SMALL CELLS A Business Model Examination...Making LTE Technologies Play Nice With Small Cells VOLUME 2 • ISSUE 3 • SEPTEMBER 2015 SMALL CELLS A Business Model Examination THE MIDDLEPRISE

Making LTE Technologies Play Nice With Small Cells

VO

LUM

E 2 • ISSUE 3 • SEP

TEMB

ER 2015

SMALL CELLS A Business Model Examination

THE MIDDLEPRISEA Big and Complicated Marketing Opportunity

5G DATA CRUNCHSpectrum, Technology and Infrastructure Continue To Be Key

[email protected]

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 5:07 PM

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.

PO Box 2090Ashburn, VA 20146

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 VOLUME 2 • ISSUE 3 • SEPTEMBER 2015

06 | Trending

08 | From the Editor

12 | Industry Insight

50 | ETC

52 | Going Forward

FEATURES14 | The Middleprise: A Big and Complicated

Market Opportunity A once in a decade business opportunity is about to be dropped on our door

step. Find out where that will land, and how to position for it.

18 | 5G Data Crunch — Spectrum, Technology and Infrastructure Continue To Be Key

The 5G landscape is still a moving target, but it can’t be much longer. Find out

what the key issues are, and how technology is about to catch the bullet train of

development toward that 2010 deployment bulls eye.

22 | Case Study: C-RAN Small Cells in a Coliseum A new platform, C-RAN LTE small cells is about to emerge; ideal for deployments

such as coliseums and stadiums. Understanding this approach can offer a new

vector of opportunity.

24 | Special Report: Small Cells, the Internet of Things, the Standards, and Connectivity

Standards will be a driving factor that will radically change the small cell

game. If you don’t know what is happening in that game, you will be left

behind – with both small cells and the IoT.

26 | Making LTE Technologies Play Nice With Small Cells

LTE/A will require much more precise timing and synchronization to make

it play nice with small cells. That is a bit more complicated than it seems,

and this article will delve into how these complexities will shape small

cell deployments.

40 | Small Cells: A Business Model Examination Where is the sweet spot that will put small cells in the map, everywhere and

anywhere? This article discusses areas such as demand, the marketplace, and

economics, among others, that will define that sweet spot.

44 | Top 10 Challenges Hindering Outdoor Small Cell Deployments

As much as small cells have to offer for a number of scenarios, it isn’t a cake

walk yet. Explore the issues that will have to be overcome to make small cells

ready for large-scale deployment.

26

12

52

COLUMNS

4 AGL SMALL CELL MAGAZINE • SEPTEMBER 2015 aglmediagroup.com

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.

10 | AGL Conferences

01 | Black & Veatch

49 | Black Box Network Services

33 | Charles Industries

21 | Bird Technologies

37 | Electric Conduit Construction

C2 | Extenet

23 | Huber + Suhner

02 | IWantToBeRecycled.org

17 | Kathrein

C3 | National Association of Tower Erectors

38 | Network Building & Consulting

31 | Red Cross

09 | Sabre Industries

C4 | Solar Communications

46 | TheShelterProject.org

05 | Times Microwave Systems

*C2, C3 & C4 denote cover pages

ADVERTISING INDEX

[email protected]

©20

15 K

athr

ein

US

A |

All

rig

hts

rese

rved

| *

So

urce

: AB

I Res

earc

h 20

15

Place capacity where it’s needed fast.Kathrein small cell solutions make it easier for mobile

operators to densify their networks to provide faster,

more reliable data connections and higher data

throughput on 3G, 4G and LTE networks.

Learn more about the #1 LTE Antenna Provider* at KathreinUSA.com

KATHREIN SMALL

CELL SOLUTIONS:

ENHANCE THE QUALITY

OF THE MOBILE

EXPERIENCE EVERYWHERE

AGL Small Cell Magazine (Above Ground Level) is published 4 times a year by AGL Media Group LLC., P.O. Box 2090, Ashburn, VA 20146-2090. It is mailed free to qualified individuals in the United States of America.

POSTMASTER: Send address change to: AGL Media Group Circulation Department, P.O. Box 2090, Ashburn, VA 20146-2090.


TABLE OF CONTENTS


COLUMNS

THE CONNECTED CAR IS HAPPENINGConnected cars are one of the hottest trends in wireless today. In a recent survey by Changewave, when they looked at the latest trends, the connected car came out as the number one.

Without a doubt, there is an upbeat outlook for connected cars. And the automotive industry isn’t letting that go unnoticed. GM, Audi, and Chrysler, are among the latest to jump on the connected car bandwagon and roll out cars that are totally Wi-Fi’d and LTE’d, including Hotspot 2.0, and 4G capability.

Interest in the connected car is up 11 points from last year. Today, nearly 40 percent of those sur-veyed said they are very interested in owning a con-nected car. Another shift in some statistics show that more people are willing to pay for that feature; 47 percent say they would pay up to $10.00 per month for it.

Industry analysts expect that, in the next couple of years, virtually every auto manufacturer will offer wireless connectivity as standard.

DATA PLAN MARKET IS HOTThe hoopla over data plans has garnered a lot of interest lately, and the market is under tremendous competitive pressure. As mobile devices become more sophisticated, the consumer is demanding more and more data as photos, multimedia and music downloads are the top contenders to clog up the limited bandwidth.

It will be interesting to see how this proceeds, espe-cially with the ongoing feud between the big four and the FCC, who is calling them on the carpet for initially offering “unlimited” data plans, then either throttling

TRENDINGback or actually capping data in some cases. However, they have been anything but unlimited. And carriers will have real problems if their subscribers start consuming upwards of 50 GB regularly.

To address that, the trend is towards shared data plans. Why? Simple, the monthly wireless bill is deter-mined by how many gadgets are on the plan and how

much data is being shared among them. This is a win-win for the

carrier for a number of reasons. First of all, data issues with individuals fall dramatically.

Simply put, there are fewer subscribers to worry about,

and deal with if data limits are exceeded. Secondly, they don’t care what you have on

the network. Data is data and all they care about is

if the shared plan limit is exceeded. Thirdly, it gives the

carrier a whole lot of options, and pricing to go with it, and, quite

frankly, it is easier to sell a family plan at $160.00 for say, four people

than to put each person on an individual plan, according to what they think they will need. People seem to think a $160.00 monthly shared plan is cheaper than four each, $40.00 plans. And don’t forget the “Mobility Administrative Fee,” just for signing up for a shared plan.

How this will shake out is a bit fuzzy. We have gone from unlimited, to limited, to shared. What will be the next genius marketing trend from the big four?

HOTSPOT 2.0, 802.11AC, AND VOWI-FI TECHNOLOGIES RAMPING UPThis trend is being accelerated by emerging technologies such as Hotspot 2.0, VoWi-Fi, and 802.11ac.

One of the sub-trends is that many businesses, in


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

different verticals like retail and hospitality, are seeing the benefit to removing fees on Wi-Fi usage, and are offering it as an amenity service in order to attract more footfalls. The expected result is increase customer satis-faction, which should, eventually, generate more sales and activity. Furthermore, advances in data analytics and the resultant ability to target advertising are new tools that hotspot owners can us to increase the value of their networks, enhance end-user experience, attract strategic partners, and create a collaboration ecosystem.

THE MOVE TO OPEN SOURCEIn order for the next generation of networks to come on line, open-source software will become the trend. Plat-forms like Network-function virtualization (NFV) and software-defined networking (SDN) will never come about if the basic platforms are proprietary. For example, the Open Networking Foundation (ONF) announced the release of Atrium, an open SDN software distribution designed to help the network industry more easily adopt open SDN by integrating established open source SDN software with some critical connecting pieces.

The first piece of the release, Atrium 2015/A, incorpo-rates the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), the Open Network Operating System (ONOS) and Open Compute Project (OCP) components. The software elements run in either controllers or switches, communicating using OpenFlow protocol, and include plug-in opportunities for other switching solutions to help foster an open ecosystem with interoperable, hardware-based OpenFlow switches.

SMART HOME TRENDSThe smart home market is generating significant industry buzz with a flood of new products hitting the market. At the top of the device tree are thermostats and home monitoring. Across the board, Smart Thermostat (51%) and Smart Home Monitoring (49%) are by far the most popular types of devices/services, with 51 percent and 49 percent, respectively, of smart homes utilizing each technology.

It is expected that this trend will ramp up in the next few years with one in three homes implementing smart home technology of one type or another. Smart home device will not just be thermostats and security, rather they will encompass a whole slew of devices, including such things as smart lighting, smart locks, smart environmental sensors (smoke, CO2), smart outlets and smart appliance.

TRENDS IN BEACON TECHNOLOGYOne of the fastest moving platforms is beacon technology. Beacons are low-cost, battery-friendly, low-energy Blue-tooth pieces of hardware small enough to attach to a wall or countertop. Beacons use connections to transmit messages or prompts directly to a smartphone or tablet.

They are poised to transform how retailers, event organizers, transit systems, enterprises, and educational institutions communicate with people indoors. Consumers might even want to deploy them as part of home auto-mation systems.

Beacons are going to show up soon in retail outlets to provide customers with product information, flash sales or deals, and to speed up the checkout process with a completely contactless payments system. Beacons will also show up in airports and ground transit hubs so that noti-fications on departures, delays, and gate and platform assignments can be delivered instantly to passenger phones.They are currently integrated with Apple devices, and the iOS7 mobile operating system. Today, 200 million iOS devices can serve as transmitters and receivers. As well, PayPal and Qualcomm are gearing up to challenge Apple with beacon hardware of their own.

Why this has so much traction is because half of American adults already utilize their mobile devices in stores. Consumers could also use them to inexpensively automate their homes. For example, beacons could turn on lights in a room as soon as someone with a smart-phone has entered them, or open doors or window shades. And, there are tons of other applications on the drawing board.


FROM THE EDITOR

A few months ago, I wrote a rather tongue-in-cheek editorial column about the end of the traditional cell towers. While the technologies I mentioned were a bit out there, I really do believe there is more than a modicum of truth to the fact that the wireless infrastructure of today is not going to be the wireless infrastructure of tomorrow.

However, certain comments I made “…I think that the traditional cell tower infrastructure is heading for obso-lescence… ” elicited some rather mocking responses from those that have a vested interest in the tower infrastructure (don’t forget, this publication is about small cells and really isn’t vested in cellular towers). They immediately took me to task and came up with a bit of rather sarcastic banter as to why I was off my rocker.

Well, perhaps drones, balloons and satellites aren’t going to send the cell tower infrastructure to the scrap heap quite yet, but as technology marches on, I maintain my position that the cell towers we see today will be part of the great iron and steel scrap of the future. Here‘s why.

A technology has been developed and is being trialed by Qualcomm. It is addressing a very interesting idea; enabling smartphones to communicate directly with each other, sans towers. OK naysayers, say what you will, but when Qualcomm speaks, the industry listens.

In fact, this concept garnered high interest at the recent Founders Forum Smart Nation Singapore conference. And why not? Anyone in the thick of wireless technology knows that the future of wireless communications isn’t going to be a bunch of devices tethered to a fixed radiator site. It will be a heterogeneous network of all types of mostly low-power devices flowing in and out of a liquid sea of frequencies all handled by intelligent, virtualized systems, especially once the Internet of Everything emerges. There will be billions of small, low-power cells. Some will be radio

heads, others, cell phones, still others include land and air vehicles, roving and fixed Wi-Fi networks, and yes, drones, balloons and satellites. And there will be elements of other wireless technologies, such as Bluetooth, for example, working in there as well. The point being that, for the most part, tethered networks will be history.

The truth is that the industry is on the cusp of tech-nologies such as new small form factor chips that will replace the entire electronics of a cell tower. And they won’t need the megawatts, only a few milliwatts since, conceivably, at least in populous locations, such devices will never be more than a few meters from another such device — it could just work.

The fact is that 5G will radically redefine the “cellular infrastructure” to a much more mobile and agile wireless infrastructure. Coming on line is device-to-device tech-nology that enables the discovery of thousands of devices, and their services, in a proximity of up to 500 m. This in a privacy-sensitive and battery-efficient way. This is just the tip of the technology iceberg.

And, I am not alone here. One nod for this concept comes from a Professor Jeff Andrews, who said, “in principle, exploiting direct communication between nearby mobile devices will improve spectrum utilization, overall throughput and energy efficiency, while enabling new peer-to-peer and location-based applications and services. D2D-enabled LTE devices have the potential to become competitive for fallback public-safety networks that must function when cellular networks are not available or fail.” There are others on board with this as well.

This may not be drones, balloons or satellites, yet, but however this landscape evolves, cell towers will have a much diminished play. I’m selling my tower stock. —[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: Direct Communications — the end of the cellular tower, continued.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

䌀漀渀琀愀挀琀匀愀戀爀攀琀漀搀愀礀昀漀爀愀氀氀礀漀甀爀猀洀愀氀氀挀攀氀氀渀攀攀搀猀⸀ ㌀㠀ⴀ㈀㌀ⴀ㈀㤀　　䤀眀眀眀⸀匀愀戀爀攀䤀渀搀甀猀琀爀椀攀猀⸀挀漀洀

꤀ ㈀　

㔀匀

愀戀爀攀

䤀渀搀甀

猀琀爀椀攀猀

Ⰰ 䤀渀挀⸀

ⴀ 　㠀开

㔀匀

䈀匀

倀爀漀瘀椀搀椀渀最攀渀最椀渀攀攀爀攀搀猀漀氀甀琀椀漀渀猀昀漀爀琀栀攀搀攀渀猀攀甀爀戀愀渀洀愀爀欀攀琀Ⰰ 漀甀爀瀀爀漀搀甀挀琀猀㨀

∠ 䌀漀渀挀攀愀氀刀䘀攀焀甀椀瀀洀攀渀琀昀漀爀匀洀愀氀氀䌀攀氀氀愀渀搀䐀䄀匀∠ 䌀漀渀猀漀氀椀搀愀琀攀攀焀甀椀瀀洀攀渀琀椀渀猀椀渀最氀攀栀漀甀猀椀渀最∠ 䄀搀搀爀攀猀猀洀漀猀琀樀甀爀椀猀搀椀挀琀椀漀渀愀氀爀攀最甀氀愀琀椀漀渀愀渀搀愀攀猀琀栀攀琀椀挀渀攀攀搀猀

戀氀攀渀搀椀渀最椀渀琀漀琀栀攀甀爀戀愀渀氀愀渀搀猀挀愀瀀攀


CONFERENCES

For Sponsorship Information Contact:

Register by October 23 for only $119Registration after October 23 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.

The Omni Charlotte HotelCharlotte, NC 28202

REGISTER ONLINE: aglmediagroup.com/aglevents

AGL Brings Content to Charlotte, NC

Gain insight from leading

companies that design,

build and improve today’s

demanding networks and

plan the future of wireless.

Session Topics

• Spectrum, Technology, and Tower Trends

• Evolution of WiFi

• Tower Business Roundtable

• NATE: Wireless Industry Challenges and Safety

Solutions in 2015 and Beyond

• PCIA Educational Sessional

• Case Studies in Small Cell and DAS

Experience the Education

Social/Networking Event in Conjunction with the Carolinas Wireless Association

Kari Willis | [email protected] | 714.504.1145

ENJOY THE BENEFITS

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

WEDNESDAY — NOVEMBER 4, 2015

After the Conference:

2015 AGL CONFERENCE SPONSORS

COST

$TIME

5:00 – 7:30 p.m.

Who Says Learning Can’t Be Fun!


CONFERENCES

For Sponsorship Information Contact:

Register by October 23 for only $119Registration after October 23 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.

The Omni Charlotte HotelCharlotte, NC 28202

REGISTER ONLINE: aglmediagroup.com/aglevents

AGL Brings Content to Charlotte, NC

Gain insight from leading

companies that design,

build and improve today’s

demanding networks and

plan the future of wireless.

Session Topics

• Spectrum, Technology, and Tower Trends

• Evolution of WiFi

• Tower Business Roundtable

• NATE: Wireless Industry Challenges and Safety

Solutions in 2015 and Beyond

• PCIA Educational Sessional

• Case Studies in Small Cell and DAS

Experience the Education

Social/Networking Event in Conjunction with the Carolinas Wireless Association

Kari Willis | [email protected] | 714.504.1145

ENJOY THE BENEFITS

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

WEDNESDAY — NOVEMBER 4, 2015

After the Conference:

2015 AGL CONFERENCE SPONSORS

COST

$TIME

5:00 – 7:30 p.m.

Who Says Learning Can’t Be Fun!


COLUMNS

Google’s launch of its virtual mobile network, Project Fi, isn’t necessarily a traditional mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) scenario; where a consumer brand looks to add mobile services to its portfolio, like Virgin Mobile does on EE’s UK infrastructure. Instead, Google has moved to a position where it can convert traditional mobile operators into utility pipe providers and replace them in the eye of the customer. Clearly a long-term plan for Google, this announcement hints at a huge number of impli-cations for operators.

Although initially offered only to Nexus 6 handset owners in the US, Google will no doubt be looking to expand it to further devices and territories as the service becomes established. Google is certainly a worthy challenger and has presented a solution to the coverage and capacity problems that mobile operators have failed to address worldwide.

While some may see this as ‘Super Google’ saving the world from patchy signals, the end-to-end net-work visibility will give Google the ability to know all about how consumers search and choose products online, respond to online advertising and then con-vert that to action in physical retail environments. This so-called omni-presence, is the retail industry Holy Grail, whereby retailers can integrate their online knowledge of customers’ needs, and desires with the in-store experience.

As retailers battle it out with each other, they all want to be closer to their customer. They know that when a customer is served what they are looking, for when they need it, they can likely drive sales upwards.

If consumers are on the Project Fi service, Google will

know where they are, what they are doing, when they are shopping and probably exactly what they are looking for. This is the core of any sales optimization strategy and how retail brands know they must engage with and influence customers. Clearly, it’s about joining the dots between the online and the physical world of shopping.

WHY SHOULD OPERATORS BE WATCHING THIS SO CAREFULLY?

Operators who are fighting each other to win customer recognition

and handset contracts could lose out to a larger, consum-

er-focused brand that aims to serve customer content and helpful services. Cus-

tomers have been screaming for better coverage and capac-

ity for years, and Google has listened to these cries and seen a

gap in the market.But Google brings this all together

with guaranteed access to its many content, search and shopping services. Its size and innovative approach has enabled it to move, at a global scale, and it could eventually challenge the dominance of network operators, or even fully convert them into utility-pipe providers.

By white labelling services from more than one network, as well as the ability to operate over Wi Fi, Project Fi can seamlessly switch to the strongest service. All the user sees is the same continual Google name in the top left hand corner of the display screen, serving everything they offer from a single touch-point. The network will undoubtedly have unmatchable coverage and capacity compared to any single operator, and those operators choosing to take part will have no contact with the customer and no brand recognition. Google could easily substitute them for a cheaper competitor, as the customer’s brand loyalty is with Google rather than the service network.

INDUSTRY INSIGHT: EVALUATING GOOGLE’S NEW VIRTUAL MOBILE NETWORK STRATEGY

B y G a v i n R a y


WHAT CAN OPERATORS DO TO DEFEND THEIR POSITION? In order for network operators to take on Google, they’ll need to quickly act; focusing on doing what Google is trying to achieve, and do it better, leveraging all their assets in new ways. Google has highlighted the fact that users are not happy with poor coverage and capacity and, given an alternative, users are prepared to switch.

Using Google’s announcement as a wakeup call to the dissatisfaction of the consumer, operators must focus on their existing networks, ensuring they deliver a better service, more quickly, and everywhere it’s needed. Greater collaboration is fine, but improved service levels should begin internally. Ensuring there is coverage exactly where the consumer wants it, by using a combination of macro and small cells, will create a dynamic network presenting greater value for money and a better total service experience for the end users.

Operators can compete not just on a coverage and

COLUMNS

capacity level, but also on the presence-based services that Google will be looking to offer. Operators need to look at how they can improve their service to brands as well as network subscribers. Google’s strength is using data to promote insight into a customer’s habits and preferences, which consequently provide brands with targeted information on purchasing habits that can then increase sales in both the short-and long-term. By lever-aging their spectrum and existing user bases, operators can present their own solutions that compete with Goo-gle and bridge the gap between online and retail insight.

Now a battle of the big versus the nimbler begins and the question is: are operators light enough on their feet to go toe-to-toe with Google? As Louis V. Gerstner said when he wrote his book about turning around IBM “Who says elephants can’t dance?” Well, it won’t take long to find out.

Gavin Ray, SVP Products & Marketing at ip.access


The middleprise is defined as venues between 100,000 square feet and climbing to 500,000. The global middle-prise build-out represents a $20B — that’s a B for billion dollar market, of which less than 2% has been tapped.

The middleprise landscape includes hotels, hospitals, colleges, retail, multi-level class A office towers, and their cadre of stakeholders. Property owners and managers, the commercial real estate community as well as the developer community including architects and engineers, will all play significant roles in shaping how wireless service is designed, turned up, and who pays for it.

Directly and indirectly, big trends within the wireless industry are buoying the middleprise opportunity such a Bring Your Own Device (BYOD), Internet of Things (IoT) and, of course, 5G. The common denominator is the wireless “data tsunami” that AT&T’s John Donovan described earlier this year as meeting the 100,000 percent increase in wireless traffic. Grabbing market share of the $20B worth of in-building wireless technology revenue is achievable now to those players agile and, innovative enough to take the plunge into the middleprise.

That said, achieving success is not going to be a cake-walk. New markets require new approaches. The chal-lenges and opportunities can be grouped into four areas: design and infrastructure; compliance with public safety fire code mandates; the technology and product toolkit; and what may be the biggest hurdle — funding and ownership business models.

DESIGN AND INFRASTRUCTURESolutions within the middleprise must be flexible to support multiple services — specifically, multiple operators — including multiple bands to address legacy, current and future frequencies. For example, a hotel fails its guests by offering service from a single carrier only. Instead, the ideal infrastructure needs to provide a converged network where a single backbone serves multiple services including commercial cellular, public-safety and IP (Wi-Fi). This optimal approach enables the infrastructure to stay in place while the end pieces get swapped out to avoid expense rip and replace. Middleprise solutions need to be intelligent to make it easier for the venue to design, commission, optimize and manage the network. Networks have to become self- defined and self-organizing. They also need to become smaller, lighter and greener. Because a middleprise venue does not have significant space for base stations and head-end gear, equipment must get smaller and/or be hoteled at a centralized and off-site location. Combined, these success factors contribute toward re-ducing Total Cost of Ownership (TCO). PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS Public safety is going to play a major role in middleprise build outs. Exactly how remains to be seen because the International Code Council (ICC) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) will set about writing and publishing new model codes and standards for in-building

THE MIDDLEPRISE: A BIG AND COMPLICATED MARKET OPPORTUNITYTHE “MIDDLEPRISE” IS A ONCE-IN-A-DECADE OPPORTUNITY FOR NEW MAR-KET LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE IN-BUILDING WIRELESS (IBW) ECOSYSTEM

B y M i k e C o l l a d o

FEATURES


wireless public safety communications in 2016 and 2017, respectively. But we believe that the codes will become more stringent in requiring support for public safety communications. This will apply for both new venues in order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) and, likely, existing and previously grandfathered venues that get renovated.

Whereas multiple stakeholders such as the venue, wireless operator, or third party neutral host (3PO) may fund a commercial cellular in-building wireless network, the cost of complying with an unfunded public safety mandate will undoubtedly be borne by the venue. Over time, we anticipate the emergence of creative business models to potentially provide tax shelters for investments in public safety networks as well as incentives akin to the significant tax credits and/or insurance breaks venues receive for deploying fire sprinkler protection systems.

FUNDING AND OWNERSHIP The middleprise represents a key shift in the business model for in-building wireless networks, specifically the funding, ownership, and operation. It also informs of the complexity in solving for these market challenges.

In-building wireless networks in large venues have traditionally been funded and owned by a wireless oper-ator or 3PO. However, these business models, which are often optimized to generate revenue through advertising, and elevate subscriber goodwill and loyalty, don’t correlate within the middleprise.

Perhaps it is the business model that more clearly delineates between the large venue and middleprise market segments: the middleprise is the point where operators or 3POs won’t fund or own the in-building wireless network. For them it becomes a pure analysis of the ROI and because of the variety of middleprise venues, this downsizing threshold will vary based on the size (horizontal) and/or industry (vertical). Horizontally, certain venues within the top end of the middleprise may get funded by a carrier or 3PO. Vertically, certain venues based on industry type, venue use and potential strategic advantages, may similarly get funded by a carrier or 3PO.

Across the middleprise, the venue will most likely play the lead role in funding and owning the network. Both TCO and project management will be pivotal in the new middleprise business model paradigm. The total solution cost will likely need to be sharply reduced to around $1 per square foot. Similarly, the venue owner must be able to successfully enable carriers to plug-in to the network. To offset the complexity of funding, ownership, and operation models, we expect new stakeholder roles to emerge to orchestrate those activities.

TOOLKIT APPROACHAlthough the wireless industry has suggested a toolbox strategy that consists of DAS, Small Cells and Wi-Fi, will be used to enable wireless coverage and capacity inside venues, the middleprise is where we will truly see this approach play out. Yet, the decision path for determining

the right tool in the middleprise will be complicated. Generally speaking, DAS is ideal for large venues while small cells are better suited for smaller buildings. But just as the venue size (horizontal) and/or industry type (vertical) influence the business model, these factors also affect the technology solution. Both the size of the venue and industry impact whether a DAS or Small Cell solution is optimal. For example, a 300,000 square foot building might at first glance not lend itself to DAS, but when discovered that it’s a hotel whose guests may subscribe to any of the four major wireless operators, DAS is likely a good solution.

In practice, the right technology approach for the middleprise is determined case by case, and may leverage multiple tools in the same venue. Consider a property such

FEATURES


as the Anatole in Dallas: DAS might be deployed for the guest rooms and lobby areas; small cells for the conference rooms and atrium areas; and Wi-Fi throughout for data capacity. It’s kind of like Legos in that we’ll use what’s needed to build the network.

Ultimately, the middleprise will drive technology inno-vation because conventional DAS and Small Cells are not optimized to solve for the unique challenges within this market. DAS is evolving to look more like a Small Cell in terms of cost and deployment ease while Small Cells is going to look more like DAS to support multiple bands.

Multiple tools — and not a single, silver bullet — are required within the middleprise.

THE BOTTOM LINENot since the early days of in-building wireless has there been such a big market opportunity that’s largely untapped. Representing a total addressable market (TAM) potential of $20B, the middleprise is complicated with challenges to the technology and product toolkit as well as funding and ownership business models. Look

for innovation, new market entrants and, ultimately new market leadership within the in-building wireless ecosystem to emerge through the genesis of the nascent middleprise market.

Mike Collado is Vice President of Marketing for SOLiD, a manufacturer of RF Amplifier, RF Radio and Optical Transport solutions that help keep people connected and safe in a rapidly-changing world. He leads the company’s go-to-market strategy as well as market positioning, product launch and thought leadership initiatives. Mike is an author and frequent presenter at conferences on emerging wireless trends.

“...conventional DAS and Small Cells are not optimized to solve for the unique challenges within this market. ”

FEATURES


TABLE OF CONTENTS©

2015

Kat

hrei

n U

SA

| A

ll ri

ght

s re

serv

ed |

*S

our

ce: A

BI R

esea

rch

2015

Place capacity where it’s needed fast.Kathrein small cell solutions make it easier for mobile

operators to densify their networks to provide faster,

more reliable data connections and higher data

throughput on 3G, 4G and LTE networks.

Learn more about the #1 LTE Antenna Provider* at KathreinUSA.com

KATHREIN SMALL

CELL SOLUTIONS:

ENHANCE THE QUALITY

OF THE MOBILE

EXPERIENCE EVERYWHERE


FEATURES

The year 2020 seems like a long way off. Children born in 2003 will be freshman in college; the Apple you waited in line for starting at 4 a.m., will be five years older and likely have been upgraded at least twice more; teleportation, though, will still not be a viable option for the morning commute. But believe any parent — or wireless telecom infrastructure profes-sional — when they say, “Man, that went by fast. It seems like only yesterday…”

2020 is the target commercial roll-out year for 5G. The normal cycle time from concept to technical stan-dardization to commercial availability for next genera-tion wireless networks is historically ten years. We are right now a little over half-way to 5G availability, which means it’s time to ramp up planning for 5G. And as we do, the buzz words in the wireless industry — spectrum, technology, and infrastructure — will play even larger roles in the evolution and commercial viability of this next generation network. 5G — THE EVOLVING REVOLUTIONLike previous generations of mobile technology, 5G is evolving as a new superset of network technologies with an aim to cater to:

• 1,000 times traffic volumes.

• Tens of billions of connected devices.

• 10-100 times higher end-user data rates.

• Extremely low latency to achieve real-time video broadcast quality.

• 10x end-user device battery life.

• All types of different devices (e.g., mobile phones,

tablets, television, wearable tech, vehicles, the break room coffee machine…anything!).

By now you have read that the technical standards for 5G are still in flux. However, the goal is ultimately to transition from today’s person-to-person communi-cation model to a “network of things”; a network where people, objects, and data, both mobile and fixed, are part of an interlaced multi-level functioning singular communication system.

As everything becomes connected, the obvious leap is to synthesize now-available data from a multitude of sources into usable information that will drive personal, business, and automated decisions and have societal benefits beyond the use cases we have thought of today. The dramatic increase in connectivity and information exchange generated by evolving 5G network architec-tures is creating what PCIA President Jonathan Adelstein calls a “data crunch like wireless networks have yet to experience.”

The wireless industry has been exploring creative ways to deliver more data to both end-users and a multitude of different devices and data storage warehouses. The three main ways to deliver more wireless data are:

1. Increased spectrum availability and utilization.

2. Technological evolution for 5G wireless access networks.

3. Reuse and construction of new wireless infrastructure.

Parallel Infrastructure are naturally interested in how the 5G infrastructure requirements will shake out. However, we are not the only ones. The wireless industry as a whole, and specifically the infrastructure industry, is significantly affected by how 5G evolves to address spectrum and access network technologies.

5G DATA CRUNCH — SPECTRUM, TECHNOLOGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONTINUE TO BE KEY

B y E d M y e r s

WHILE THE 5G LANDSCAPE IS STILL A RATHER CLOUDY VISION, TO MAKE 5G A REALITY BY 2020, TECHNOLOGY WILL ADVANCE LIKE NEVER BEFORE.


FEATURES

SPECTRUM AVAILABILITY AND USEClearly, more spectrum is needed to accommodate the grand vision of 5G. It’s logical to assume that in order to further expand traffic capacity and enable the transmis-sion bandwidths needed to support the very high data rates, 5G will require the extension of the range of wire-less frequencies used for mobile communication. High frequencies (those above 10 GHz) can complement the lower frequency backbone of today’s 5G broadband wire-less networks by providing for extreme data rates and population dense deployments.

The federal government continues to view the “unleashing” of spectrum for broadband use — which really is more of a “slow drip” — as one of the FCC’s most effective strategies for spurring economic growth and job creation. However, the wireless industry requires new spectrum now to both improve the performance of wire-less broadband services beyond 2020, and support new technologies and applications that will be deployed in the millimeter wave portion of radio spectrum.

As the FCC prepares for the 2016 Incentive Auction to 600 MHz of broadcast TV spectrum available for wireless carrier utilization, 5G technology groups are focused on techniques to improve spectrum utilization rather than improving spectrum efficiency. This is primarily due to the fact that improvements in spectrum efficiency — defined as bits per Hertz of spectrum - are constrained by the physical characteristics of the spectrum itself. Improvements through coding and modulation design alone become increasingly more difficult and less effective. However, technological jumps in spectrum utilization — defined as bits per Hertz per cell site area — will allow for flexible network deployments more capable of han-dling the data volumes and transactional applications envisioned as part of 5G.

TECHNOLOGY EFFICIENCYJumps in the availability of new spectrum and how it is utilized will only get us a fraction of the way to a network that can support data volume and access re-quirements proposed as part of 5G. The wireless indus-try is relying on technologists and equipment manu-facturers to incorporate several key access and operational technology components.

• Multi-Antenna Support — The use of multiple anten-nas in the radio access network is critical as networks become more dense and the propagation properties worsen due to the use of higher spectral frequencies.

• Efficient Transmission and Power Usage — Designing radio access network equipment to minimize their net-work management data transmissions and limit power usage not directly related to the delivery of user data will reduce interference and lead to spectral utilization.

• Direct Device-to-Device (D2D) Communication — D2D will include peer-to-peer communication (by-passing the core network), as well as the use of the end-user mobile device as a way of extending network coverage. This not only will enhance the efficiency of the radio access network, but possibly decrease the need for additional dedicated infrastructure to support licensed frequency communications in the core trans-mission network. If an end-user device can be used as a relay to extend coverage, large capital expenses for radio access network deployments could be greatly reduced or avoided altogether in some cases.

• Access and Backhaul Integration — In addition to fiber, licensed high-frequency wireless technology is used today as a part of a backhaul solution. 5G equipment is being designed for the access network (core network to end-user device) to extend to the higher wireless frequencies. This will allow the historically separated access and backhaul networks to be integrated and use


and permitting of real estate required to successfully design and deploy a scalable network that provides the coverage and capacity demanded by the end-user. Players are liaising with municipal land owners across the country and major carriers to reach consensus on ways to collaborate that will benefit both sides’ objectives when it comes to accessing available real estate to build much-needed infrastructure.

5G networks will be deployed by leveraging the heteroge-neous network strategies of today; macro cell sites, small cell sites, indoor and outdoor distributed antenna systems, Wi-Fi data off-load, etc. 5G networks will leverage high-capacity backhaul of all types (dark/lit fiber, licensed and unlicensed millimeter wave broadband fixed wireless, satellite). All 5G sites will require access to utilities, be fully accessible for maintenance and operational needs, and have adequate vertical co-locatable space at 20 to 100 feet in the air.

Due to the capacity, coverage, and latency requirements, 5G networks will be ultra-dense. These ultra-dense net-works (UDNs) will have multiple access points for a given area. They will self-organize based on application, network utilization, and end-user requirements.

Hardware (primarily radios, integrated antennas), some form of backhaul, and utilities must be available at every UDN location. Although footprints will be significantly smaller, these requirements for co-locatable structures, available access and utilities are very similar to the infrastructure essentials required by today’s macro, small cell, and DAS networks. And therein lies the issue.

As cited above, despite the recent efforts of industry advocacy groups like PCIA working alongside the FCC to streamline and expedite the deployment of broadband wireless infrastructure, real estate approvals for deploy-ment at the state and local levels continue to face resis-tance. As an example, Montgomery County, Maryland recently filed a law suit against the FCC calling the new Infrastructure Order “unconstitutional, arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion and otherwise illegal.”

It’s hard to deploy technology everyone wants when the infrastructure required for successful deployment is prohibited, or in many cases, vehemently opposed. AN URGENT CALL FOR COLLABORATIONFor 5G network deployment to be successful and timely, state and local governments must truly partner with the

FEATURES

the same basic technologies and spectrum bands. Doing so will lead to overall effective spectrum utilization as well as reduced operational and management efforts.

REALIZING NEW WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTUREAs the wireless industry addresses the challenges of spectrum availability and use, 5G access network tech-nology requirements, and how they will become interop-erable with today’s commercial 4G LTE networks and end-user devices, the question of how to deploy these new networks looms large.

Significant functional requirements such as standards, capital, and operational costs must be rounded into shape as standards are solidifying. In the United States, industry groups are beginning to remove obstacles and change pol-icies allowing for the significant physical infrastructure required for 5G to become a reality by 2020. Organizations like PCIA have developed agendas to address topics such as:

• Improving the state, local, and federal application approval processes for a new tower or wireless infrastructure element.

• Removing significant barriers for siting wireless facilities on federal property.

• Adopting rules and standards for collocation on existing wireless infrastructure.

• Encouraging wireless broadband deployment in rural and underserved areas.

• Growing the wireless industry skilled workforce pool.

However, the greatest impediment to the growth of wireless infrastructure required to address 5G requirements in 2020 and beyond lies squarely out of the control of the wireless in-dustry itself: access to more co-locatable structures and zone-able/develop-able land for new infrastructure deployment. THE ARGUMENT FOR REAL ESTATE AND DEPLOYMENT STANDARDIZATIONThe largest speed bump in wireless network deployment today is real estate. Or, more specifically, the leasing, zoning,


carrier and telecom infrastructure community as never before. And the partnership must be mutually beneficial.

At a minimum, the 5G community must:

1. Determine standard configurations (e.g., size, dimension, weight, power and access requirement, footprint, etc.) for new technology deployment. When standards are mutu-ally agreeable and followed, deployment may accelerate.

2. Assist the state and local public officials in understanding the economic and technological benefits of deploying new technology. If the public can benefit from the service provided and the community enjoys both job creation and new revenue sources, deployment may accelerate.

3. Leverage available state and local co-locatable assets (e.g., buildings, rooftops, streetlights, utility poles, schools, existing public safety infrastructure, existing vertical real estate and towers) wherever possible. Leveraging otherwise fallow real estate to generate revenue at zero cost to the public should accelerate deployment.

At a minimum, state and local governments must:

1. Make publicly owned real estate available for standardized 5G wireless infrastructure development. This must be inclusive of stabilized standards, rents, and timelines for zoning and permitting approvals.

2. Maintain reasonable financial expectations for the use of publicly owned real estate. 5G technology deployment will be prolific, but small in footprint. Rent and revenue sharing payments must be proportional to the space/use ratio or will otherwise become cost prohibitive.

3. Allow the wireless infrastructure industry to move quickly. This must entail a standard set of streamlined processes, procedures, and accounting for the deployment of network and of rent and revenue sharing payments.

SUMMARY2020 and the promise of 5G may seem like a long way off. Technology, new access devices, and applications will continue to evolve and standardize. Efficiency gains in spectrum use

and development of access technologies will only get us so far. The systemic issues around stabilizing infrastructure require-ments, costs, and approvals required for successful network planning and deployment must be addressed now. Cooperation among the wireless infrastructure industry, federal wireless broadband deployment initiatives, and state and local govern-ment interests is paramount. We currently have time to de-velop 5G deployment standards and gain mutual acceptance. The last place any of us want to be in late 2019, within reach of a massive technological change that will alter personal lifestyles and global business practices, is to be standing there talking into our Apple Watch that can’t find a network con-nection and thinking, “Man, that five years went by fast…”

Ed Myers, is the Vice President of Business Development and Strategic Initiatives at Parallel Infrastructure. Ed is a well-known and respected member of the wireline and mobile communications industries and brings more than 15 years of experience to his role at Parallel Infrastructure. He’s responsible for communications tower and fiber infra-structure sales, emerging technology ecosystems and new right-of-way development.

BirdRF.com+01 866.695.4569+46(0)8 684 480 00

Visit us at these TradeshowsCTIA/Tower & Small Cell Summit Sept. 9-11HetNet Expo Oct. 27-28

© 2015Bird Technologies. Bird Technologies, BirdRF, DeltaNode and TXRX are registered trademarks of Bird Technologies. All rights reserved.

Total reliability in public safety LTE is more than possible.It’s essential. When lives are at stake, rely on Bird.

BIRD HAS YOUR CITY COVERED

1. Digital BDA (TX RX Systems): Flexible digital � lters can be con� gured to pass signals of interest and reject interfering signals

2. Fiber DAS Head End (DeltaNode): Modular system can be used to condition and combine both narrowband and broadband signals and send over � ber

3. Fiber DAS Remotes (DeltaNode): High output power coupled with low noise � gure gives e� cient coverage without sacri� cing uplink performance

4. Low PIM Couplers/Components (Bird): Low PIM components prevent interference and maximize system performance

RF Test and Measurement Systems and Services: Get the system operating and keep it operating with the equipment and skill set of Bird’s RF Experts

FEATURES


FEATURES

Connected devices are everywhere as users are turning to tablets and smartphones to update their Facebook status, post photos on Instagram, check e-mail, and everything in between. This is especially the case in large high-use venues like stadiums and coliseums.

Wireless service providers have turned to distributed antenna systems (DAS) to provide coverage in these venues. DAS connects a mobile base station to a network of antennas distributed throughout the building to pro-vide cellular coverage and high capacity.

DAS is effective, but at a cost. It requires coax or fiber optic cabling to transmit RF signals to remote antennas, plus master units and remote radio heads to power and condition the RF signals to ensure adequate transmit power at the antenna sites. DAS can run into many com-plex deployment issues, like passive intermodulation (PIM) and challenges in re-sectorization when capacity needs change. As a result, DAS is expensive to design, install, configure and troubleshoot. Network operators and property owners often report that DAS systems require expensive upgrades every 2-3 years to keep up with capacity growth. Additionally, DAS cannot support all LTE-Advanced features, such as Coordinated Multi-point (CoMP). ENTER THE SMALL CELL

In recent years, small cells have emerged as an alter-native. The term “small cell” is used for a variety of prod-ucts, ranging from sub-50 mW residential femtocells to 5 W picocells. But so far, small cells have been used only in a limited way, in large venues, usually as a supplement to a DAS.

For example, a small cell might fill a coverage hole in a distant corner, or a satellite building where it would be uneconomical to extend the DAS cabling. However, since each small cell is in fact an independent cell, deploying them densely throughout a large build-ing creates cell borders that in turn cause radio inter-ference and frequent cell-to-cell handovers, degrading the user experience. They can also interfere with the outdoor macro network.

ENTER THE CLOUDA new technology is emerging to fill the void: Cloud RAN (C-RAN) LTE Small Cells. With C-RAN the base-band processing is centralized, allowing multiple access points to act as a single continuous cell rather than as an array of competing cells. In this respect, C-RAN small cells are similar to DAS. However, C-RAN small cells are much more economical. In a recent study conducted by Real Wireless Ltd., C-RAN LTE small cells (in this case Airvana OneCell) were found to cost 71% less than a new 4G DAS, and 63% less than upgrading an existing 3G DAS to 4G. With the large install-base of DAS systems that do not yet have LTE, wireless operators and enterprises have an opportunity to save big when deploying LTE, while letting the existing 2G/3G DAS remain undisturbed — a big benefit in itself. The study further found that it was economical to use OneCell for LTE in new DAS deployments, be-cause the DAS could be 3G and SISO rather than high-er-cost 3G/4G and MIMO.

MAKING THE CASEWith new technologies coming into play, providers are continuously trying to upgrade networks for future growth. Nex-Tech Wireless saw the need to upgrade its wireless service in Gross Memorial Coliseum at Fort Hays State University in Hays, Kansas. A typical college coli-seum, Gross Memorial Coliseum holds up to 7,600 peo-ple and experiences heavy wireless use during events.

The coliseum already had a DAS, but it was 3G-only and the cost of upgrading it to 4G was high. Due to potential interference problems, Nex-Tech Wireless de-cided against “standalone” small cells and investigated alternative solutions.

Looking at how best to handle the upgrade, Nex-Tech Wireless deployed OneCell for the coliseum, with the objective of having it ready for use in time for the uni-versity’s graduation ceremony in May. The aggressive three week project schedule meant that they would be testing not only the performance but also the promised simplicity of C-RAN small cells.

CASE STUDY: C-RAN SMALL CELLS IN A COLISEUM

B y J o s h A d e l s o n


FEATURES

OneCell’s single-cell architecture greatly simplifies radio planning. The system’s elements are connected over a standard Ethernet LAN, making for a simple Wi-Fi-like installation. As a result, Nex-Tech Wireless was able to complete the installation, including performance test-ing, in time for the graduation ceremony.

Once graduation weekend approached, the system per-formed as expected. In fact, throughout the ceremony engineers recorded peak individual data rates of 66 Mbps throughout the coliseum. The maximum theoretical data rate for this 10 MHz channel is 75 Mbps.

The system also performed well in other respects. The connection setup success rate was 99.7%, and the macro handover success rate was a perfect 100%. Since there are no handovers in a single cell system, there was no possibility of handover failures within the system. This case study shows that single cell C-RAN

architecture carries advantages for both simplicity and performance. BEYOND THE COLISEUM: WHAT’S NEXT?The coliseum proved an ideal test case for C-RAN small cells, but the architecture is applicable in many other settings. Hospitals, office buildings, shopping malls and hotels are examples of large and potentially crowded venues in which subscribers’ demands for coverage and capacity have the potential to exhaust macro cell capabil-ities. For these venues DAS economics often do not work, and traditional stand-alone small cells cannot scale to meet their requirements. C-RAN small cells will be an important component of an operator’s strategy to keep up with data demand and to provide a superior user experience.

Josh Adelson is the Director of Product Marketing for Airvana.


FEATURES

The Internet of things (IoT) is poised to change the small cell game. There are competing standards for the world of products and services that currently make up the In-ternet of Things (IoT). The companies putting forth these standards have formed alliances that represent a who’s who of OEMs, and multi-billion dollar companies. These IoT standards are designed in a variety of ways to deal with four main focus areas which each IoT product or service must address: interoperability, privacy, security, and connectivity.

The battle of IoT standards between these alliances has only just begun to influence it, and the type of product or service has a great impact upon which of the four major focus areas is first on the list. But the one thing that seems to cross the standards near the top of each list is the over-all need to address connectivity. Small cells have the potential to influence a lot of what goes on in these areas.

Based on the moves of the players, there appears to be a combination of multi-faceted approaches to connec-tivity as products are designed, some bet-hedging, and a bit of crystal-balling.

One of the largest alliances is the All Seen Alliance (allseenalliance.org). This group was created in 2011 by Qual-comm. The underlying software code uses open standards to enable IoT products to work together, and is free to utilize upon agreement to the alliance terms and conditions. All Seen has over 100 member companies, including AT&T, Microsoft, Sharp, LG, Vodafone, ASUS, Cisco, and HTC.

All Seen’s target applications include various connect-ed home applications such as smart appliances that would need only a typical home unlicensed Wi-Fi environment, but also items that need a macro wireless environment to be used successfully, such as automobiles and logisti-cal tools/products. These types of applications then would

SPECIAL REPORT: SMALL CELLS, THE INTERNET OF THINGS, THE STANDARDS, AND CONNECTIVITY

B y G r e g g H i g g i n s


FEATURES

need either access to licensed spectrum networks or a more robust unlicensed environment that does not yet exist. All Seen claims to also be trans-port-layer agnostic and supports Wi-Fi-Direct, Bluetooth, Ethernet and Power line.

Qualcomm also recently announced a new LTE Unlicensed application called MuLTEfire, which operates solely in unlicensed spectrum. This could be an interesting match technically for Small Cell, as MuLTEfire reportedly creates an LTE like envi-ronment in a macro environment for use by play-ers that don’t hold licensed spectrum. Qualcomm also claims that MULTEfire does not create inter-ference with Wi-Fi proximity due in part to channelization and SON applications. That could open up a new business and macro network design that doesn’t depend on tra-ditional carrier relationships.

Companies like Crown Castle, American Tower, and even wireless environment providers like Extenet could utilize existing infrastructure to deploy such a network to benefit a whole new multi-company list of players in the macro world, and freeing IoT product manufacturers and providers from carrier dependency. Even the major network operators that do hold licensed spectrum could potentially benefit as use of MuLTEfire could free licensed network bandwidth in key areas.

IoT product explosion over the next few years could provide Small Cell the infusion needed to make the next leap in infrastructure deployment. The inclusion of such technologies like MuLTEfire could also edge that further, giving the major carriers the impetus that has been lacking to invest in Small Cell, and providing newer play-ers a reason to join the game.

Qualcomm and companies like Cisco, AT&T, Samsung, GE and LG aren’t putting their eggs in one basket, however. Each belongs to more than one IoT alliance, such as Thread Group (threadgroup.org), Open Interconnect (openinterconnect.org), and the Industrial Internet Con-sortium (iiconsortium.org), although the latter predomi-nantly focuses more on IoT policy than the other organiza-tions and includes more academic members than the others.

Google and Apple also are moving in directions that impact the game; some in concert with the direction of others, some not. The power plays by the big members

of each alliance, and the success or failure of IoT devices and platforms will move the bar on which ends up on top. The next big news story about privacy and security failure of a given set of products may also turn the tide toward or away from one or the other.

The likely application of self-organizing network (SON) design also makes an inclusion in small cell infrastructure even more appealing, and likely why Cisco and others have hands in many places. For the IoT, this will help address the flexibility that will be required to address the power play, success and failures that are yet to come in IoT products and services. If a carrier can adapt and provide the speed, flexi-bility, and connectivity needed for a variety of IoT device platforms, it is more likely to adapt successfully. The ability to modify network design in a software world vs. a hardware world will give an edge to address such failures and successes. This is more the hedging than the crystal ball, as no knows when the privacy and security failure will occur that drives customers one way or another, but only that it will likely occur. The ability to move from one set of transport-layer protocols to another seamlessly may make the difference.

As one who remembers the Beta and VHS battle, time will tell how this shakes out, but at least the players have appeared to learn the big lesson of that drama…adapt or die. I doubt we’ll see a significant leader before 2017 regard-less. It does appear that Small Cell seems well suited regard-less of the outcome to address connectivity necessary.

Gregg Higgins — Lead Counsel — North America, Brightstar. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect the view of Brightstar Corporation or its affiliates.

“IoT product explosion over the next few years could provide Small Cell the infusion needed to make the next leap in infrastructure deployment.”


TABLE OF CONTENTS

MAKING LTE TECHNOLOGIES PLAY NICE WITH SMALL CELLSHow to Synchronize LTE-TDD and LTE-A Networks While Simplifying Small Cell Deployment

By Eric Colard

COVER STORY

subscribe at aglmediagroup.com/subscribe/

TABLE OF CONTENTS

27


COVER STORY

Once a routine network function, timing and synchro-nization requirements are changing rapidly as mobile network and backhaul technologies evolve. Carriers successfully solved the problem of distributing frequency synchronization through asynchronous Ethernet back-haul networks using the IEEE 1588v2 Precision Timing Protocol (PTP) and/or Synchronous Ethernet (SyncE). However, LTE-Time Division Duplex (LTE-TDD) and LTE-Advanced (LTE-A) impose new, very stringent time and phase synchronization requirements.

With the emergence of small cells, several additional backhaul technologies are thrown into the mix. In ad-dition, timing (particularly, GPS-based timing), is a critical cyber security component to this industry — GPS vulnerabilities that impact timing can take many forms, including malicious attacks.

Stringent timing for phase, new backhaul technologies, and security requirements have pushed the issue of cell site synchronization to the forefront. The right solution for each network is driven by several fundamentals, and needs to be leveraged by best-in-class Precision Time Protocol (PTP) Grandmaster technology.

There are also special considerations for small cell networks inside tall buildings, which until now could only operate using rooftop-based timing receivers and antenna, connected to small cells, over long multi-floor cabling runs that were difficult and expensive to install. Now, these small cells can be served with a new class of GNSS Grandmaster solutions that integrate the antenna into a single, cost-effective solution in a small footprint with plug-and-play installation.

REQUIREMENTS AND CHALLENGESTiming and synchronization are fundamental to digital network operations. Historically, relatively easy fre-quency synchronization was all that was required. LTE-TDD and LTE-A technologies add requirements for phase and time. Figure 1 illustrates the differences between the three.

Precision and accuracy are also important. Carriers achieve it by basing performance on a very precise and accurate primary reference. In nearly all cases, this reference is from signals transmitted by Global Navi-gation Satellite System (GNSS) satellite systems (GPS,

GLONASS or Beidou). A high-quality GNSS receiver derives frequency and calculates time from the satellite signals, and the synchronization equipment then uses it as a reference for network timing. The best timing and sync equipment will also use additional frequency inputs such as Synchronous Ethernet or E1/T1 signals which enable the solution to converge more quickly on the precise and accurate time, and improve holdover when the GNSS signals are impaired or only available intermittently.

It is essential that the time and phase reference in LTE-TDD and LTE-A networks is traceable to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). ITU-T G.8272 defines requirements for:

• A Primary Reference Time Clock (PRTC);

• A time and phase advancement compared to the long established standards for the Primary Reference Clocks (PRC); and

• Primary Reference Sources (PRS) used for frequency synchronization.

Without the common UTC time reference, cell sites cannot operate as intended. It must be emphasized that SyncE is only a frequency reference, and cannot be used by a PTP clock (such as a Boundary Clock) as a primary time reference.

For applications in wireless communications that have

FIGURE 1: FREQUENCY, PHASE AND TIME SYNCHRONIZATION.


COVER STORY

very stringent timing requirements, atomic clock oscil-lators have long been deployed in cellular base stations if GPS-timing receivers could not process satellite data. In new technology LTE network deployments, a cost- effective PTP/IEEE 1588 technology is also used. This technology can be used to hold and maintain time and phase instead of atomic clock oscillators in base stations/eNodeB’s where cost is a higher priority than maintain-ing stringent timing accuracy of the order of less than 1.5 microsecond over 24 hours. PTP, a Layer 2 or 3 time stamping protocol, distributes accurate timing from a Grandmaster clock, and can be distributed to LTE eNodeBs as a backup to GNSS timing sources or as the primary source of timing in locations where GNSS signals are not available. GNSS receivers and PTP are complementary, as PTP can be used to verify that GNSS receivers are providing accurate timing. The GNSS receivers can similarly verify that PTP is delivering accurate timing as well.

SOLUTIONS FOR STRINGENT TIME AND PHASE SYNCHRONIZATIONThere are three primary techniques to meet the stringent phase and time synchronization requirements of LTE-TDD and LTE-A networks: “GNSS everywhere;” PTP with “full on-path support,” and PTP with “partial on-path support and/or Edge Grandmaster.” Each solution has advantages and disadvantages.

• GNSS Everywhere: A GNSS receiver is deployed at every mobile base station, and can be a standalone device or embedded into the base station. It can also be integrated into a collocated or nearby cell site router (CSR) or network interface device (NID) if they also support sync distribution to the base sta-tion, typically using PTP. Though straightforward, this approach is not economically or technically feasible at every location (especially for public access small cells), and it will also leave the eNodeBs vul-nerable to GNSS signal interference. GNSS signal vulnerability is a growing concern, as the signals are very weak at the earth’s surface and easily interfered with. Carriers choosing “GNSS everywhere” still need a solution for situations where it is not feasible,

and best practice also points to the need for a back-up timing source. It is necessary to use other solu-tions either as the primary timing solution, as an alternative source where GNSS cannot be deployed, or as a backup when GNSS is impaired.

• PTP Profile with Full On-path Support (G.8275.1): IEEE 1588-2008 Precision Time Pro-tocol is a proven technology for distributing syn-chronization over packet-based backhaul networks to mobile network elements that require frequency synchronization. It is typically deployed using a centralized PTP Grandmaster (with GNSS primary reference to meet G.8272 PRTC requirements), which then interoperates with slave or client soft-ware in the mobile network elements, enabling the client to determine frequency and calculate the time. Full on-path support will best fit scenarios where new backhaul equipment is being deployed at every location (i.e. greenfield deployments), but it has practical disadvantages in other network scenarios.

• PTP Profile with Partial On-path Support and/or Edge Grandmaster (G.8275.2): Responding to the need for a phase timing solu-tion that is more feasible in non-greenfield, real-world scenarios, “partial on-path support” is the deployment of advanced Boundary Clocks at intermittent locations through the network. Key to this approach is to limit the number of hops, and path asymmetry between the grand-master and the client. Advanced Boundary Clocks have superior oscillators and can leverage additional inputs such as SyncE and E1/T1 cir-cuits as frequency reference to maintain high accuracy timestamps to the next clients in the path. Edge Grandmasters ensure accuracy by deploying closer to the clients, and thereby reducing the hops, and putting problematic parts of the backhaul network behind them. Edge Grand-masters include a GNSS reference and perform much like centralized PTP grandmaster equipment, except they are scaled and cost-optimized for deployment closer to the network edge.


Edge Grandmaster and/or partial on-path support with advanced Boundary Clocks provide many advantages, from the flexibility to work across diverse network scenarios, to more economical small cell deployments, to cost savings by avoiding backhaul network upgrades for embedded Boundary Clocks (and possibly also up-grade for SyncE). They also avoid issues related to high packet delay variation, asymmetry and/or third-party backhaul. Further, timing and synchronization protec-tion techniques ensure high mobile network availability and performance can be maintained, and synchronization reliability will not be threatened by failure of one of many embedded Boundary Clocks.

Finally, these solutions make extended holdover possible as the cost of a superior rubidium oscillator is leveraged across multiple base stations, and they leverage existing investment in centralized PTP grand-master and SyncE while preserving practices put in place for frequency synchronization and for MPLS network and engineering processes. Figure 2 depicts some of the many network scenarios that can be

solved with partial on-path support and/or Edge Grandmaster deployment.

A NEW GNSS MASTER OPTION FOR SMALL CELL DEPLOYMENT INDOORSThe operator small cell market is beginning to show life. After an initial set of deployments focused on outdoor small cells (e.g. Vodafone in London for the Olympics), indoor deployments experienced great momentum in 2014. According to mobile experts, 64 operators use small cells commercially in their networks and more than 44 operators use enterprise small cells.

There are three major challenges with the current indoor small cell synchronization:

• High operational expenses incurred in deploying an outdoor GNSS antenna.

• Legal issues with roof site access and associated site licensing fees.

FIGURE. 2: PARTIAL ON-PATH SUPPORT AND/OR EDGE GRANDMASTER DEPLOYMENT SCENARIOS

COVER STORY


TABLE OF CONTENTS

March 22 – 24, 2016Las Vegas Convention Center

IWCE’s Network Infrastructure Forum is a new event held in

conjunction with IWCE. The forum will have a dedicated area within

the IWCE show � oor with companies showcasing products and

services that are vital to infrastructure. In addition, there will be

dedicated educational sessions that examine infrastructure topics

such as tower management, safety, coverage, capacity, HetNets,

DAS, small cells, spectrum, Wi-Fi, and even business issues.

› Network with over 7,000 industry peers› See the latest products and solutions› Gain insight and learn from the experts

Learn more at iwceexpo.com/nif16

IW16 NIF Ad 8.25x10.75.indd 1 8/21/15 12:20 PM


• Liabilities with teams trying to install and to cover insurance, etc. for the operational teams to install the GNSS antenna and run cabling.

Let’s try to elaborate on the high operational expenses incurred when installing an outdoor GNSSS antenna for indoor small cells. Accurate timing needed for indoor small cell operations entails an outdoor GNSS antenna which, up until now, required an expensive, and often a complicated GNSS antenna installation for a relative-ly few number of small cells. IGR reports that the aver-age cost to deploy a small cell is approximately $31,000 and much higher than the cost of the small cell itself. The cost of deploying a GPS antenna on a roof is typi-cally $15,000 to $25,000 and can reach $60,000 in high-rise buildings, in addition to the roof rental expense on a yearly basis. Plus, because 80 percent of small cell

needs are for indoor use according to Small Cell Forum, the overwhelming majority of deployments have typi-cally required this costly installation approach.

An alternative to this approach is now available by deploying a solution that fully integrates a 1588v2 PTP grandmaster with a GNSS receiver and antenna in a small, fully contained package, designed to mount in-doors. This approach eliminates the need for an outdoor antenna and related cabling which dramatically decreases the effective cost of the solution while providing all the performance requirements of a 1588 Grandmaster.

An alternative solution to this can be achieved by using a Microsemi Integrated GNSS Master (IGM). This approach eliminates the need for an outdoor antenna and therefore significantly reduces the purchase, instal-lation and maintenance deployment costs for typical GNSS antenna systems. The GNSS receiver uses patented timing

FIGURE 3: PARTIAL ON-PATH SUPPORT AND/OR EDGE GRANDMASTER DEPLOYMENT SCENARIOS

COVER STORY


algorithms to enable deployment in many different indoor environments, and the solution also uses Power-over-Ethernet (PoE) to simplify installation by utilizing standard Ethernet within a facility. No more than 12.95 watts of power is required, directly from the Ethernet cable.

The IGM is simply mounted on the wall or ceiling in much the same way as a typical indoor Wi-Fi hot spot, and connected to the network via PoE. It automatically self-configures, locks to GNSS signals and provides accurate and precise PTP grandmaster synchronization needed for optimum small cell operations. The solution can also be complemented by PTP 1588 products that the operator has deployed in its own network to provide enterprise customers with more reliable service, minimizing both in CAPEX and OPEX.

MAKING THE RIGHT CHOICEThere is no single easy answer for how to synchronize LTE-TDD and LTE-A networks. The stringent require-ments for phase and time cannot be met using yester-day’s “frequency synchronization distributed over the backhaul network” techniques. Simply deploying GNSS receivers and antennas everywhere is not economically or technically feasible for all situations, and GNSS alone exposes the base stations to the vulnerabilities of the satellite signal-based systems.

For these reasons, network distributed time using the IEEE 1588 PTP is becoming part of virtually every mobile operator’s network. Full on-path support is most feasible in most greenfield situations, but Edge Grandmaster deployments or advanced Boundary Clocks offer the flexibility to fit a wide range of net-work scenarios while providing solutions for sync protection and switch- and path-asymmetry compen-sation. Most recently, with the advent of innovative timing solutions and ways to install them indoors, there are also new opportunities to implement accu-rate and precise PTP grandmaster synchronization in a way that will enable significantly broader LTE small cell deployment, as well.

Eric Collard is the Director of marketing and business development, Microsemi Corporation

COVER STORY


With smartphone adoption at record levels, and mobile data traffic skyrocketing, mobile users are always seeking the best way to stay connected using cellular 3G or 4G LTE networks or alternatives such as Wi-Fi. Congested high-traf-fic areas such as urban centers, malls or venues, and areas with poor signal strength such as office buildings and some suburban and rural areas represent challenges for the macro cellular network. This has set the stage for “network densification” a strategy of deploying cellular small cells and Wi-Fi access points to help extend network coverage and capacity efficiently and cost-effectively.

Wi-Fi networks already play a key role in mobile data offload for mobile subscribers. Up to 80 percent of traffic originating from mobile devices — smartphones, tablets and PCs — in certain markets, is already carried over Wi-Fi. And there are almost 50 million Wi-Fi hotspots, today; a number which is expected to grow to 340 million by 2018.

Current generation “best-effort” Wi-Fi hotspots, however, do not provide subscribers with the level of mobility that matches the cellular experience. For-ward-thinking mobile service providers are therefore looking to integrate Wi-Fi into the mobile core network, creating so-called Service Provider or Carrier Wi-Fi service. This significantly enhances the end user expe-rience by providing transparent authentication for roam-ing, and enables seamless mobility between the cellular networks and Wi-Fi. Service providers increasingly see Carrier Wi-Fi as a strategic offering that can enhance or damage their brand and, which must support an end user quality of experience for roaming and mobility similar to cellular networks. WHERE DID MY VOICE GO? VOICE IS NOW “VOICE OVER… SOMETHING.”All the talk is about mobile data, but what about mobile voice? Traditionally, mobile voice services have been

carried over 2G/3G cellular networks, using dedicated circuit switched channels. As our adoption of IP-based communications grows, we have become accustomed to IP services that are ‘access-agnostic’ and that work equal-ly over fixed broadband and cellular networks as well as Wi-Fi. IP technology enables service providers to separate the services from the network technology over which those services are offered, enabling the disaggregation of service and access. In doing so, communication services such as voice, messaging, data and video can be offered as software applications or services and combined as needed to offer new services and made accessible from any device.

This has set the stage for over-the-top (OTT) commu-nications solutions using VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) over Wi-Fi and cellular data networks. These OTT services have become very popular by enabling free messaging, voice and video calls from anywhere in the world for both mobile (SIM based) and tablet/PC (non-SIM) devices. There are many “pure play” OTT services available glob-ally such as Viber and Skype, and a few such as fring Mobile OTT, that are able to integrate OTT cloud with mobile service providers – enabling them to offer their own OTT and RCS like services.

At the same time mobile networks have been migrating to 4G LTE, an all-IP packet-only hi-speed cellular tech-nology. Currently there are more than 350 LTE networks in use around the world. Voice over LTE (VoLTE) is the next evolution for mobile voice and is an IP-based voice communication system that runs on LTE mobile net-works. Several operators have announced initial launch-es of VoLTE services.

In parallel, the trend towards Carrier Wi-Fi has led to Voice over Wi-Fi (VoWi-Fi) or Wi-Fi calling which allows consumers to make voice calls over Wi-Fi networks with-out user intervention. The recent launch of Apple’s iOS8 on the iPhone6 included “Wi-Fi calling” integrated in the

SPECIAL REPORT: A NEW DAWN IN MOBILE VOICE — WI-FI CALLING

B y A s h i s h J a i n

WI-FI CALLING IS AN EMERGING PLATFORM THAT PROMISES TO ENHANCE THE NEXT-GENERATION OF VOICE COMMUNICATIONS AND ELIMINATE CELLULAR VOICE TRAFFIC BOTTLENECKS.

FEATURES


FEATURES

handset. This is helping turn Wi-Fi calling into a house-hold name, and changing how people discuss the com-munication services of the future. Figure 1 lists the main reasons for Wi-Fi calling’s proliferation.

Several major mobile operators have indicated their support for Wi-Fi calling and it is estimated that 40 – 50

percent of global mobile broadband subscribers will start using Wi-Fi calling in the coming years, driven by the growth in Wi-Fi networks.

JUST ONE VOICE — BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER WITH SECURE VOWI-FI AND VOLTE ROAMING & MOBILITYSubscribers want a simple, seamless voice service. With the launch of VoLTE and rollout of Carrier Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi calling, mobile carriers are back in the driver’s seat and have options that truly allow them to compete with pure player OTT providers and help them offer their own set of higher-quality OTT ser-vices. One of the challenges they must solve in order to achieve that is ensuring secure and transparent connectivity between LTE and Wi-Fi networks, as well as seamless handover between VoLTE and VoWi-Fi without users noticing. The solution for the mobile network operator consists of securely integrating the Wi-Fi network and cellular mobile packet core network using common IMS/TAS core elements and Subscriber Management and Billing systems. This solution is

FIGURE 2. INTEGRATION OF VOWI-FI AND VOLTE TO A COMMON MOBILE CORE NETWORK.

FIGURE 1. WHY WI-FI.


shown in Figure 2.Of the many network functionalities needed for this

solution, two are critical for secure Carrier Wi-Fi mobile core integration:

• ePDG (evolved Packet Data Gateway) for ”untrust-ed” Wi-Fi access points.

• SaMOG (S2a Mobility over GPRS Tunneling Pro-tocol Gateway) for ”trusted” Wi-Fi access points.

Untrusted Wi-Fi access points are typically any type of Wi-Fi access that the operator has no control over (public hotspots, home and corporate access points) and that did not provide sufficient security mechanisms (authentication, radio link encryption,) when they were deployed. In order for the device to be securely connect-ed to the mobile packet core, a secure IPsec tunnel be-tween a client in the device and the Evolved Packet Data Gateway (ePDG) for 4G LTE networks must be estab-lished. The ePDG is then secured to the mobile packet core (P-GW) through a GTP tunnel. In the case of a 3G network, a Tunnel Termination Gateway (TTG) is used. These functions are described more fully in the 3GPP iWLAN specifications.

Trusted Wi-Fi access points, on the other hand, are often assumed to be part of operator-built Wi-Fi networks with secure 802.11i airlink en-cryption in the Wi-Fi radio link, combined with 802.1x based security and EAP SIM or non-SIM methods for authentication. As the airlink is secure, the IPsec tunnel runs only from the access points themselves, rather than from the mobile device, eliminating the need for a special client on the device. In this scenario, the IPsec tunnel is terminated by the S2a Mobility over GPRS Tunneling Protocol Gateway (SaMOG) per 3GPP Release 11 specifications. SaMOG is also referred to as Trusted Wireless Access Gateway (TWAG).

When combined with the Next Generation Hotspot initiative using Hotspot 2.0/Passpoint technology and 3GPP functionalities, trusted Carrier Wi-Fi access using SaMOG offers subscrib-ers a truly “cellular-like” seamless roaming expe-rience over both cellular and Wi-Fi networks. User

devices will be able to automatically discover, and seam-lessly make “in-pocket” connection to the best available Wi-Fi or cellular networks with which the subscriber’s home mobile operator has established roaming agreements.

COMING DOWN THE PIKENext-generation Wireless Access Gateway (WAG), such as the GENBAND device, integrates both ePDG and SaMOG GW functionality in a single platform to support the secure Carrier Wi-Fi integration needed for data roaming and VoWi-Fi / Wi-Fi calling. Figure 3 is a block diagram of such a device. The combination of WAGs with a common mobile packet core including Subscriber Management and IMS systems enables reliable VoWiFi interworking with VoLTE. This means mobile operators can immediately satisfy their subscribers’ desire to try out their device’s new VoWi-Fi /VoLTE capabilities.

The top WAG vendors, offer a slew of capabilities for WAGs for Carrier Wi-Fi Deployments, and have a host of advanced features on a single platform. These ad-vancements enable Carrier Wi-Fi calling over both non-trusted and trusted Wi-Fi networks. They facilitate VoWi-Fi calling and handovers between VoWi-Fi and

“Service providers increasingly see Carrier Wi-Fi as a strategic offering that can enhance or damage their brand and which must support an end user quality of experience for roaming and mobility similar to cellular networks.”

FEATURES


FEATURES

VoLTE networks, providing seamless IP session mobil-ity and continuity for voice and data with full integration to the IMS core.

They also have secure connectivity and authentication for subscribers to transparently roam between 3G and 4G cellular (including small cells) and Carrier Wi-Fi net-works and are compatible with Next Generation Hotspot (NGH) and Hotspot 2.0 for enhanced Wi-Fi roaming experience for end users. Other features that should be available in a WAG include:

• Support for WRIX standards for Wi-Fi-to-Wi-Fi roaming and hubbing.

• Support for all small cell technologies - femtocells, picocells, metrocells, and microcells — on 3GPP and 3GPP2 networks

• Massively scalable security.

• Access Point vendor-neutral solution with field-prov-en interoperability with most major access point and mobile core network vendors.

• Software-based solution using latest high perform-ing and energy efficient commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) platform.

• Ability to minimize total cost of ownership by

FIGURE 3. BLOCK DIAGRAM OF A NEXT=GENERATION WAG.

optimizing upfront equipment capex and reducing ongoing operational expense.

Other operators wishing to expand VoWi-Fi to Wi-Fi networks that are not operator-controlled can mean different security considerations for both non-trusted and trusted Wi-Fi access points. Advanced WAGs delivers solutions that span across any type of Wi-Fi access point and 3GPP networks, ensuring an ecosys-tem that is both open and secure.

Ashish Jain is the Director of Solutions Marketing at GENBAND. He has over 10 years of telecommunications industry experience with expertise in the areas of Voice over IP for fixed and mobile networks, Wireless Security, Mobile OTT, Internet/e-commerce, and enterprise social media applications. Ashish holds a bachelor degree in Electronics Engineering and a Masters in Computer Science, with specialization in networks and communications, from The University of Texas.

ELECTRICCONDUITCONSTRUCTION.COM/DAS-SMALL-CELL

UNSURPASSED INTEGRITY.

UNMATCHED QUALITY &

For over 60 years, we have been trusted to complete projects both big and small with unmatched quality assurance and on-time performance. We’ve built trust and confidence by being committed to doing the job right. Safety, productivity and protecting our customer’s assets are our top priorities on every project because we know that’s what matters to you. That’s our standard.

ABOVE. BELOW. BEYOND.

E L E C T R I C C O N D U I T C O N S T R U C T I O N . C O M | 6 3 0 - 2 9 3 - 4 4 7 4

DA S / S M A L L C E L L • C O N D U I T • C E L L TO W E R D I R E C T I O N A L D R I L L I N G • T R E N C H I N G


TABLE OF CONTENTS

© 2

015

NE

TW

OR

K B

UIL

DIN

G +

CO

NS

UL

TIN

G, L

LC

.

NETWORKBUILDING.COM

S I T E D E V E L O P M E N T + E N G I N E E R I N G + C O N S T R U C T I O N

Not everybody understand

s

small cells.

But we’re not everyb

ody.

Jimmy Ellis, Project Manager, Site Development

NB+C is totally committed to small cell solutions. Small

cells are different, and we get it. We’re developing

thousands of small cells throughout the East Coast.

We come through when other firms simply can’t.

Our experience includes:

+ Successfully executing franchise agreements

+ Developing text amendments with jurisdictions

for shorter development cycles

+ 30 years of relationships on the East Coast with

state and local governments, DOTs, utilities and

Departments of Public Works

+ Providing on-staff Right-of-Way Specialists

+ Fiber expertise in small cell deployments

+ Specialized civil and structural design for

hundreds of small cells

NBC15-09A_MediaCreativeRefresh_JimmySpread_C165x1075-M1.indd All Pages 8/14/15 11:47 AM


TABLE OF CONTENTS

© 2

015

NE

TW

OR

K B

UIL

DIN

G +

CO

NS

UL

TIN

G, L

LC

.

NETWORKBUILDING.COM

S I T E D E V E L O P M E N T + E N G I N E E R I N G + C O N S T R U C T I O N

Not everybody understand

s

small cells.

But we’re not everyb

ody.

Jimmy Ellis, Project Manager, Site Development

NB+C is totally committed to small cell solutions. Small

cells are different, and we get it. We’re developing

thousands of small cells throughout the East Coast.

We come through when other firms simply can’t.

Our experience includes:

+ Successfully executing franchise agreements

+ Developing text amendments with jurisdictions

for shorter development cycles

+ 30 years of relationships on the East Coast with

state and local governments, DOTs, utilities and

Departments of Public Works

+ Providing on-staff Right-of-Way Specialists

+ Fiber expertise in small cell deployments

+ Specialized civil and structural design for

hundreds of small cells

NBC15-09A_MediaCreativeRefresh_JimmySpread_C165x1075-M1.indd All Pages 8/14/15 11:47 AM


FEATURES

SMALL CELLS: A BUSINESS MODEL EXAMINATIONB y G r e g W e i n e r

WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO FIND THE SWEET SPOT IN THE SMALL CELL BUSINESS MODEL?

The small cell landscape has been ebbing and tiding for some time now. There have been many promises, prog-nostication, and expectations. Yet it is only now starting to emerge from this state of flux.

This article takes a look at what might make the busi-ness case, and is based upon a very successful panel (Making the Small Cell Business Work) from this year’s PCIA Wireless Infrastructure Show. It recapitulates what the panelists discussed and what is the general perspective of the small cell arena today.

First, let’s take a one-line look at some of the issues. Then we will unpack a number of complex and urgent issues surrounding small cell deployment, planning, and execution. Finally, we will expand on these themes and provide insights on the small cell business model, including key components and some best practices.

BASIC OBSERVATIONS• Small cells have been slow to gain traction and on

the cusp of breakthrough for years.

• In order for small cells to become prevalent, carriers will need to abandon their macro mindset.

• At present, carriers are used to deploying fewer than 10,000 sites/year. Larger deployment quantities are required to achieve the economies of scale for equipment and to iron out acquisition and installation processes.

• Backhaul costs must come down — mesh backhaul, non-line-of-sight microwave, and other alternative technologies could make a big difference for small cells.

• Carriers are looking at cost-sharing models to make deployments more affordable.

THE DEMAND FOR DATA — A PRIMARY DRIVERIn order to set the stage for any small cell deployment discussion, we must first consider the demand for data. 451 Research estimates that 15 petabytes of new data are created every day, and 90 percent of today’s digital data was created in past two years. Three billion photos

Figure 1. Expected increase in LTE traffic FIGURE 1. EXPECTED INCREASE IN LTE TRAFFIC


FEATURES

are uploaded onto Facebook each month and 451, itself, manages 25 Terabytes of data per day. What’s more, in 2015, the equivalent of all movies ever made will cross global IP networks every five minutes, according to Cis-co. A significant and growing portion of this data will ultimately traverse wireless networks.

Moreover, the global adoption of 4G continues to in-crease significantly. GSMA Intelligence is forecasting that the number of global LTE connections will reach 2.5

billion by 2020, which will account for 28 percent of the worldwide population (see Figure 1).

Small cell investment is currently focused on improving coverage (indoor and outdoor), increasing capacity to keep up with user demands, and driving more efficient spectrum use. But this network densification comes at a time of flattening, or declining average revenue per unit (ARPU), a brewing price war, and a relatively saturated marketplace where growth is coming from lower value devices (e.g., tablets) and movement of customers among the big four carriers. There simply isn’t a significant amount of new revenue on the immediate horizon to support a massive network investment. As a result, if small cells (in their various forms) ultimately are to be deployed in the tens or hundreds of thousands, an aggressive cost structure must be achieved.

THE MARKETPLACEThere are a number of dynamics in the marketplace that are influencing the rate of small cell adoption by the

carriers. Like most new technologies, achieving economies of scale will help drive down unit costs for the equipment and associated services. Some of the relevant market conditions include:

Early Adopters — According to Infonetics, mobile op-erators in developed countries (including Japan, South Korea, the U.K., and U.S.) are the only countries today that are driving early adoption of small cells. As a result,

small cells have not reached the critical mass re-quired to drive costs to an attractive price point with an acceptable set of features and capabilities.

The Evolution of the Vendor — Carrier Rela-tionship — The infrastructure business model has not fully shaken out, with vendors taking a fairly conservative approach to the small cell market thus far.

Standardization vs. Menu-Driven Pricing — The industry has not yet achieved a level of stan-dardization of small cell sites where menu-driven pricing is a feasible option.

Cost Considerations — In addition to the relatively immature small cell equipment and services space, carriers must focus efforts on achieving price points that support their business case. These are the prima-ry cost drivers associated with a small cell deployment:

Power — While it can add complexity, power itself is generally not a cost driver. In fact, recurring power charges will likely be less than $50 per month. That said, providers need to be conscious of the need for commercial power when selecting sites as extending power to some locations can be costly.

Space — The costs associated with securing space can vary greatly for small cells, ranging from cheap regu-lated rates (e.g., <$10/month) to $200+/month when privately owned. When it comes to evaluating space many structures are available (e.g., lamp posts, utility poles, buildings) and each have their tradeoffs. Key attributes to consider include:

“…if small cells (in their vari-ous forms) ultimately are to be deployed in the tens or hundreds of thousands, an aggressive cost structure must be achieved.”


FEATURES

• Adequate mounting height and structural capacity and that they are located where needed.

• Ability to lease in relatively large quantities.

• Low capital cost to install (e.g., avoid pole replacements).

• Low ongoing rental expense.

• Power and backhaul options available or close by. Operations and Maintenance — While cost structure and scope of needs are largely undefined at the outset, it’s helpful to allow for some level of monitoring and mobilization for diagnosis and repair (~ $100/month/node). This is particularly important when extending the coverage footprint (vs. enhancing capacity) as an outage has the same consequences as a macro site outage, albeit on a smaller scale. Additionally, installing on utility poles — especially above the power space — can require spe-cialized crews.

Electronics — This can vary widely depending on the tech-nology solution selected and specific carrier configurations. Current offerings are primarily 3G or 4G and support only a single wireless carrier. Most major OEMs have multi-tech-nology and multi-carrier equipment on their roadmap.

Acquisition, Construction and Installation Services — With elements that include leasing, permitting, construc-tion, and installation, costs are running $20 – $40k per node, with heavily focused efforts to reduce these num-bers by 50 percent, or more over time.

How to Drive Costs Down — In order to drive meaning-ful volumes it is important to get OPEX down below $400 per month total and CAPEX down well below $20K. Figure 2 is a breakdown of current OPEX costs. At current price points carriers will deploy, in major problem areas, and use these projects as a litmus test to analyze performance and to further evaluate cost structures.

Vendors are salivating at the prospect of growing services revenue (or replacing slowing macro revenue

growth) and have shown limited efforts to drive price points down significantly. Some considerations include:

Identifying transport solutions that reduce OPEX as well as CAPEX

• Lower cost copper options that meet performance requirements.

• LOS/NLOS microwave aggregation.

• Leverage existing outside the plant.

Looking at installation differently than macro sites

• Dramatically reduce the scope of required services (e.g., surveys, title searches, drawings).

• Evaluate performance requirements relative to macro sites (e.g., battery backup).

• Look to the FCC to help streamline environmental and permit processing.

Looking to vendors to come up with innovative business models

• Tower companies have invested large amounts of money in tower assets in exchange for an ongoing rent stream from carriers. Will vendors emerge to do the same for small cells in large volumes? How

Figure 2. Opex costs percentage breakout. FIGURE 2. OPEX COSTS PERCENTAGE BREAKOUT


• The OEMs have danced around a managed network model in the past but have never made any signif-icant investments in such a strategy. Are small cells, along with a shift of network capabilities to the cloud, the catalysts that will stimulate such a strat-egy? OEMs have been reluctant to do anything viewed as competitive to their MNO customers. However, it presents an opportunity to ensure that their equipment is deployed over competitors. Fur-ther, OEMs generally feel like they have the tech-nical capabilities to engineer, design, deploy, and manage a network, as long as they don’t have to handle the customer side of the business. While this model may emerge over time, we do not believe it will happen in the short term.

Ultimately, The Optimal Business Model As the Making the Small Cell Business Work panel at PCIA discussed, until significant new revenue streams like content, M2M, and connected cars become common-place, carriers will need to be focused on driving small cell deployment and operating costs down.

Without being able to justify deployments that con-currently rein in OPEX as well as CAPEX, they will find it challenging to meet the lofty volume targets that have been published in recent years. By executing a disciplined approach to developing the strategy, pushing vendors to try different models, and shifting the internal mindset away from a macro mentality, MNOs will ultimately find the model that enables them to deploy small cells by the tens or hundreds of thousands.

Greg has led dozens of strategic sourcing and outsourcing transactions and negotiated multiple lease agreements (cell towers) and amendments. He has had leadership roles in several large scale network buildouts in the US as well as in countries across South America. He has also conduct-ed numerous IT and Network outsourcing initiatives across multiple in-dustries. He has over 14 years of industry and consulting experience with a strong emphasis on sourcing/outsourcing and the telecom industry. He was previously a Vice President of Strategy and Business Development with Mobilitie, and a co-founder and CIO of Pace Harmon, a boutique consultancy focused primarily on supply chain and strategic sourcing Industries. Greg is a cum laude graduate of the University of Michigan with a BSE in Computer Engineering.

FEATURES

will they be valued? Can they make it attractive to carriers with shorter terms, less onerous restrictions and lower rents? We believe that vendors will emerge with these shared infrastructure models. However, carriers need to be careful to avoid the long-term burdens (e.g., escalating costs, limited flexibility) that have historically accompanied the tower com-pany relationships. Carriers also need to be cautious regarding the long-term viability of these providers.

• True equipment sharing never materialized at carrier macro sites. Are small cells a better candidate? Will OEMs produce equipment that can support multiple wireless carriers in a single enclosure with shared installation, backhaul, and power? This would enable any number of vendor models where investors ap-preciate multi-tenant solutions with low turnover. It is questionable whether OEMs are motivated to reduce the number of distinct devices that they sell without some external prodding and possibly sub-stantial volume commitments.

• Cable companies (MSOs) are another possible dis-ruptor to the small cell model. They have access to space on a significant number of utility poles, can provide power (with backup) directly from their HFC plant, can provide fiber- or coax-based backhaul, and have the field force required to maintain the assets.

MSOs have been actively deploying Wi-Fi equipment in a similar fashion, however, there are strategic reasons that may prevent them from being too aggressive in the small cell space. Are they willing to give up premium strand space where people congre-gate? Would they rather work to monetize their Wi-Fi offering instead of enabling the MNOs to enhance wireless service? Are they comfortable leasing dark fiber? Will they approach the lower prices required for small cells and risk impacting their macro backhaul business?

There is confidence that MSOs will continue to inves-tigate if and how they want to play in the small cell space and feel that they may ultimately be forced to participate to prevent new entrants from overbuilding their net-works and threatening existing and future revenues.


FEATURES

TOP 10 CHALLENGES HINDERING OUTDOOR SMALL CELL DEPLOYMENTS

B y G r e g F r i e s e n

SMALL CELLS HAVE BEEN TOUTED AS THE SOLUTION FOR A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT FACE THE WIRELESS INDUSTRY. HOWEVER, AS IT TURNS OUT, AS MUCH AS THEY OFFER, THEY STILL HAVE A NUMBER OF CHALLENGES TO OVERCOME FOR LARGE-SCALE DEPLOYMENT.

We are now about five years into the small cell discussion and there still have not been any large-scale outdoor deployments. However, this is not due to lack of desire on the operators’ side. There is a significant need for outdoor small deployments to deal with LTE density, while still delivering a high capacity, high-quality service.

This is evidenced by the significant number of an-nounced small cell plans by operators, and the growing participation in steering groups, conferences and events driving industry direction (see Figure 1). However, there remains a wide range of challenges that are hindering outdoor small deployments and the 10 most common are presented here.

SUITABLE SMALL CELL SITESOne of the most common issues facing small placement is acquiring a suitable location. Given that small cell deployments are done to improve coverage and increase capacity in targeted areas, location is the most governing requirement. Additionally, it is important that the loca-tion is structurally suitable to mount the small cell and

backhaul equipment. The site must also have suitable and reliable power to be able to operate the small cell equipment.

Height is the next critical parameter. The operators are trying to get down onto the street level in order to deploy the small cells densely and without inter cell interference. At the same time, if the small cell is deployed too low (typically below 10 feet), the regulator may require the small cell to operate at a lower output power, which will be counterproductive to the goal of increasing coverage.

The final major factor is scalability. Mobile operators are trying to deploy anywhere between 1000–10,000 outdoor small cells in a city, so choosing types of struc-tures available in many locations, and ones that do not need to be negotiated for on a per site basis, is very im-portant. This can also allow the operator the flexibility to quickly change sites as network plans adjust, or if street level obstructions are discovered. For this reason, operators are commonly targeting locations known as “urban furniture”, such as traffic lights, lamp poles, bill-boards, and bus stops (see Figure 2).

AVAILABILITY OF SUITABLE SMALL CELL EQUIPMENTOutdoor small cells are still in their infancy, and new equipment is being released rapidly. For operators, it is important that their desired frequency bands and tech-nologies (LTE, 3/4G, TDD, FDD, etc.) are available. It is also very important to most operators that their small cells have high-output power to maximize coverage, and to ensure users are operating at maximum modulation to deliver the highest capacities.

Power is also very important for small cells, as tradi-tional telco DC power plants will not be available at most locations, so direct AC powering is desirable.

Another top prerequisite for small cell equipment, is size. The smaller the equipment, the easier zoning and site acquisition becomes. Weight is also critical, as lower weight will broaden the number of suitable sites and also FIGURE 1. ANNOUNCED OUTDOOR SMALL CELL DEPLOYMENTS


FEATURES

minimize the amount of site engineering required. To address both size and weight, operators are also looking for increased integration, where RAN Access, switching, and backhaul can all be delivered in a single package rather than requiring three or more boxes at each location.

The final important aspect of the equipment is instal-lation simplicity. Operators are demanding equipment that can be installed by non-specialized crews, and at a very high rate of deployment.

ZONING RIGHTS AND CITY PERMITSAfter rights to a site are secured, zoning and city permits must be completed. This can be a very difficult process and is extremely dependent on the specific local regula-tions. Some municipalities have strict volume, dimension and weight limits, while others may even regulate the color of the equipment.

Mounting height will also often be regulated. In addi-tion, all construction permits and safety permits must be completed, which may dictate when installation can

take place and by whom. As with site acquisition, the desire is to be able to do permitting on a broad basis, with the ability to adjust rapidly as network topology changes. However, this is very dependent on the flexi-bility of the municipality.

FIBER ACCESS FOR BACKHAULThe desired mode for backhaul is typically fiber, because it delivers the highest capacity and, generally, has high avail-ability. Unfortunately, however, fiber is generally not avail-able at desired urban furniture locations. Although fiber may be very close to the desired location, digging up the street for the last few meters can be extremely expensive, requiring extensive permitting, traffic stoppage and right of way acquisition, as well as significant labor. Beyond the costs, the administrative work and planning associated with this means that fiber extension will typically take 6-12 months, often making it unsuitable for rapid small cell deployment. If fiber is already at a location, one must weigh the business case to justify the cost of leasing the fiber.

FIGURE 3. SMALL CELL BACKHAUL SPECTRUM OVERVIEW


— EINSTEIN adopted 12-09-10

SURE,AT FIRST I WAS A LITTLE TAKEN ABACK

BY THE WHOLE PEEING STANDING UP THING. BUT I TAUGHT HIM TO THROW A STICK

AND NOW HANGING OUT WITH HIMIS THE BEST PART OF MY DAY.


— EINSTEIN adopted 12-09-10

SURE,AT FIRST I WAS A LITTLE TAKEN ABACK

BY THE WHOLE PEEING STANDING UP THING. BUT I TAUGHT HIM TO THROW A STICK

AND NOW HANGING OUT WITH HIMIS THE BEST PART OF MY DAY.

FEATURES

SPECTRUM FOR WIRELESS BACKHAULIf fiber backhaul is not available, the next choice is typ-ically wireless backhaul. One of the major challenges with wireless backhaul is finding suitable spectrum. Sub-6 GHz spectrum is desirable, although very scarce, because it can provide non-line of sight connectivity. There is about 100 MHz of spectrum in 5.8 GHz band, but it is unlicensed, which makes it very prone to interference, resulting in low capacity and low availability connections.

In some countries, 3.5 GHz spectrum can be used for backhaul, although this is typically a small amount of spectrum, resulting in fairly low capacities (±50 Mbps). Some operators are considering using their 2 GHz access spectrum for backhaul, although again, it is a fairly thin spectrum, and the opportunity cost of not using it for

access is extremely high. After sub-6 GHz, the 24 – 42 GHz bands are commonly

considered. These bands are desirable, as they support compact antennas suitable for urban furniture. What’s more, these bands are often available on an area basis, making co-ordination and deployment simple. The chal-lenges with these bands is that they require line of sight (LOS), and they are not globally available, but rather available in about half of the world’s countries, with specific spectrum varying widely by location.

Many operators are also strongly considering 60 GHz (or V-Band) spectrum, which is also an LOS band. The 60 GHz band is attractive, as it is a band that is available almost globally. In addition, small form factor antennas are per-mitted, making it well suited for small cell. There is a very

FIGURE 3. SMALL CELL BACKHAUL SPECTRUM OVERVIEW


large amount of spectrum available in the 60 GHz band (>5 GHz), allowing for high-capacity backhaul with little worry of congestion. Lastly, the propagation properties of 60 GHz translate to very high attenuation, limiting link length. This is fine for the short links required in small cell, and also means that the signals fade fast, minimizing interference.

The final wireless band under consideration for small cell is E-Band (70/80 GHz). This band requires line of sight and is also a fairly globally available band, with small antennas authorized in most regions, the exception being the United States. This band is typically licensed, but at a very low spectrum cost. And with over 10 GHz of spectrum in this band, it can offer very high capacities with little worry of interference or congestion. Figure 3 is a matrix of frequencies around the globe.

LINE OF SIGHT ACCESS FOR WIRELESS BACKHAULWith the exception of the sub-6 GHz band, which has capacity, interference and delay concerns, all of the oth-er suitable backhaul bands require line of sight for con-nectivity. This can be a major challenge, as there are many obstacle at street level, such as trees and buildings.

From a desktop analysis, line of sight can be planned, but not with certainty, as the street level is a very dynamic environment. This means that either path surveys need to be completed, or a new site may need to be selected during the deployment phase if a line of sight path is not available.

An approach some operators are considering is to use a handful of intermediate repeater points often placed on building tops. This allows paths to use this site as an intermediate site, even though there is no base station at the repeater site, in order to get to the desired site. In addition, line of sight drives operators to try and get access to mounting rights as high as possible on a pole or billboard. Many operators are also looking at mount-ing on the extended arms of light poles to get into the center of the street, and to avoid sidewalk clutter and trees. This will often drive in equipment requirements, as the stability on a light pole arm may be low, and may limit the weight or beamwidth of the backhaul equipment.

BACKHAUL CAPACITYThe primary purpose of an outdoor small cell is to increase user capacity. Therefore, of course, it is important that the

backhaul to support it also provides sufficient capacity. Current estimates for this requirement are between 100 and 500 Mbps per small cell site. In the case of 500 Mbps per site, it rules out sub-6 Ghz technologies, as they are typically limited to 200 to 300 Mbps. In the case of 100 Mbps per site, sub-6 GHz may be used, but perhaps limited to the last mile link. Any aggre-gation links would require higher capacity systems. The high capacity requirements will also limit the number of sites that can be daisy-chained, or used in a ring, in certain bands.

Lastly, these throughputs will mean that operators must engineer the links with high modulation capabilities. If the link is limited to a low modulation scheme, because of reach, then the capacity may be limited to 100 Mbps or less, even in the V- and E-Band.

INSTALLATION TIME AND PROCESSESThe install costs become one of the major cost drivers of a small cell deployment. Installation time is extremely important, not only for the associated labor costs, but also for the adherence to municipal regulations, which may include lane closures, use of a local unionized workforce, notices and other costs that increase with a longer instal-lation. Secondly, the required skill and training of the workforce is very important. Today, it often takes two crews of two well-trained installers to install a link. Min-imizing this to a single crew of untrained workers can reduce the costs by 75 percent. Install time is also very important for scale. If it takes two crews a full day to install a link, it will be difficult to install 10,000 links in a few months, unless 200 crews can be obtained in a single city.

Operators are looking at their own processes to improve install time, with the goal of doing as much configuration as possible remotely. New equipment innovations are coming to help with this problem. Of course, size is im-portant, as is auto-configuration. Wider beamwidth products also help address this problem, while emerging auto-aligning antennas will go a long way towards reduc-ing install times, and the skill levels required.

SCALABLE ENGINEERING PROCESSESMost small cell trials and pilot networks that have been deployed to date have used traditional cellular engineering processes. However, these processes do not fit well at the street level. In urban small cell deployments, there is no

FEATURES


longer a traditional telco environment and the engineering scenario is different. The possibility exists that coverage may be poor, or backhaul cannot be made available. When these issues arise, the operator needs to adapt within hours instead of the months that could be accommodated for site changes in traditional mobile networks.

This requires operators to redefine, completely, their network engineering processes, building in flexibility to quickly change topology and sites, and then reflect that in the design after the fact. The network design needs to be much more fluid than a traditional firm network plan. This will also drive network equipment capabilities that can rapidly adapt to changing architectures requiring significant reconfiguration.

Additionally, the traditional level of likely redundancy is not feasible in an urban environment, where there is limited mounting space and power. Availability may also need to be reduced to accommodate the urban environ-ment, with the understanding that the macro mobile network over-top provides inherent redundancy.

AND THE MOST CRITICAL ISSUE IS…A VIABLE BUSINESS CASEThe business case may be the last item to discuss, but it is also the most important item and has impacts on all nine of the other challenges. The very goal of deploying small cells is to increase capacity by deploying a significantly higher number of base stations, typically in the range of 5 – 10 times more. However, this does not result in a significant revenue increase, and therefore, cannot result in a major total cost of ownership (TCO) increase. So, the TCO of a small cell will need to be in

the range of 10X lower than that of a traditional cell site.This is a major driver in how the aforementioned nine

challenges can be addressed. Almost all of them can be addressed by spending lots of money. However, deliver-ing high capacity, acquiring sites, and deploying rapidly become even larger challenges when there is a major cost constraint. This means as every obstacle is tackled, it must be done so within a budget and with a keen eye to the impact on the total site cost.

The 10 challenges to outdoor small cell deployment are all significant. However each can be addressed if there are the imperative and effort to tackle them. It is import-ant when addressing these challenges to keep in mind that they all interact with one another.

For example, you can hit desired capacity, but may have to sacrifice on equipment size or spectrum choice. This makes it critical for operators to optimize the entire small cell deploy-ment challenge rather than focusing on specific areas in iso-lation. And, some sacrifices may have to be made in each area.

This will be a delicate tradeoff that operators have to make. At the same time, every small cell network will be very unique and dependent on city geographies, technologies, spectrum, desired capacity, site availability, and local zoning laws. This will make it very difficult to adapt a cookie-cutter approach, but instead operators need to develop very flex-ible processes that can adapt to specific market nuances.

Greg Friesen is the Vice President of Product Management at DragonWave Inc. Greg has over a decade of experience in network design, planning, and engineering, at a number of communications firms, and experience in product definition, architecture, and network designs.

[email protected]

Do you have a comprehensive wireless strategy?

High-Capacity Wi-Fi

Distributed Antenna Systems

blackbox.com/wireless

BBOX_AGL_Small_Cell_QtrPage_081415.indd 1 8/14/15 10:46 AM

FEATURES


COLUMNS

Almost 20 months ago the world’s largest RAN compa-ny proclaimed the arrival of the Ericsson small cell — except for it was, and is, a distributed antenna system (DAS). Since then, many of the world’s largest DAS ven-dors have followed suit and have started to position existing distributed antenna systems or Wi-Fi as “small cells.” Why is that you may ask?

Very simply, this is “marketing 101” speak. If you’re late to market, or if you do not have a competitive prod-uct, you mirror the momentum marketing messages and reposition existing product lines to gain or retain the interest of your customers, Wall Street and, the media.

Last week I got a chuckle when I read an industry blog written by a DAS infrastructure vendor’s marketing strat-egist, positioning DAS as “the original small cell,” and today’s small cells as a capacity supplement, only while describing “four viable small cell paths for wireless oper-ators…” Except, of the four deployment options, the “right” answer for three of the scenarios was DAS. Seriously?

Yes, seriously. And furthermore, the author proclaimed to know the definition of a small cell by defining it so that an antenna could be a small cell. Coverage does not constitute access to needed capacity.

The Small Cell Forum defines a small cell as “an um-brella term for operator-controlled, low-powered radio

access nodes” and “small cells can be based on ‘femtocell technology’ — i.e. the collection of standards, software, open interfaces, chips and know-how that have powered the growth of femtocells.” Thus, small cells are nothing like “spatially separated antenna nodes connected to a common source via a transport medium that provides wireless service within a geographic area or structure.”

(…gotta love Wikipedia).Why the urgency to position DAS as a Small Cell,

or to deposition small cells vs. DAS? Very simply, DAS as we knew it is D.E.A.D.

D IS FOR DAS (OR DUCK)“If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it’s a duck.” Distributed Antenna Systems are just that. An antenna connected to coax, fiber or oth-er special cabling that requires cable pulls through the risers, and racks and racks of equipment in the basement or the telco closet. If you want to drill down, see our DAS review blog for details, and if you have time, read a 100-page DAS instal-

lation manual or the 10-page long price list with nec-essary equipment to power the “small cell” antenna.

E IS FOR END OF LIFEYes, the DAS market will continue to grow as predicted by leading analyst firms. No right-minded person would dispute that. However, DAS as we knew it last year or the year before, is finished. Why are 100s of system integrators working hard to get up-to-speed on small cells, and how to install them? Mobile operators, enterprise, venue or building owner customers do not care if it’s DAS, Wi-Fi and/or small cells that are fixing their problem with in-building coverage and capacity. They just want the problem fixed, and for the business case (payback) to work.

Long-gone are the days of 7-10 year payback periods, or securing rights to a location, only to charge-back Opex fees to mobile operators, even after they have deployed their own $150k baseband. The model is now easy to install

ETC: DAS (AS WE KNEW IT) IS D.E.A.D.

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

“Why the urgency to position DAS as a Small Cell, or to depo-sition small cells vs. DAS? Very simply, DAS as we knew it is D.E.A.D.”


single or multi-operator small cells and small cell systems over Ethernet, with pay-back periods measured in weeks or months. This makes the old DAS obsolete. Yes, there I said it. Obsolete. But, there’s reason to celebrate.

A IS FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENTBecause of the rise in tide for small cell vendors, DAS and RAN vendors alike went back to the drawing board to sim-plify single operator and multi-operator DAS systems, mak-ing them easier and cheaper to deploy. Is this enough? Time will tell, but for now, the in-building coverage and capacity market is smoking hot and the DAS vendors do not want to be pushed outside in the cold. Big venues and buildings need any and all spectrum and capacity.

The pragmatic solution, where DAS already exists, is to supplement with Wi-Fi and Small Cells. After all, adding LTE DAS is just like adding an entire new DAS system installation at $4–6 a square foot

D IS FOR DEMARCATIONNew DAS systems find their place where old DAS once were deployed, but in competition with scalable small

cell systems that add capacity wherever a small cell is mounted. Whereas DAS systems for big venues and build-ings would deploy capacity for 40 sectors with hundreds of special antenna pulls, a small cell system could easily add 200 sectors of 3G/4G capacity for 25% of the cost, as compared to DAS (not counting yearly Opex which is closer to 50-100x difference). The DAS business case makes good sense for 1M-10M square feet. Below a mil-lion, the business case now favors small cell systems.

At PCIA’s Wireless Infrastructure conference, Alan Tantillo, national director for development and siting policy at T-Mobile USA, pointed out on a panel that “It is not cost-effective to put in a neutral host DAS system.”

It’s a brave new world out there, and the winners are the end-customers. Mobile operators, enterprise, building and venue customers are the beneficiaries of free-market com-petition where the best solution deployed in the shortest amount of time, for best price, wins!

Let’s not confuse the customers. If they want a duck, they’ll buy one.

Ronny Haraldsvik is the SVP/CMO, SpiderCloud Wireless.

COLUMNS


Today’s competitive world of higher education must meet an expanding list of student criteria. It not only includes excellent professors, small classes, and a wide choice of curriculum, but ubiquitous wireless network coverage is critical.

Over 80 percent of students use mobile devices to study. With these devices, they want to access education portals and a growing number of applications any-where, anytime; therefore, making ubiquitous wireless connectivity not just a convenience, but an ex-pectation. This coverage must not only be pervasive, but students also expect it to be fast, secure and reliable.

CIO CHALLENGES The main concern, a few short years ago, was coverage. But now it is all about capacity per user. Adequate capacity must be available anywhere, anytime on campus — in lecture halls, dorms or stadiums. Thousands of students converge on these locations and expect the wireless network to support their voice, video, and data needs.

In addition to managing the “densification” issue, IT departments must also ensure the wireless signals from surrounding cellular towers are not impeded by the con-struction of these facilities. Large stadiums, in particular, are constructed of concrete and steel — materials, which cause cellular connectivity issues.

Institutions often also have expansive outdoor grounds where students expect wireless coverage. However, the cel-lular antennas across a campus can be unsightly; therefore, concealment options are required to maintaining the beauty of the outdoors while still ensuring cellular connectivity.

A campus’ wireless network must be able to support a variety of applications, beyond voice, video and data, such as mobile learning, finding parking, or public safety.

EFFECTIVE WIRELESS SOLUTIONS Innovative wireless solutions, including DAS and small cells,

can enable the fast, reliable, secure and pervasive wireless connectivity students expect. JMA can deploy, for example, a leading edge DAS (Distributed Antenna System), state-of-the-art antennas, and world-renowned compression

connectors. This particular modular solution was implemented at the University of

Vienna recently and supports multiple operators, multiple bands, and several

mobile technologies. Such solutions are scalable and can be installed on

campus or off-premise.This particular cost-effective

solution uses a single optical fiber to distribute multiple frequency

bands and multiple carriers from the rack mounted Master Unit to one or

multiple Remote Units to ensure coverage redundancy with MIMO (multiple input

multiple output). This configuration uses 50 percent to 75 percent less fiber than competitive offerings. It supports the different power level units automatically, and brings the proper level to the BTS (Base Transceiver Station).

The off-premise option or Centralized DAS (C-DAS) is possible as well. The critical mobile processing equipment is off campus, but the robust antenna and amplifier technologies are located onsite. This centralized approach preserves valu-able real estate on campus and enables greater economies of scale; therefore, decreasing the TCO (total cost of ownership).

On college campuses, many large events such as a football game or commencement may require additional wireless coverage to ensure robust mobile communications. The system’s antennas can be redirected remotely to provide wireless support in densely populated areas of a venue, or small cells can be integrated with the system, as well.

Overall, DAS and small cell systems will become as much a part of the higher-education landscape as the diploma itself.

Todd is the Corporate Vice President of Product and Market Strategy at JMA Wireless. He holds two patents in communications systems and 3G wireless data systems.

GOING FORWARD:HIGHER EDUCATION REQUIRES HIGH-DENSITY WIRELESS NETWORKS

B y To d d L a n d r y , J M A W i r e l e s s

COLUMNS


TABLE OF CONTENTS

www.natehome.comErnest N. Morial Convention Center • Hilton New Orleans Riverside

TABLE OF CONTENTS

From stadiums to boardrooms, parking lots to playgrounds, SCI has got your DAS covered and your customers connected. For more than a decade, SCI has been out in front, engineering and manufacturing the most innovative concealment systems on the

market. Count on SCI to deliver the products and services you and your team deserve. Call us today to discuss your DAS projects.

DAS The Way To Do It. Expand Your Footprint Without Leaving A Mark.

4 1 1 4 6 E l m S t r e e tS u i t e FM u r r i e t a , C A 9 2 5 6 2

9 5 1 . 6 9 8 . 5 9 8 5

From stadiums to boardrooms, parking lots to playgrounds, SCI has got your DAS covered and your customers connected. From stadiums to boardrooms, parking lots to playgrounds, SCI has got your DAS covered and your customers connected. For more than a decade, SCI has been out in front, engineering and manufacturing the most innovative concealment systems on the For more than a decade, SCI has been out in front, engineering and manufacturing the most innovative concealment systems on the

market. Count on SCI to deliver the products and services you and your team deserve. Call us today to discuss your DAS projects.market. Count on SCI to deliver the products and services you and your team deserve. Call us today to discuss your DAS projects.

DASDAS The Way To Do It. The Way To Do It. Expand Your Footprint Expand Your Footprint Without Leaving A Mark.

4 1 1 4 6 E l m S t r e e tS u i t e FM u r r i e t a , C A 9 2 5 6 2

9 5 1 . 6 9 8 . 5 9 8 59 5 1 . 6 9 8 . 5 9 8 5

Documents

SMALL CELLS A Business Model Examination...Making LTE Technologies Play Nice With Small Cells VOLUME 2 • ISSUE 3 • SEPTEMBER 2015 SMALL CELLS A Business Model Examination THE MIDDLEPRISE