David Goodman - IEEE VTS UKRI - Can cellular networks keep up with the growth of big data?

David Goodman July 26, 2012

CAN CELLULAR NETWORKS

KEEP UP WITH THE GROWTH

OF BIG DATA?

David Goodman NYU WIRELESS

Polytechnic Institute of New York University

[email protected]

IEEE VTS-UKRI CHAPTER MEETING

July 26, 2012

mailto:[email protected]


Cellular Data Crisis 2010

@ 4G World: Carriers brace for data storm

October 20, 21 2010

Like the rest of the world, Japan is forecasting explosive growth in data traffic.

Japanese end users are demanding high-definition digital cameras,

access to YouTube, e-books and online games.

January 28, 2010


Cellular Data Crisis

2012 Update

10-fold surge in global mobile data traffic … by 2016

Non-voice service revenue annual % growth:

Italy 1.8, UK 4.9, Germany 7.0

FT: Feb. 25, 2012

4G upgrade signals threat and opportunity


COST

REVENUE

Time

$ $

SMS iPhone etc.



• Revenue 2005-09 $8.5B →$37B 4x

• AT&T Data Usage 2006-09 70x

• Japan data usage 2007 – 2017 200x ??



• BlackBerry = Cellphone x 2

• iPhone = BlackBerry x 5

• Aircard = iPhone x 5

• iPad, future devices and services = ???

Cellular Data Usage


Cellular Service Plans

• Voice $60 750 minutes $600/GB

• SMS $20 1000 texts* $60000/GB

• Data $60 5 GB $12/GB

• iPhone $30 unlimited →$5/GB??

Pandora=60 MB/hour Live video =300 MB/hour *2011: 8T texts = $127B = $53,000/GB


What’s wrong with this picture?

Revenue Demand

Voice

SMS

Usage sensitive Limited

Data Fixed Unlimited


Industry response $10-50/GB

From June 28, 2012


New picture (June 2012)

Revenue Demand

Voice

SMS

Usage sensitive

Fixed

Limited

Data Fixed

Usage sensitive

Unlimited


Increase Network Capacity

• Cell splitting

• More spectrum

• Advanced technology


Increase Network Capacity 1985-2008

• Total x10,000

• Cell splitting x400

• More spectrum x3.4

• Efficient technology x7


FCC Auction 2008 $19,000,000,000


4G Spectrum Auctions

France €3.8B

Germany €4.4B

Italy €3.9B

Spain €1.6B

UK Late 2012


Cellular technology evolution wider transmission bands

25-30 kHz 200 kHz 5 MHz 1.4-20 MHz

2010

LTE

2000

WCDMA

1990

GSM

1980

AMPS

1G 2G 3G 4G

100 MHz

20??

LTE-A


Cellular technology evolution Internet core network

Cellular

protocols SS7 - ISDN IP

1G 2G, 3G 4G


Cellular technology evolution multiple access

FDMA TDMA CDMA 1990 2000

2010

1G, “4G” 2G 3G


Cellular technology evolution system names

2000 – UMTS

UNIVERSAL

1990 – GSM

GLOBAL 1980 – NMT

NORDIC

1G 2G 3G

4G

2010 – ???

LTE


Addressing the data crisis Industry trends

• LTE – Up to 20 MHz signal band

– Up to 300/75 (DL/UL) throughput

– Up to 4x4 MIMO

– IP core network

• Video compression

• Smaller cells

• Wi-Fi off-loading


NYU WIRELESS Director: Prof. Ted Rappaport nyuwireless.org


Addressing the data crisis Future directions

• Network optimization with small cells

• mm wave transmission

• Cooperative communications

• Cognitive radio

• Adaptive pricing


Addressing the data crisis NYU WIRELESS RESEARCH

• Network with small cells

– Optimum cell selection Prof. Rangan

– Handover for mobile terminals Prof. Panwar

• mm wave communication, Prof. Rappaport – Measurements, devices

• Cooperative communications

Prof. Erkip, Knox, Panwar

– Algorithms, signal processing, testbed


Femto and pico cells

Wireless Research Lab

Femto- and Picocells:

Small is Beautiful

5

Traditional

macrocell tower

Nokia MetroSite

UMTS base

station

Huawei femtocell

“personal base

station”

Smaller, easily deployable, lower cost


Femtocell

Use customer

broadband for

backhaul

Offload traffic from

Macro cells


Femtocell challenges

• Uncontrolled interference environment

– Unplanned deployments.

– Large power disparities between macro and femto.

– Restricted association & closed subscriber groups

• Need for self-configuration & “plug & play”.

– Must synchronize for macro-femto handover & to enable advanced interference mitigation techniques.

• Mixed backhaul: operator and subscriber’s ISP.


Small cells are coming

Today's Top News (June 25, 2012)

Rumor mill: AT&T gears up to order

100,000 small cells

(283,000 cells total in USA at end of 2011)

Small cells=femto < pico < metro < micro

www.smallcellforum.org

http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=86&ms=NDE2ODY2NAS2&r=MjM2MTIzNzU5NzkS1&b=0&j=MTI2OTM4MzgwS0&mt=1&rt=0

http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=86&ms=NDE2ODY2NAS2&r=MjM2MTIzNzU5NzkS1&b=0&j=MTI2OTM4MzgwS0&mt=1&rt=0


Backhaul becoming a dominant

cost • Backhaul represents significant cost to operators:

– 30 to 50% of OPEX costs by various estimates

• Cost and management of airlink is decreasing – Lower power / smaller cells

– Self-organization

• With greater bandwidth and larger numbers of cell sites, backhaul will become dominant expense

• Is there a cheaper way to deliver backhaul?


• Cell selection now based on signal strength

• Add backhaul as selection criterion

• Provision for average (not maximum) traffic

• Opportunistic backhaul challenges

– Variable traffic loads

– Distributed management

– Heterogenous cell sizes

– Load balancing

– Small numbers of users per cell

Cell selection with opportunistic

backhaul: Prof S. Rangan


Cellular Handover, Prof. Panwar

• Handover between macrocells takes less than 100ms.

• Handover to indoor Femtocells

– Near stationary user

– Slow handover: Many messages going

over the public internet.

• Handover among outdoor picocells

– More Frequent: Users quickly passing through small cells.


Faster Handover

• Prefetch user data to picocells in proximity.

• Add a fast over-the-air interface connecting picocells.

• Decouple control messages from actual handoff.

Handover Durations for Femtocells

• Legacy Handover ~ 1500ms. (applied as it is)

• Prefetch-based Fast Handover ~ 800ms. (with all control messaging via backhaul)

• Near-Instantaneous Handover ~ 30ms. (with OTA interface)


•G. L. Baldwin, “Background on Development of 60 GHz for Commercial Use,” SiBEAM, inc. white paper, May

2007, http://sibeam.com/whtpapers/Background_on_Dev_of_60GHz_for_Commercial%20Use.pdf

Spectrum Allocation for 60GHz – key

mmWave frequency

•Park, C., Rappaport, T.S. , “Short Range Wireless Communications for Next Generation Networks: UWB, 60 GHz Millimeter-Wave PAN, and ZigBee,”

Vol.14, No. 4, IEEE Wireless Communications Magazine, Aug. 2007, pp 70-78.

• Spectrum

allocation similar

worldwide

• 5 GHz common

bandwidth

among several

countries

Background

http://sibeam.com/whtpapers/Background_on_Dev_of_60GHz_for_Commercial Use.pdf


“Bevo 1” June 2009 1,4,5

“Antenna” Dec. 2009

1,4

“Bevo 4” July 2010 2

“PN Generator”

Oct. 2010 3

mmWave/sub-THz on-chip antennas

Probe de-embedding and calibration

RFICs for 60 GHz, 77 GHz, sub-THz

Wireless propagation measurements

and modeling for mmWave/sub-THz

On-chip channel sounding system

mm Wave devices


Cooperative communications research at NYU WIRELESS

•Antenna diversity (virtual MIMO)

•Cooperative coding

•Coop MAC – IEEE802

•Relay

•Video multicast

•P-to-P content sharing


Cooperative communications

Portable devices communicate with each other

S1

S2

Base Station

Bandwidth consumers → suppliers


QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Adaptive Pricing Research


Beyond the data crisis

• Align theory, experiments, and systems

• Challenges become opportunities

– Mobile (distribute information)

– Portable (human energy source)

– Free space (broadcasting, cooperation)

• Application specific networks

– Health

– Transportation

– Environment

– Entertainment

Technology

David Goodman - IEEE VTS UKRI - Can cellular networks keep up with the growth of big data?