP– for operator

• OPEX costs, power, space?


Business Issues

• Role of end user deploying LAP in relation to operator– One possible model: Network Franchising

Operator is franchiser, end user is franchisee

• Value proposition for mobile operators– increased capacity, but no control of where it appears

• Value/Incentives for end users – kickback– lower tariffs when other user’s traffic go through the LAP– Bundled service offerings:

LAP + WLAN access + broadband access + free mobile access when connected through LAP + ...

• Role of / value to broadband provider (are LAPs allowed?)


Open Issues – Opportunities for Innovation

• complete business case for all actors to be verified– which scenarios / settings?

– ”what’s in it for me?”

• potential market size?• other business models than network franchising?• other, competing solutions that would obviate the LAP concept• quantified examples on incentives for end users, service bundles, etc.

– how big incentive for end user? (assuming today’s expenditures on broadband (€30-40/month) and mobile services (€30-40/month))

• technical challenges (for the brave at heart):– mechanisms for spectrum management (interference control)

– mechanisms for network monitoring


LAP Concept – Status

• concept investigated from both technical and business perspectives, see references– qualitative and quantitative– cost savings analyzed

• no detailed specifications of mechanisms• no prototype or demonstrator


Research Projects

• Low Cost Infrastructure– project within Affordable Wireless Services Initiative– Partners: KTH, SSE (Handels), Ericsson– Financing: SSF, KTH, SSE, Ericsson

• Ambient Networks– European Union IST 6th Framework Programme– Partners: KTH, Ericsson– Financing: EU, Ericsson


Selected References

• “Framtidens mobilnät kan byggas à la Ikea”, artikel i Ny Teknik, 040123.

• K. Johansson, A. Furuskär, P. Karlsson, and J. Zander, “Relation between base station characteristics and cost structure in cellular systems”, Proc. IEEE PIMRC, Barcelona, 2004.

• K. Johansson, M. Berg, J. Hultell, J. Markendahl, J. Lind, N. Kviselius, and M. Prytz, “Integrating User Deployed Local Access Points in a Mobile Operator’s Network,” Proc. WWRF#12, Toronto, 2004.

• F. Loizillon et al., ”Final results on seamless mobile IP service provision economics”, IST-2000-25172 TONIC Deliverable number 11, Oct. 2002.

• N. Niebert et al., ”Ambient Networks: An Architecture For Communication Networks Beyond 3G”, IEEE Wireless Communications, April 2004.

Mikael Prytz, Olof Lundström Ericsson Research, Wireless Access Networks

Documents

Transcript of Mikael Prytz, Olof Lundström Ericsson Research, Wireless Access Networks