ˆˇ˘ IN PROGRESS€¦ · lia. Tor may route my traffic through Germany, Sweden, and end up in Russia. You think I’m in Russia, and what it looks like to the website I’m visiting,

COVER IN PROGRESS

SDN AND NFV:PARTNERS IN TOMORROW’S INTELLIGENT WIRELESS

LANDSCAPE.

VO

LUM

E 2 • ISSUE 2 • JU

NE 2015

Visit

to select your booth todayand receive a

10% Early Bird Discount

for space secured before July 1, 2015!

www.natehome.com

Speed. Safety. Innovation.

Black & Veatch has shaped the telecommunications landscape for the last 50 years. Wireless carriers rely on Black & Veatch to support their macro network sites or specific coverage solutions, including DAS and Small Cells. No other company can offer the depth and breadth of engineering, program management, site acquisition, construction and technical expertise of Black & Veatch. That’s why Engineering News-Record has ranked us the #1 engineering company for telecommunications for the sixth consecutive year.

We’re building a world of difference. Together.

Consulting • Engineering • Construction • Operation I w w w.bv.com

Learn more at bv.com/telecom

DAS

Small Cells

15 AGL Magazine ad (DAS & Small Cells)_052615 v7.indd 1 5/26/15 12:04 PM

Visit

to select your booth todayand receive a

10% Early Bird Discount

for space secured before July 1, 2015!

www.natehome.com

2 aglmediagroup.com

AGL Media Group, LLCRichard P. Biby, P.E., CEO

Rick Heilbrunn, COO/CFO

Publisher/CEORichard P. Biby, P.E.

[email protected]

EditorErnest Worthman

[email protected]

Art DirectorBrian Parks

Riverworks Marketing Group423.710.3866

[email protected]

Copy EditorKim Potts

Sales ManagerMercy Contreras

[email protected]

Advertising CoordinatorKaren Clark

[email protected]

Circulation [email protected]

Press Releases and Advertising [email protected]

Corporate OfficeAGL Media Group, LLC.

201 Loudon St. S.E., Suite 301Leesburg, VA 20175

703.594.8500

Subscribe Onlineaglmediagroup.com/signup

Subscribe by MailAGL Small Cell Circulation Department

PO Box 2090Ashburn, VA 20146

Copyright ©2015. AGL Media Group LLC. All Rights Reserved.

3All Things Great but Smallsubscribe at aglmediagroup.com/subscribe/

CONTENTS

WHAT’S INSIDE

ON THE COVERSDN and NFV are not adversarial technologies and will integrate very well to take on network challenges in the future.

VOLUME 2 • ISSUE 2 • JUNE 2015

06 | Trending

08 | From the Editor

12 | Industry Insight

34 | ETC

36 | Going Forward

FEATURES14 | A New Approach for the Accurate

Measurement of 5G Cellular Networks The 5G wireless landscape is yet to be defined, but whatever the network

ends up looking like, the physics of the radio wave do not change. What does change is how they behave and propagate at different frequencies. Therefore, a new model for test and measurement of 5G networks is needed.

18 | A Look at the Difference Between SDN and NFV SDN and NFV are two disruptive technologies that will change the face of

future wireless networks. It is not an either-or scenario. These two tech-nologies are very complimentary and in this case, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

24 | The Smart Home Radio Protocols War There are many wireless protocols that can play in the smart home space.

Some are more established than others. It is always good to know which one does what.

30 | Key Considerations for Designing a Wireless Medical Device

Wireless medical devices answer to a higher order that puts life-safety and five-nines reliability at the top of the development tree. Therefore, the design paradigm for medical devices is unique, and they are a specialized case that requires divergent design expertise.

34

12

18

COLUMNS

4 AGL SMALL CELL MAGAZINE • JUNE 2015 aglmediagroup.com

AGL Small Cell Magazine (Above Ground Level) is published 4 times a year by AGL Media Group LLC., 201 Loudoun St. S.E., Suite 301, Leesburg, VA 20175. It is mailed free to qualified individuals in the United States of America.

POSTMASTER: Send address change to: AGL Media Group Circulation Department, 201 Loudoun St. S.E., Suite 301,Leesburg, VA 20175.

ADVERTISING INDEX

10 | AGL Conferences

05 | APCO

C4 | BICSI

33 | Bird

01 | Black & Veatch

17 | Black Box

15 | Charles Industries

02 | FeedingAmerica.org

23 | Huber + Suhner

32 | IWantToBeRecycled.org

C2 | National Association of Tower Erectors

22 | Red Cross

13 | Sabre Industries

28 | TheShelterProject.org

09 | Times Microwave Systems

27 | Tower & Small Cell Summit

C3 | Tower Family Foundation

*C2, C3 & C4 denote cover pages

Interested in advertising with AGL Media Group’s magazine,

website or e-newsletters or sponsoring AGL Regional Conferences?

Visit aglmediagroup.com/advertise for information.

The RF Experts

Monitor up to 16 channels simultaneously, with expansion units available to cover the largest systems.

Measures forward, re� ected and composite power as well as antenna system VSWR.

Con� gurable with multiple options for sensors and meters, purchase only what you need.

Easy remote connection using a built-in web server for setup and monitoring.

Bird Technologies®

www.birdrf.com 866.695.4569

Channel Power MonitorContinuous monitoring of communications base stationequipment of all types.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT

WWW.APCO2015.ORG

APCO GOES TOWASHINGTON

JOIN US IN THE NATION’S CAPITAL FOR APCO INTERNATIONAL’S 81ST ANNUAL CONFERENCE & EXPO | AUGUST 16-19 IN WASHINGTON, DC

AU G U S T 1 6 - 1 9 , 2 0 1 5 WA S H I N GT O N , DC

WHO?This must-attend conference hosts more than 5,000 attendees representing a wide range of organizations, including PSAPs, EMS, law enforcement, fire service, government agencies and service providers.

WHY?Education: Earn up to 15 CEUs from more than 100 professional development sessions.

Networking: Engage and unwind with industry peers at our special events featuring engaging speakers.

Exhibits: Visit the Expo, where more than 250 vendors showcase new products and services to meet your needs.

Involvement: Participate in PSAP tours, career advancement sessions, healthy living seminars and much more!

HOW?Registration opens on April 2 with early bird savings available until July 20. To learn more, visit www.apco2015.org.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

BEWARE, THE CLOUD IS COMINGLike it or not, public and private clouds are going to be the wave of the future. Cloud computing, along with mobility and ubiquitous broadband, is underpinning the creation of the connected society. And the numbers are starting to show the momentum.

Mobility and ubiquitous broadband are driving cloud computing, heralding a change in the way Information and Communications Technological (ICT) resources are being used. Cloud computing is an attractive proposition for consumers and businesses because of its efficiencies, ubiq-uity, and pay-per-use pricing models. Telecom operators have recognized it as a source of new revenues, with global investments in cloud services projected to be annually nearly US$130 billion by 2015. The explosive growth of mobile access into the cloud also plays strongly to operators’ strengths, especially with small cell deployments. Telecoms have the perfect platforms, i.e., existing network-based features and their expertise in managed services. Table 1 presents the business case for the cloud.

Going forward, telecom operators will have to consid-er cloud computing as an integral part of both business and deployment strategies, as they shift from selling communications services to servicing on-demand ICT capacities. Understanding the fluid cloud ecosystem, partnerships, and business models will be vital.

TRENDS IN THE SMALL CELL MARKETOf late, 2016 is now considered to be the year of the small cell, at least for the enterprise, and there are some mar-ket trends that tend to support that. In a recent market report commissioned by the Small Cell Forum, the over-all small cell market has shipped 10.2 million units, and expects that most of the small cell growth between now, and 2019 will come from the enterprise space.

Other promising signs include agreements being inked between major players such as ip.access and Amdocs to provide enterprise small cells on a large-scale basis. Cisco is reselling SpiderCloud’s small cells, to be deployed by Vodafone. And SpiderCloud Wireless is reported to be supplying 4G

TRENDINGsmall cell systems to Verizon Wireless business customers.

Technology advancements are ramping up. There are new models emerging such as converging in-building connectivity systems. Such in-building mobile solutions are seeing migra-tion from DAS to IP-based smart networks, using a controller that can “route” the traffic and perform the features of LTE-Ad-vanced. Such models are being supported by products such as Ericsson’s Radio Dot; Huawei’s LampSite; and small cell vendors such as SpiderCloud and Airvana. Some of those include native Wi-Fi integration and cellular connectivity.

Self-Optimizing Networks are starting to show up, al-beit still in the early stages. Two of the most basic aspects of SON are Physical Cell Identification and Automatic Neighbor Relations – essentially the abilities of a site to identify itself to the network and to determine the iden-tity of neighboring cells and what its relationship to them should be. Most of them are built on ANR and similar technologies. But watch for a concentrated effort to resolve the interoperability issues, which are the major stumbling blocks that are holding back full SON for the time being.

Technologies across multiple lines and bands are show-ing up. Alcaltel-Lucent is offering outdoor small cell lines with a new, particularly compact, line of metro cells that support LTE for up to 200 users, and a Wi-Fi option. Gal-tronics, has added quad-band antennas for DAS and small cell applications. They are being integrated in JCDecaux deployments. JCDecaux has a partnership with Vodafone to deploy small cells as street furniture. This is an extreme-ly attractive proposition for leveraging Wi-Fi in cities that want to expand public Wi-Fi offerings while smoothing the path for cellular small cell deployments.

SMALL CELLS AND CARSBMW, peiker acustic GmbH & Co., KG and Nash Tech-nologies GmbH are offering a “Vehicular Small Cell” in certain models of the BMW to deal with reception issues inside of vehicles. The use of platforms such as smart watches and phones, tablets, etc., are difficult to make work well in automobiles, which form strong shielding environments. So BMW is working to improve that by


COLUMNS

INTERACTLet’s talk Small Cell. Follow @AGLMAG on

Twitter to join the Conversation.

CONNECT WITH USTwitter.com/aglmag

Linkedin.com/company/agl-media-group

CONNECT WITH US:Plus.google.com/+Aglmediagroup

Aglmediagroup.com

integrating a femtocell in their vehicles (see Figure 1).This femtocell is built into the vehicle, and uses the

vehicle aerial connection to provide better reception to the mobile devices while greatly reducing the electro-magnetic radiation inside the vehicle.

The small cell will automatically connect all mobile devices inside the vehicle, including smart watches and other smart devices, to the vehicle aerial which will then send the signal out from there.

This design is expected to improve throughput across the network, improving web surfing and streaming vid-eo for passengers, and navigation or music streaming for the driver. It will also help preserve battery life on the mobile devices since the transmitted power will only have to travel a meter or two.

ENTERPRISES MOVING TO WI-FI ONLY NETWORKSWi-Fi’s evolving ability to do voice, video and data, is an alluring option for some enterprises, and they are turn-ing to wireless-only networks. This is a boon for IT, who no longer will have to deploy and maintain the dreaded spaghetti-mesh of wired networks. Thank 802.11ac’s large-capacity capabilities. Wi-Fi devices that are 802. 11ac-compliant can provide that extra bandwidth. And with Wave 2 coming out later this year, there will be even greater capacity available on such networks.

Following that, are two new 802 standards; 802.11ad and 802.11ax. The ad standard is designed to deploy in the 60 GHz band, where there is tremendous potential bandwidth, and the higher frequencies make containment much easier.

802.11ax promises 10+ Gbps of bandwidth deployed in the 5 GHz band. 802.11ax offers MIMO spatial streams, with each stream multiplexed with (orthogonal frequency division access) OFDA, at least initially. This technology increases spectral efficiency by 10 times. 802.11ax standard will improve Wi-Fi performance in environments with high numbers of users, such as enterprises and hotspots in public venues. It will do this by improved spectral efficiency, better interference management, and enhancements to underlying protocols such as medium access control (MAC) data communication.

YOU CAN RUN, BUT YOU CAN’T HIDEIn a move to make see-what-I-see (SWIS) the standard for video conferencing, video collaboration company Vidyo is partnering with smartglasses maker Vuzix to bring wearables-based videoconferencing and “see-what-I-see” technology to the enterprise (see Figure 2). Wear-ing such smartglasses, users can video conference from any location, anytime – mainly using small cell platforms.

This technology can be a boon to users in any number of field situations, assembly lines, combat, classrooms, vehicles, healthcare, retail, energy , etc., where the remote site can send what-I-see-is-what-you-get (WISWYG) video back to the base location.

In addition to the partnership announcement, Vidyo has released VidyoWorks application programing interfaces to application developers who want to integrate the technol-ogy into their applications for any smartglassess. That means this becomes an open platform much more likely to get adopted than the failed, proprietary Google Glass.

FIGURE 1. THE VEHICULAR SMALL CELL. COURTESY BMW.

FIGURE 2. VIDYO SMARTGLASSES. COURTESY VIDYO.


FROM THE EDITOR

We are still waiting to learn exactly how all the compo-nents of the IoT/E will come together, but there is little doubt that the small cell will be extricable interwoven on so many different levels. That means small cell players need to get involved in all aspects of small cell design, especially security. While much of this doesn’t affect small cells directly, peripherally, it plays big.

With the IoT/E, if someone hacks your Facebook ac-count, it isn’t just your picture that shows up as the head of a donkey or some other nefarious activity. Everything else that links to you will be hacked too. That, and many other security issues have yet to be addressed, especial-ly securing the various flavors of small cells.

But one that lurks out there has the potential to wreak havoc with the IoT/E. It is the “dark Internet,” or “dark-net” (not to be confused with the deep web).

There has always been an underground of some sort — probably as far back as the caveman secretly trading outside of the pack — and for just about everything. In my youth, before the Internet, I loved the British underground rock music scene. Today there is pirate radio, medicines, medical services – any number of venues. At one time, there was even a human underground – the Underground Railroad used to ferry slaves to freedom. And there are surely hundreds of others, around everything imaginable, thoughout the ages.

Today, this darknet is a piece of the Internet underground. It is prolific in a number or areas; human rights activists, journalists, the military, and law enforcement to champion for those that may go unheard or punished. On the right side, it serves to stand against injustice, bad rules and regu-lations, unfair practices, and dozens of other valuable causes.

Therefore, I am a fan of the darknet. But…there is a dark side to the darknet underground. For good or bad, it allows one to operate in total anonymity, without being tracked.

On the bad side, surfers can access websites that sell drugs, weapons, and they can even hire assassins. One such black-market site, Silk Road, was revealed, last fall, after a crackdown by the FBI. Imagine the implications if this has access to the autonomous interconnect of the IoT/E.

The process is remarkably simple. All one has to do is find an alternate browser such as Tor, short for “The Onion Rout-er” (which, by the way, was developed by the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory as a way to protect the communications of the U.S. military). Tor uses a fairly well known technique to reroute your computer through a series of other comput-ers, and bounces the user around anonymously until it reach-es a destination. Say, for example, my origination is Austra-lia. Tor may route my traffic through Germany, Sweden, and end up in Russia. You think I’m in Russia, and what it looks like to the website I’m visiting, is that I am in Russia.

So imagine how easy it is for malfeasants to do that too. And with small cells everywhere, the points of entry are ubiquitous! And, if unsecured, the havoc capability is monumental. The scary part is that no one really knows the extent of it, making the potential security risk ex-tremely dangerous.

Today, the Internet isn’t nearly as autonomous as it will be when it becomes the IoT/E. With billions and billions of autonomous devices hanging on the IoT/E, the ability of the darknet to cause havoc is multiplied by orders of magnitude and hackers can have us chasing our tails.

On top of that, these dark networks are so cloaked with encryption and anonymity, that it is virtually impossible to find them, even if we can track it back to the originator.

So, anybody got any ideas? Ping me and let’s talk (but remember, I’m on the other side of the world)!

*Publisher’s note…Ernest really isn’t in Australia, at least not physically. —[email protected]

COLUMNS

E r n e s t Wo r t h m a n , E d i t o r

This Month’s Topic: It’s Dark Out There.


TABLE OF CONTENTS


CONFERENCES

Register by June 12 for only $119Registration after June 12 is $139*Registration includes a chance to win a GoPro Camera given at each conference. Must be present to win.

9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Westin DullesHerndon, VA 20171

Social/Networking Event in Conjunction with the Virginia and Maryland/DC Wireless Associations

REGISTER ONLINE: aglmediagroup.com/aglevents

Education Learn from industry leaders and technology experts

Networking Interact with existing clients and build new relationships

Exhibition Showcase your company’s products and services

1

2

3

THURSDAY — JUNE 25, 2015

After the Conference:

COST

$TIME

5:30 – 7:30 p.m.

Who Says Learning Can’t Be Fun!

For Sponsorship Information Contact:

EXPERIENCE THE EDUCATION

Session Topics

• Spectrum, Technology and Tower Trends

• The Evolution of Wi-Fi: Threat or

Opportunity for the Wireless Industry?

• NATE: Wireless Industry Challenges and

Safety Solutions in 2015 and Beyond

• Tower Business Roundtable

• Case Studies in Small Cell and DAS

AGL Brings Content to Washington, DC

Kari Willis | [email protected] | 714.504.1145

2015 AGL CONFERENCE SPONSORS

Jonathan Adelstein — President & CEOPCIA — The Wireless Infrastructure Association

Gain insight from keynote presenter, Jonathan

Adelstein and hear from other industry experts

that plan and shape the future of wireless.


CONFERENCES

Register by June 12 for only $119Registration after June 12 is $139*Registration includes a chance to win a GoPro Camera given at each conference. Must be present to win.

9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Westin DullesHerndon, VA 20171

Social/Networking Event in Conjunction with the Virginia and Maryland/DC Wireless Associations

REGISTER ONLINE: aglmediagroup.com/aglevents

Education Learn from industry leaders and technology experts

Networking Interact with existing clients and build new relationships

Exhibition Showcase your company’s products and services

1

2

3

THURSDAY — JUNE 25, 2015

After the Conference:

COST

$TIME

5:30 – 7:30 p.m.

Who Says Learning Can’t Be Fun!

For Sponsorship Information Contact:

EXPERIENCE THE EDUCATION

Session Topics

• Spectrum, Technology and Tower Trends

• The Evolution of Wi-Fi: Threat or

Opportunity for the Wireless Industry?

• NATE: Wireless Industry Challenges and

Safety Solutions in 2015 and Beyond

• Tower Business Roundtable

• Case Studies in Small Cell and DAS

AGL Brings Content to Washington, DC

Kari Willis | [email protected] | 714.504.1145

2015 AGL CONFERENCE SPONSORS

Jonathan Adelstein — President & CEOPCIA — The Wireless Infrastructure Association

Gain insight from keynote presenter, Jonathan

Adelstein and hear from other industry experts

that plan and shape the future of wireless.


COLUMNS

It has come to light that FCC Chairman, Tom Wheeler, is looking to close 75 percent of the FCC Field Offices (18 out of 24). The reason cited is, ostensibly to save money. That seems a bit strange, considering that the FCC’s annual budget is approximately $350,000,000, and closing these offices would result in a saving of roughly $9 million – or about 2.5% of the total budget.

This move comes after analyzing a contractor report on field office use, which determined that deploying staff using a ‘tiger team’ ap-proach would make better use of regional offices.

While many of my con-tacts, in every segment of communications overseen by the FCC, grumble about being cited for major and minor viola-tions; every one of them was fer-vently against the closure of the majority of field offices.

We all know that the primary tasks performed by the field offices are rule enforcement and interference inves-tigation/mitigation. Proactive investigation by the FCC has encountered everything from safety violations (tow-er light failures and/or maintenance issues) to interfer-ence issues across the frequency spectrum.

In light of the current wireless environment, where there is about to be an explosion in the proliferation of all types of networks – from DAS to Wi-Fi to various types of small cells to HetNets, and virtual networks – the wisdom of such a decision seems counterintuitive.

The proponents of the reduction in field offices claim that a “fast and ready technical service” can be on site from one of the six, essentially coastal, offices in four to six hours. In the opinion of this writer, that seems doubtful. Just one example of where that may fail, is that many interference issues occur during periods of emergency or natural disaster.

That could easily impede action as much as three to four times the normal time frame, even if military support is provided.

Hunting interference is a specialized task that not only requires constant practice, but also local knowledge of the area. As the wireless landscape mushrooms with

emerging technologies, the local personnel have a much better working knowledge

of what is in place on most frequencies across the spectrum in their area.

After years of working with local broadcast and communications

technicians; the local field of-fice personnel have a handle on what needs to be done and who to contact, and

perhaps can solve the prob-lem before the designated tech-

nicians even board the plane.If this is really a budget issue, then

why not allocate some of the money collected at spectrum auctions, which

went into the general fund. Since the field offices are, in effect, saving money for both the FCC and the spectrum users, disbanding most of them does not make a lot of sense. For the small amount of money involved, an option could be to charge licensees a minimal Spectrum Management Fee to cover the cost of these field offices.

These field offices are a critical component of spectrum management. They have equipment in place and can be ready as soon as they are called upon. The spectrum users within the area know them, and have an ongoing, working relation-ship with the local office. This is a public/private partnership in the best sense, and it deserves to be continued.

Stan Reubenstein is the Founder and owner of Aurora Marketing Company. His experience includes Radio Club of America - past president and board member, Communications Marketing Association - past president and board member, Life member ARRL and QCWA (WA6RNU), Member of APCO, National Sales Manager - Standard Communications, Marketing Manager - TPL Communications.

INDUSTRY INSIGHT: TAKING THE FCC TO TASK

B y S t a n R e u b e n s t e i n


Contact MUTI today for all your small cell needs. 217-819-3040 I www.mutionline.com

© 20

14 S

abre

Indu

stries

, Inc.

- 11_

14 M

UTI

Providing engineered solutions for the dense urban market, our products:

• Conceal RF equipment for Small Cell and DAS• Consolidate equipment in single housing• Address most jurisdictional regulation and aesthetic needs

blending into the urban landscape


FEATURES

Active Antenna System (AAS) technology is receiving increased attention as a component for upcoming 5G cellular networks. These networks will have flexible ra-diation patterns that are capable of adapting to changing conditions. In order to fully characterize AAS’ in the 3D space, a new approach to active antenna measurement will be required. This article takes a look at new ways to achieve quick and accurate AAS characterization.

ANTENNA CHARACTERISTICSMultiple-Input-Multiple-Output (MIMO) antenna arrays or “Massive MIMO” will play a prominent role in the 5G development, both in user, and network segments. The definition of “massive” can vary from AAS arrays with relatively few elements, to more conceptual designs in-volving hundreds of antennas. The common denominators for both are distributed amplification, beam steering, and full integration of the densely packed antenna elements.

In order to characterize the AAS, the collective perfor-mance must be determined in a calibrated over-the-air (OTA) setup, in which the spatial-directional power and sensitivity profile are measured. Consequently, the useful performance parameters in AAS testing are very similar to the existing tests for much smaller mobile devices.

AAS PERFORMANCE PARAMETERSThe performance parameters of interest for AAS are the directional dependent power and sensitivity performanc-es under far-field (FF) conditions [1], they are:

• Effective Isotropic Radiated Power – EIRP(θ,φ)

• Total Radiated Power – TRP

• Effective Isotropic Sensitivity – EIS(θ,ϕ)

• Total Isotropic Sensitivity (TIS) or Total Radiated Sensitivity (TRS)

• Antenna Directional Gain – G(θ,ϕ,)

The EIRP and EIS are directional performance parameters that can be measured, for a given direction of the anten-na, via a calibrated OTA measurement. The directional EIRP, is the radiated power weighted by the directional gain of the antenna. The TRP can be determined from a full sphere integration of EIRP and associating isotropic gain to the antenna. Likewise, directional EIS is TIS/TRS weighted by the directional gain of the antenna. TIS/TRS can be determined by integrating the EIS, over the full sphere and associating isotropic gain to the antenna.

FAR-FIELD MEASUREMENT CONDITIONA generally accepted criteria, which defines the FF dis-tance of an antenna, is 2D2/λ, where D is the diameter of the antenna and λ is the free-space wavelength [2]. For electrically small antennas, such as antennas for mobile communication devices, the measurement, in the FF condition, is generally satisfied over convenient short measurement distances.

However, for moderate size, or larger AAS antenna systems, the FF measurement condition places unreal-istic requirements on the measurement distance. Figure 1 illustrates the elevation pattern of an 8-element array antenna at 2 GHz, for different near-field (NF) distances, and the referenced FF distance. As can be observed, the elevation pattern is not fully formed at any realistic measurement distance.

The FF pattern of a given antenna can be measured directly using a Compact Antenna Test Range (CATR) [1, 2] or determined from NF to FF transformation, using standard NF techniques [3]. NF measurements are often preferred for 3D performance scenarios, since they require physically smaller measurement setups, and are gener-ally considered faster and more accurate.

However, due to the capability of power conservation, AAS performance parameters can be determined at any distance from the device, using a calibrated OTA setup.

A NEW APPROACH FOR THE ACCURATE MEASUREMENT OF 5G CELLULAR NETWORKS

B y L a r s J a c o b F o g e d

UNDERSTANDING AND WORKING WITH NEW 5G TECHNOLOGIES WILL REQUIRE OUT-OF-THE-BOX THINKING


FEATURES

The difference in NF to FF gain of the antenna can be determined and compensated for by standard NF to FF transformation techniques [3].

PHASE RECOVERY IN ACTIVE MEASUREMENT SCENARIOSince the AAS antenna is an active device with no fixed phase reference, the measurement in FF condition can be done using an FF setup, such as CATR, or a NF range. Applying phase recovery techniques allow NF to FF field transformation.

A common phase recovery method is the holographic technique, which uses different combinations of an unknown, measured signal against a stable reference signal. This is the preferred method, based on the simultaneous reception of the reference, and measured signals. A Phase Recovery Unit (PRU) has been designed to perform all the necessary amplification, filtering and signal combination for the accu-rate determination of the phase of the modulated signal.

VALIDATION OF THE PRUThe actual AAS antenna is emulated using a mobile phone with an LTE protocol, connected to an 8-element passive array as the external antenna (see Figure 1). Figure 2 illustrates the comparison of the measured amplitude and phase of the co-polar NF, using phase recovery. This is then compared to passive measurements on the same antenna. As can be seen, the amplitude and phase cor-relation between the measurements is very good.

The measurement with phase recovery, using LTE modu-lation, was performed with the PRU set to a 10 MHz band-width around the 1940 MHz center frequency of the BTS

FIGURE 1. MEASURED ELEVATION PATTERN @ 2 GHZ OF AN 8-ELEMENT ARRAY ANTENNA FOR DIFFERENT NF DISTANCES AND FF.


MEASUREMENT OF EIRP OF 8-ELEMENT ARRAY ANTENNA WITH LTE PROTOCOL USING NF TECHNIQUESThe EIRP of the 8-element array antenna at 1940 MHz was measured using the LTE protocol and compared to a reference scenario to validate the approach. The EIRP, elevation and azimuth pattern of the reference and NF measurement, using the PRU unit in a 10 MHz bandwidth around the 1940 MHz center frequency, are compared in Figure 4. As expected, the pattern shapes are very similar in both azimuth and elevation. The ~0.5dB offset

in EIRP of the two measurements is justified by the un-certainties relative to the NF measurements and the determination of the reference scenario.

CONCLUSIONThe NF measurement technique has been demonstrated effectively in the measurement of performance parameters such as EIRP and EIS for AAS. It has been confirmed, exper-imentally, that the implemented PRU technique can, reliably,

FEATURES

antenna. The error introduced by the phase recovery technique was determined to be equivalent to a -45 dB noise level.

VALIDATION ANTENNA FOR EIS (θ,ϕ), EIRP(θ,φ) MEASUREMENTIn order to validate the NF approach, a validation device with known EIS(θ,ϕ) and EIRP(θ,φ) is required. Since the 8-element antenna and LTE device in this example are separable, the reference EIS(θ,ϕ) and EIRP(θ,ϕ) performance of the combined device can be determined from the antenna gain and the sensitivity/radiated power of the LTE device from a conducted measurement.

EIS MEASUREMENT OF AN 8-ELEMENT ARRAY ANTENNA WITH LTE PROTOCOL, USING NF TECHNIQUESThe EIS of the 8-element array antenna at 1940 MHz using the LTE protocol has been measured in NF and compared to the reference scenario to validate the approach. The EIS elevation and azimuth pattern of the reference and NF mea-surement, using the PRU unit in a 10 MHz bandwidth around the 1940 MHz center frequency, are compared in Figure 3.

As expected, the pattern shapes are very similar in both azimuth and elevation. The ~1 dB offset in measured sensitivity by the two methods, is justified by the uncer-tainties relative to the NF measurements and the deter-mination of the reference scenario. Range calibration and the sensitivity search accuracy for EIS measurements are considered the main uncertainty contributor for the NF measurements. Range calibration and sensitivity search accuracy for conducted sensitivity are considered the main uncertainty contributors for the reference scenario.

FIGURE 2. CO-POLAR, NF OF 8-ELEMENT ARRAY ANTENNA. REFERENCE MEASUREMENT (LEFT) AND ACTIVE MEASUREMENT (RIGHT) LTE PROTOCOL, USING PRU. MAGNITUDE (TOP), PHASE (BOTTOM).

FIGURE 3.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

FIGURE 4. COMPARISON OF MEASURED ELEVATION AND AZIMUTH EIRP(ϴ,Φ) OF 8-ELEMENT ARRAY ANTENNA USING LTE PROTOCOL.

measure the phase in NF for modulated signal with large bandwidth, such as LTE, and allow for accurate NF/FF trans-formation. The intrinsic advantages of NF measurement techniques makes this, in the author’s opinion, the best way for the accurate measurement and testing of 5G devices.

REFERENCES[1] Ericsson contribution, “On radiated testing of AAS BS,” 3GPP R4-132211, May 2013. [2] ANSI/IEEE Std. 149-1979; Standard Test Procedures for Antennas.

[3] IEEE Recommended Practice for Near-Field Antenna Measurements, IEEE Std, 1720-2012. [4] L. J. Foged, A. Scannavini, N. Gross, F. Cano-Facila “Accurate Measurement of Transmit and Receive Perfor-mance of AAS Antennas in a Multi-Probe Spherical NF System,” IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, July 19-25, 2015.

Lars Jacob Foged is Scientific Director, Microwave Vision and Associate Director, Microwave Vision Italy. Email him at lars.foged@microwavevision.

AGL SMALL CELL MAGAZINE • JUNE 2015 aglmediagroup.com

COVER STORY

18

BY KELLY LEBLANC

A LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

SDN AND NFV

subscribe at aglmediagroup.com/subscribe/

COVER STORY

Continued on Next Page...

BY KELLY LEBLANC

A LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

SDN AND NFV


COVER STORY

Most industry watchers agree that the networking in-dustry is transforming from a hardware-centric approach to a software-driven model. A few analysts are using the word metamorphosis to describe the scope of this trans-formation. As you will recall from your high-school biol-ogy class, metamorphosis means a profound change in form, as in from a caterpillar to a butterfly. While it is difficult for the capital-intensive telecommunications and enterprise networking worlds to morph overnight, there is no doubt that these industries are going through a disruptive change rather than incremental changes more typical of the last 20 years.

For disruptive change to occur, two forces must be clearly visible. First, market trends must illustrate that the current approach to building solutions cannot be incrementally improved to meet the customer demands of the future. It is clear that the proprietary hard-ware-centric approach to today’s communications in-frastructure cannot cost-effectively handle the huge forecasted growth in data traffic and the explosion in the use of more demanding technologies such as video. It is also difficult, time consuming, and far too costly to develop, trial and deploy new applications; in effect, innovation critical to the success of any industry is stymied in the networking world.

Secondly, new technologies and solution architectures must demonstrate that they address the problems with the current solutions, cost-effectively meet future market needs and allow for a managed transition to the new technologies.

The transformation of today’s networking infrastruc-ture into a more robust, cost-effective solution that sup-ports rapid innovation includes two key elements. First, the move away from customized, propriety hardware platforms to lower-cost, industry-standard platforms with features that support communications functions. And, second, the transition to a software-driven network architecture that is inherently more flexible and enables rapid innovation.

Two software technologies are driving the transition: Software Defined Networking (SDN) which makes it easier to build and efficiently manage large complex networks and Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) to increase telecom network resource utilization while reducing the costs asso-ciated with developing, trialing and deploying new services.

SOFTWARE DEFINED NETWORKINGThere is some confusion surrounding the use of the term “SDN”. In the early stages of the discussion, SDN was used synonymously with OpenFlow, a new standard communications protocol between the con-trol and forwarding layers of a software-driven net-work. Current definitions take more of an architec-tural view in which SDN refers to all the protocols and technologies that work to create a global view of the network and provide for centralized, intelli-gence-based network control.

The Open Networking Foundation (ONF) is the orga-nization dedicated to the promotion and adoption of SDN through open standards development. ONF defines SDN as “an emerging network architecture where network control is decoupled from forwarding and is directly programmable. This migration of control, formerly tight-ly bound in individual network devices and into accessi-ble computing devices enables the underlying infrastruc-ture to be abstracted for applications and network services, which can treat the network as a logical or virtual entity.”

Stated slightly differently, SDN abstracts the underly-ing infrastructure of the network so it can be treated as a logical or virtual entity. In today’s definition, there are three fundamental elements of SDN:

• A programmable network

• The separation of the control plane and data plane

• Centralized network management.

Figure 1 is a high-level depiction of the SDN architec-ture showing the physical infrastructure layer separate from the control layer and applications using an API abstraction to access all network services.

In a software-defined network, traffic is managed from a centralized control point by changing the rules used by any switch in the network when necessary. SDN-related products in the market today include the routers, switches and network orchestration software that utilize programmable network protocol standards such as OpenFlow.


COVER STORY

NETWORK FUNCTIONS VIRTUALIZATIONAs we learned in the data center, virtualization tech-nology can increase resource utilization, thereby re-ducing CAPEX and OPEX primarily through reduced equipment costs and reduced power consumption. NFV is an initiative driven by the European Telecommuni-cations Standards Institute (ETSI) Industry Specifica-tion Group to virtualize network functions previously performed by proprietary dedicated hardware. The goal of the ETSI effort is to reduce the cost of telecom net-work infrastructure by allowing the appropriate func-tions to run on a common, commodity platform that hosts the necessary virtualized environments.

Almost any network function can be virtualized. The NFV focus in the market today includes:

• Virtual Switching – physical ports are connected to virtual ports on virtual servers with virtual routers using virtualized IPsec and SSL VPN gateways.

• Virtualized Network Appliances – network functions that today require a dedicated box can be replaced with a virtual appliance. Examples include security functions such as firewalls and gateways, Broadband Remote Ac-cess Servers (BRAS) and LTE Evolved Packet Core (EPC).

• Virtualized Network Services – examples here are network management applications such as traffic analysis, network monitoring tools, load balancers and accelerators.

• Virtualized Applications – almost any application you can imagine. For example, there is a great deal of development today for cloud applications, such as virtualized storage and photo imaging services, to support the explosion in tablet and smartphone usage.

The computing infrastructure required to support today’s mobile-device-driven networking world contains an in-creasing variety of proprietary hardware appliances (see Figure 2).

Each network appliance is slightly different in that it is optimized to support its particular function, whether it is traffic management, security or video transcoding. Launching new network services frequently requires

adding a new fixed-function appliance, with the risk that this new equipment becomes redundant if the service is not popular with end customers. Finding space and pow-er for the new box can be challenging and the overall lifecycle management of multiple network platforms is complex and costly. Many operators believe that this ‘function-per-box’ model constrains the innovation and deployment of new network services and reduces ROI.

A standard approach to the virtualization of network functions works to reduce these challenges by allowing the consolidation of proprietary network platforms onto in-dustry standard, high-volume servers. The ability to deploy virtual versions of network functions on standard hardware anywhere in the network eliminates the need to install new equipment and greatly simplifies network management.

FIGURE 1. SND ARCHITECTURE.

FIGURE 2. CLASSICAL VS. VIRTUALIZATION NETWORK.


Not all heroes wear capes.

Be a hero. Donate today.

Every nine minutes, the American Red Cross brings help and hope to

people in need. Every dollar you give helps us do more of what we do.Donate at redcross.org


telecom carriers are driving many of the NFV efforts. SDN and NFV are indeed driving the transformation of today’s networks.

CONCLUSIONSDN and NFV are both going to populate the network land-scape of the future. Fortunately they are not adversarial technologies and, collectively, the sum of the whole is great-er than the individual parts. The nice thing about both of them is that they fit particular needs very well and can in-tegrate a number of network challenges, going forward.

Kelly is responsible for 6WIND’s global marketing program. She also manages 6WIND’s global partner program with semiconductor companies, subsystem providers and software companies. Most recently she was Head of Worldwide Marketing for A10 Networks, where she managed its global marketing program, including Corporate and Product Marketing. Prior to A10, Kelly held marketing positions for VERITAS Software and Fortinet. Kelly has a Bachelor of Arts degree in Philosophy from Cal Poly University, in San Luis Obispo, California.

In addition to CAPEX and OPEX reductions, NFV works to reduce time-to-market of new services and provides greater scalability (up or down) of individual services. Being standards-based creates a more open virtual appliance market allowing for new entrants and greater innovation.

SDN AND NFV: RELATED AND COMPLEMENTARYIn the software-driven networks of the future, SDN and NFV technologies are complementary in that they ad-dress different elements of a software-driven solution. SDN increases network flexibility through holistic man-agement of the network, enables rapid innovation and lowers operating expenses. NFV works to reduce network operator CAPEX and OPEX through reduced equipment costs and reduced power consumption. NFV also reduc-es complexity and makes managing a network and de-ploying new capabilities easier and faster. It is interest-ing to note that the highest interest in SDN technology is in data center and cloud computing arenas while

COVER STORY

Small cells easily installed.HUBER+SUHNER, North America’s leading supplier of remote radio installation solutions, has developed a broad portfolio of passive FO and RF components that make small cell installations mere child’s play. The latest development is the MASTERLINE Ultimate Small Cell system. This pre-terminated factory-sealed plug and play fiber optic system supports up to 3 RRHs and connects them with easy-to-install Q-ODC fiber optic jumpers. The small form factor allows deployment with limited space impact.

› hubersuhner.com

HUBER+SUHNER INC. Charlotte NC 28273/USA

USA_SmallCell_201502.indd 1 17.02.2015 17:49:12

Not all heroes wear capes.

Be a hero. Donate today.

Every nine minutes, the American Red Cross brings help and hope to

people in need. Every dollar you give helps us do more of what we do.Donate at redcross.org


FEATURES

THE SMART HOME RADIO PROTOCOLS WARB y C h u n L i e w

A SHORT PRIMER ON WHAT WE WILL SEE IN THE HOME AS THE CONNECTED SOCIETY ADVANCES

OVERVIEWConsumers are gradually upgrading to smart homes. It is difficult to guess, precisely, what wireless protocols will be the predominant choices for the differing appli-cations, especially once the Internet of things/every-thing (IoT/E emerges). Today, there is a handful of protocols that are seasoned, well established, and com-monly accepted for the majority of applications. That is not to say that other emerging protocols, such as 6loWPAN, enocean, mesh networks, or perhaps even some technologies yet to be developed, won’t evolve. But the smart home of today is relying on the established

protocols, including Wi-Fi, Z-Wave, ZigBee, Thread and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE, or Bluetooth Smart) as the preferred wireless protocols from a global perspective.

This article will do a quick once-over of these pro-tocols with an eye to examining how they compare to each other.

WHY SO MANY?One question that is often asked is why the need for radio protocols other than Wi-Fi, such as Z-Wave, ZigBee, Thread and BLE.

The answer is actually pretty simple. Wi-Fi was originally


FEATURES

designed to cover large areas and facilitate high-speed data communication (such as media streaming). Wi-Fi’s drawback is that by being able to facilitate high-speed data communication, it is a power-hungry radio protocol. This makes it a sub-optimal radio protocol for battery-operated devices, such as door locks, scales and sensors.

To address that, radio protocols such as Z-Wave, ZigBee and Thread were developed. These protocols vary in cov-erage area from 30 to 100 meters, and vary in bandwidth and power efficiency, as well. But, in contrast to Wi-Fi, their primary claim to fame is that they are designed to be highly power efficient, which makes them a much better choice for the radio protocols of battery-operated devices for the smart home.

Another design criterion is that each of them varies somewhat in other parameters such as bandwidth, sig-naling protocols, flexibility in application environments, etc. Since smart home devices can vary significantly in functionality, the availability of a pool of technologies insures that the best protocol can be chosen for any particular device.

Table 1 is a simple matrix clarifying the key differenc-es between Wi-Fi, Z-Wave, ZigBee, Thread, and BLE.Table 2 details the technical specifications of these pro-tocols. Note, since Z-Wave operates in the Sub-1 GHz frequency band, it is subject to region-dependent regu-latory requirements. The most relevant Z-Wave frequen-cies for most product producers are Z-Wave US (908 MHz), Z-Wave EU (868 MHz), and Z-Wave AU (921 MHz). For clarity, a Z-Wave US (908 MHz) Gateway is only compatible with a Z-Wave US (908 MHz) device and not with a Z-Wave EU (868 MHz) device.

Knowing a bit about these protocols, one can take a look at how the smart home devices and protocols will, likely, evolve in the next five or so years. To do that one can look to the smartphone and use its evolution as a likely scenario for, say, the wireless router.

If we look into the evolution of the smartphone, with regards to wireless interfaces, one find that many smart-phones currently have the following radio protocols built-in by default:

• LTE

• Wi-Fi

• Bluetooth

• NFC

Each of these radio protocols has its own ideal use cases, and the reality is that consumers, generally, do not care about the different protocols and standards. Con-sumers simply expect to be able to enjoy, suitably, the relevant use cases. It is plausible to assume that the consumer will have the same attitude towards smart home devices. They just want them to work and not have to worry about what protocol does what.

So, that being said, it is reasonable to assume that a sim-ilar evolution will occur with the current Wi-Fi Router, as it will gradually morph into a multi-radio router/gateway/hub. This can happen via a number of ways. One is via an additional gateway/hub connected to your existing Wi-Fi router using an Ethernet Cable (most stable). Another is Wi-Fi, but Wi-Fi is more prone to interference or hacking.

TABLE 1. COMMON WIRELESS PROTOCOL METRICS.


FEATURES

Or, one can simply completely replace the existing Wi-Fi router (a somewhat more cumbersome process as one would have to reconfigure a new router from scratch, where-as via the additional gateway/hub approach a better plug & play experience can be provided for the end consumer).

It is possible that the final evolution may be a hybrid of some, or all of these vectors. However it ends up, it will likely, as with the smartphone, support many wire-less protocols. The evolution of it and the wireless enve-lope is discussed next.

THE FUTURE WIRELESS ROUTER STANDARDThere is a lot of movement in establishing router stan-dards so they can be follow a unencumbered develop-ment and deployment path. For example, Wi-Fi router vendors such as D-Link and Linksys have already re-leased multi-radio routers/gateways/hubs to the main-stream market, and it is expected that other competitors will follow suit.

For example, one of the areas of development has to do with multiple antenna coexistence in close proxim-ity. While this has been addressed to some degree with

a couple of protocols, having many different radio pro-tocols and their radiators in such close proximity to each other bring up a slew of interference issues. So managing the transmission platforms to mitigate cross platform interference must be addresses if successful intergration is going to happen.

Eventually, multi-radio routers/gateways/hubs will gradually support the following six protocols by default: Wi-Fi, BLE, Z-Wave, ZigBee, 6LowPAN and Thread (which can be facilitated via 4 antennas, because ZigBee, 6LowPan and Thread can share the same antenna). Table 3 is a matrix of these protocols and their breakout.

There are, of course many other issues. Security, for one, is something that will have to be given serious con-sideration – and not just simple SSL and weak password requirements. Because the ubiquity of connectivity with-in the smart home and multiple wireless protocols, to the eventual Internet of everything (IoE), will open a pleth-ora of potential vulnerabilities within the smart home.

These are but two of the many potential issues that will fall to the standards bodies to work out. While no one can predict, with certainty, exactly how this will

TABLE 2. COMMON WIRELESS PROTOCOL TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION.



TABLE OF CONTENTS


lot more flexibility in design and support new power platforms such as energy harvesting. Radio protocols will evolve as well (BLE is proof of that), and new radio platforms such as 6loWPAN will come on line. While the immediate future is fairly visible, the far future is much more vague.

Chun Liew is the Founder of SmartHomeDB and holds a MSc CEMS from the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus Univer-sity. Email: [email protected] ; www.smarthomedb.com

FEATURESFEATURES

develop, there is no doubt it will. And the existing pro-tocols are established so some predictability is possible.

CONCLUSIONFrom market research, certain conclusions can be drawn. While by no means conclusive, since technol-ogies are constantly evolving, one can say, with some certainty, that these four protocols will likely be the predominant ones for the smart home, at least for the next five years.

After that, when the IoT/E becomes more than a moving target, there will be significant evolution of devices. “Things,” like low-power sensors will require a

TABLE 3. SMART HOME PRODUCTS AND WHAT THEIR PROTOCOLS AND THEIR PERCENTAGES ARE.


FEATURES

KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR DESIGNING A WIRELESS MEDICAL DEVICEB y C h r i s D o w n e y , L a i r d a n d D a v i d

MEDICAL WIRELESS DEVICES ANSWER TO A HIGHER ORDER THAT PUTS LIFE-SAFETY AND FIVE-NINES RELIABILITY AT THE TOP OF THE DESIGN TREE

Standards, such as IEEE 802.11, and certifications groups such as the Wi-Fi Alliance have accomplished a monu-mental feat by insuring interoperability and backwards compatibility within communications protocols. As WLAN technologies improve there is an expectation of being able to plug and play with any chipset solution. However, much of the focus for WLAN technology has been on improving the size, cost, and throughput of solutions for consumer grade applications, such as laptops and smartphones.

Today’s mobile medical devices require constant con-nectivity and security for the safety of its patients, as well as for efficiency within the hospital. Therefore, med-ical device companies need to understand that there are unique requirements to ensure the success of their WLAN deployed solution within a hospital environment. If such requirements are overlooked, it may result in poor per-formance and potential regulatory recalls. However, the good news is that many of these mistakes can be avoid-ed, with the right knowledge.

THE ADVANTAGE OF A COMPLETE SUB-SYSTEM MODULE DESIGNOne of the major decisions a medical device manufac-turer will face is choosing the right radio for their device and the network. Will any radio work? Should they write their own proprietary software and security supplicant? Or, should they develop their own “system module?” These are some of the questions engineers face during the wireless design phase.

While it may be tempting to design an internal software and security supplicant, there are several issues involved that should warrant a second look. First, it is much risk-ier and requires many more resources – labor, time, and money, for example, to design this internally rather than take advantage of a complete sub-system module design. By utilizing a complete sub-system module design, it not only places the software and security support on the shoulders of the manufacturer, but it also adds another

physical layer of security.For example, the processor on the embedded module

may be physically separated from the processing capa-bility on the medical device. The advantage of this is that it decreases system loading as a whole. This approach, though the initial cost may seem to be higher, reduces the overall cost because there is no need for initial inter-nal engineering support and the inclusion of all the back end continued software support.

COSTS, PERFORMANCE, ROAMING, AND SECURITYOne of the main considerations for medical device com-panies is cost vs. proven performance. Will the designed medical device perform correctly in a highly challenging mobile environment without any risk of degradation of connectivity? If not, there can be significant cost overruns connected to product return to the marketplace, product redesigns, and competitive entrenchment to gather market share.

Another assumption of many WLAN-embedded mod-ules or adapters is that any module “will just work” be-cause it meets the IEEE 802.11 standards, or is Wi-Fi Certified to one of those standards. This isn’t necessar-ily always the case. A wireless module may seem to meet the requirements on paper, however, it may not always meet specific use-case requirements for particular appli-cations.

It is critical to understand how each device will actu-ally operate in both the mobile and roaming environment, while still keeping the authenticated connection. Some medical devices require sending data periodically, like batch-type transmissions. Others may be more real time monitoring, like patient monitors. To ensure roaming, one should confirm that there is an ability to adjust roaming thresholds, roaming across subnet boundaries while maintaining a network connection, and fast roam-ing features such as Cisco Centralized Key Management (CCKM). Some sub-system modules may have already addressed these parameters and is a good argument for


FEATURES

considering the sub-system module approach.Security is also a very important when designing a

wireless-enabled medical device. To ensure security in a medical device the following should be included:

• WPA2 Enterprise (802.11i) with 802.1x and PSK authentication.

• PKI- based EAP-TLS certificate support.

• 802.1x outer identity anonymity for tunneled EAP authentication.

• FIPS 140-2 Level 1 validation.

CURRENT AND ON-GOING TECHNICAL SUPPORTOverlooking the importance of reliable current and on-go-ing technical support can create massive headaches. Often technical support is not factored into the overall cost of development ownership of an embedded WLAN

design solution. However, as companies select a vendor, this becomes extremely important. Does the company provide dedicated engineering support from initial prod-uct inquiries to the completion of the project, no matter how long it takes? In addition, do they provide ongoing support throughout the life cycle of the product for WLAN software and firmware changes as well as field support for the client customer? If third parties are involved in software or firmware updates, charges of hundreds of thousands of dollars could be incurred to produce any changes. All of these can have a detrimental effect on the actual bottom line.

THE TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIPSometimes customers focus on the initial price of the WLAN embedded module, not knowing about all the hidden costs that have an effect on getting the wireless enabled medical device to market. Companies may be looking at the cost of goods as related to the line item of “the wireless embedded module” as a part of the overall



FEATURES

cost of the product. However, there are several factors to consider that may not be obvious when evaluating different providers of embedded WLAN modules:

• Certifications: Has the company gone through the rigors and costs associated with becoming Wi-Fi Alliance certified, and receiving any additional ap-provals such as Cisco CCX or FCC.

• Security: Choosing a company that provides an embedded module, with the security supplicants on board, will eliminate any developmental costs and decrease risk down the line with the required inter-nal on-going support.

• FIPS 140-2: FIPS 140-2 is required for any wireless enabled medical device to be sold into the Veterans Administration (VA) systems.

• Initial and on-going technical support: On-go-ing technical support for design and development is an important factor. Any medical device manufac-turer looking to design a WLAN enabled product should have numerous questions for the wireless provider.Typically, topics should include; “What type of internal antenna should we use and how should this be placed to ensure the best signal to noise ratio (SNR)?” and “What level of support can you provide our internal software and firmware engineers as we integrate your product into our final product?”

• Staying Relevant: Medical device manufacturers need to ask, “How will you ensure that we stay com-patible with the ever-changing security, QoS, interop-erability, and IEEE standards in the wireless space?”

Therefore, when comparing multiple solutions, it helps to consider not just the initial cost but also the possible costs associated with certifications, on-going support, and external expertise. Not every wireless module will do, especially in a challenging RF environment like a hospital.

The needs and requirements of the medical device space, and enterprise are much different than the con-sumer space. These requirements must be met to ensure

that the product will not only meet regulatory require-ments, but that it will also ensure a quality and risk adverse clinical experience. Not evaluating the unique needs and requirements of the WLAN embedded mod-ule could cause potential product recalls and competitive market positioning.

Laird is a global technology company focused on providing systems, com-ponents and solutions that protect electronics from electromagnetic inter-ference and heat, and that enable connectivity in mission critical systems through wireless applications and antenna systems. Products are supplied to all sectors of the electronics industry including the smartphone, tele-communications, data transfer, information technology, automotive, aero-space, defense, consumer, medical, mining, railroad and industrial markets.

The full version of this article was originally published as a white paper, “The Unique Wireless Medical Device Requirement for Healthcare.” Down-load the full version here: http://www.lairdtech.com/solutions/white-pa-pers/unique-wireless-medical-device-requirement

The RF Experts

Monitor up to 16 channels simultaneously, with expansion units available to cover the largest systems.

Measures forward, re� ected and composite power as well as antenna system VSWR.

Con� gurable with multiple options for sensors and meters, purchase only what you need.

Easy remote connection using a built-in web server for setup and monitoring.

Bird Technologies®

www.birdrf.com 866.695.4569

Channel Power MonitorContinuous monitoring of communications base stationequipment of all types.


COLUMNS

This is a retort to the editorial in the March issue by Ernest Worthman; “What’s Next for Net Neutrality.”

First of all, let’s not frame “Net Neutrality” as a political issue or one that has sides of Democrats and

Republicans. That is a recipe for disaster at best, and political gridlock (nothing gets done) at worst.

Network infrastructure is a much larger issue and rises above bi-partisan bickering and positioning. Net-work infrastructure is a key element in sustaining our strategic, global competitiveness with all our trading partners. It should be viewed as something on the level of national security and be positively supported by both parties as well as all corporate entities.

Net Neutrality has to be re-focused as more of a strategic initiative to build out the current network infrastructure with only two design constructs. It must be the fastest in the world and the most resilient in the world when it comes to reliability, and redundan-cy built into its framework. Maybe Global Net Supe-riority (GNS) is more descriptive as to what we need to do.

No single network carrier or group of carriers should

be able to dictate any network’s speed or restrictions. We need to re-establish our network infrastructure as being the best in the world. We cannot do that with companies filing lawsuits and lobbying for restrictive

regulatory practices to protect “cash cow” ele-ments of the network that are obsolete.

The real problem with the Net Neutrality law that was passed is that it does not address these issues and therefore, it falls flat on its face as far as protecting the consumer or somehow guar-anteeing some super-fast network infrastructure that 5G Networks will be built upon.

2020 is the target year when 5G Networks are supposed to roll out. Even though 5G networks have yet to be fully defined, we can define some of the constraints, for now (see Chart 1).

This noticeable increase in the baseline speeds should not come to anyone’s surprise. Predic-tions have the amount of wireless devices going from 10 bil-

lion today, to 30 Bil-lion (prediction of ABI Research); 50 Billion (prediction of CISCO); even 75 Billion (prediction by Morgan-Stanley), by 2020.

There is so much talk about moving to the Internet of Every-thing (IoE) and some-how all of this growth and traffic being pre-dicted is going to be supported by the cur-rent network infra-structure? It can’t.

“The real problem with the Net Neutrality law that was passed is that it does not address these issues and therefore, it falls flat on its face as far as protecting the consumer... ”

ETC: NET NEUTRALITY? “OR, GLOBAL NET SUPERIORITY WHEN IT COMES TO COMPETING WITH OTHERS.”

B y J a m e s C a r l i n i


Type of Use Speed Explanation

Common End-User/Subscriber 1-3 Gbps (One –three Gigabits per second)

This includes wireless due to what Smartphones

are demanding in bandwidth

Industrial Park, Business Campus

Commercial Space 40-100GbpsThis would include next-generation Intelligent Business Campuses. (Some parks already have

multiple carriers providing 40Gbps today.)

Downtown/Commercial Space 40-100Gbps For downtown urban areas.

Backbone/Carrier Backhaul 1 Tbps (One Terabit per second)

This sounds high, but the way demand is growing, this should be the goal.

The IoE needs to be able to run on the Internet of Reality (the network infrastructure) and in order

to do that, we need to be encouraging a n d s u b s i d i z i n g build-outs of new network capabili-t i e s a s w e l l a s new and larger net-work capacities.

Net Neutral ity is not the answer. GNS is. We need to push all compa-nies and other orga-nizations, such as municipalities, to build out networks and create mega- capacities as well as network speeds.

If a company is reluctant to build out a network and another company or entity (such as a municipality) wants to replace old infrastructure with new infra-structure, it should not be hampered by restrictive, regulatory gamesmanship which is only created to protect obsolete cash cows of the incumbent phone companies. Lawsuits filed to block progress are not good for national security or national competitiveness within the global economy.

JAMES CARLINI is an Intelligent Infra-structure visionary who has worked on many next-generation real estate proj-ects and mission-critical applications. He is the author of the forward-thinking book, “Location, Location, Connectivity,” a n d a n a w a r d - w i n n i n g fa c u l t y member at Northwestern University for two decades. He can be contacted at [email protected]. Follow daily Carlini-isms at twitter.com/JAMESCARLINI

CHART 1: DESIGN CRITERIA FOR NETWORK SPEEDS

COLUMNS


How edge and cloud computing can enable new Smart Building and Unified Communications managed services for the enterprise.

GAME CHANGER #1 Cisco is now reselling the SpiderCloud (easy to install) small cell portfolio under the USC 8000 Series brand. The Cisco USC 8000 Series access points are available as standalone units, or as plug-in modules for the Cisco Aironet 3600/3700 Wi-Fi access points. The plug-in radio module is a game changer! Now, the entire installed base of Airone3600/3700, inside enterprises across the globe, can be 3G+4G enabled in seconds.

GAME CHANGER #2 Services Collaboration! For many years we have showed how a Services Node is a catalyst for services. An on-premises controller (Services Node), with a services module, can enable managed cloud and application services beyond basic coverage and capacity. Here are some use-case examples.• IBM for handset-to-location video, and advertising

“push” services for use at venues and shopping malls.• HP and Vodafone UK for in-building location (which

won us all an award from the Small Cell Forum in 2014). • Intel/McAfee for policy enforcement and identify

and prevent network security threats at the edge.• Saguna for backhaul savings and user experience

benefits using a centralized content cache. • Druid and Tango for extension of enterprise UC, PBX

and mobile call services inside and outside the en-terprise network. See Druid’s hospital use case.

Ken Rehbehn (Principal Analyst, 451 Research/Mobile) puts this into context:“Enterprises recognize the strategic importance of mobile communications as a tool for business agility and efficiency, but simple in-building coverage and capacity fixes may not be sufficient. By augmenting in-building small cell mobile services with flexible mobile edge computing capabilities, enterprises gain a potent toolkit to get the most value out of smart building and Unified Communications applications.”

Services Node drives services revenue beyond coverage

and capacity. Here’s how: • The mobile device IMSI can be paired to the enterprise active

directory for authentication, as well as provide broadcast alerts within the building where the controller is deployed.

• Smart building operations benefit from mobile de-vices to improve zone heating and air-conditioning usage by monitoring the number of mobile devices and location within the building or campus.

• Improved building security access by using mobile devices as secondary identification and verification to building badge access.

• Small cell systems can enable location and context aware services and execute building-wide alerts to all mobile devices connected to the LAN.

• Compliance services can be enabled with policy fil-tering and identify and prevent mobile LAN network access to non-compliant web sites.

• Improved network security by blocking malicious packets sent by a mobile device within the LAN, and protect a device from malicious packets sent by a server on the Internet.

GAME CHANGER #3 SERVICES REVENUEThe great majority of large businesses would pay over 30% more per-employee for an indoor cellular solution with managed services (iGR survey).

A scalable small cell system deployed over a basic Cat5e LAN (or VLAN), can indeed open up a $100B services market with smart building and Unified Com-munications (Exact Ventures report).

SpiderCloud’s scalable small cell system provides real-time coordination and distributed SON capability up to 100 du-al-band 3G+4G or 4G+4G access points (up to 200 sectors of capacity), enough to effectively offer reliable managed services for buildings and offices up to 1.5 million square feet.

DAS is no-go on Services. Unless you have IT funds like Google and Apple, managed cloud and applications services is a no-go. Enabling services beyond coverage and capac-ity for DAS-based systems is simply a non-starter.

Ronny Haraldsvik is the SVP/CMO of SpiderCloud Wireless.

GOING FORWARD:IF YOU CAN SCALE CLOUD AND MANAGED SERVICES $ WILL COME

B y R o n n y H a r a l d s v i k

COLUMNS


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Big Solutions.SMALL CELLS =

OCTOBER 15–16, 2014 • CHICAGO, IL

To learn more and register, visit www.hetnetexpo.com. Register before Oct. 13 and save $100 per person.

Come together with industry experts to discuss small-cell technologies; how they intersect with the larger macrocellular, public safety and Wi-Fi networks; and what’s ahead for HetNets. These featured events create a one-of-a-kind experience at HetNet Expo:

World-Class EducationFrom the integration of a strong infrastructure for mobile devices and applications to choosing technology for commercial buildings to the impact on real estate and economic development, HetNet Expo covers the hot topics that drive your bottom line.

Interactive Exhibit HallSix dedicated hours inside the exhibit hall allow you to be face-to-face with trusted vendors who supply products and services for DAS and other small-cell solutions. Ask the technical experts questions, and compare competitive products side-by-side.

DAS Installation Tour and Networking ReceptionJoin us for a DAS installation tour at Chicago’s Museum of Science & Industry. The tour and reception are INCLUDED in your Full Access pass for the 2014 HetNet Expo!Sponsored by ExteNet Systems and Corning MobileAccess

TABLE OF CONTENTS

®

ANSI/BICSI 002-2014

Data Center Design andImplementation Best Practices

an American National Standard

The Essential Standard for Data Center Design

The highly anticipated, Data Center Design and Implementation Best Practices Standard, has arrived!

500 pages of content, including:n Modular and “container” data centers.n Data center infrastructure management (DCIM).n DC power.n Hot and cold aisles.n Multi-data center architecture.n Data center service outsourcing.n Energyefficiency.

Update your reference library with this newstandard! Buy it today at www.bicsi.org/002!

UPDATED EDITION NOW AVAILABLE!

© Co

pyrig

ht B

ICSI

, Jun

e 201

5. A

ll righ

ts re

serv

ed. B

ICSI

is a

regis

tere

d tra

dem

ark o

f BIC

SI, In

c.

AGL.Small Cell Ad.indd 1 5/14/2015 9:52:20 AM

Documents

ˆˇ˘ IN PROGRESS€¦ · lia. Tor may route my traffic through Germany, Sweden, and end up in Russia. You think I’m in Russia, and what it looks like to the website I’m visiting,