TELECOM ITALIA GROUP

iJOIN Winter School, 5G Cloud Technologies: Benefits and Challenges

University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany, February 23-24, 2015

The path toward C-RAN and V-RAN:

benefits and challenges from operator perspective

Marco CARETTI

Telecom Italia Engineering & TiLAB

Agenda

Telecom Italia presentation

RAN architecture evolution towards C-RAN / vRAN

Drivers for CRAN/VRAN deployment

CRAN fronthauling transport challenges

Virtual RAN

Mobile Edge Computing

Conclusions
iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 2
Telecom Italia group 1/2

Employees Telecom Italia is the main

telecommunication and ICT
65.872 operator in Italy, as well as one
of the most important in Latin
TIM lines in Italy America and among the main
global mobile operators
30.400.000
Italian leader in the ICT market,
Revenues (€)
active in the following sectors:
fixed and mobile communications,
15.972.000.000 internet and media, systems and
solutions for business, R&D
Values referred to September 2014
http://www.telecomitalia.com/tit/en/about-us/profile.html Strategic markets: Italy, Brasil
iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 3
Telecom Italia group 2/2
The international presence

Italy International Wholesale services

TI sparkle is an important global service provider, with

activites on Voice, IP and data transmission for fixed and
mobile operators, ISP and multinational societies (MNCs)

Latin america: Brasil

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 4
Focus on TILAB: Wireless Innovation
Main activities of the dept.
 R&D activities, scouting, testing, performance evaluation of wireless systems
(e.g. OFDMA), study of innovative radio access technologies
 technological trials (e.g. LTE), support to engineering department
 Involvement in standardization bodies and fora (3GPP, ETSI, NGMN, …)
 And also EU funded projects, collaboration with vendors and academic world.

http://www.miwaves.eu/ http://www.ict-ijoin.eu/ https://www.metis2020.com/

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 5
The drivers for the RAN evolution

5G

Drivers

INCREMENT OF
THROUGHPUT IMPROVEMENT OF
COVERAGE
Peak (100 Mbps
 Gbps) INCREMENT OF REDUCTION of
Service continuity in all the
and cell edge CAPACITY FOR A END-to-END sites of interest
GIVEN BANDWIDTH LATENCY (both outdoor and indoor)
More users and more Huge impacts on
traffic by managing QoS/QoE for 5G
the complexity services

…all with an increasing attention to Energy Efficiency and sustainability of evolved mobile networks,
driving to new network architectures
iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 6
RAN architecture evolution towards C-RAN / vRAN
 The evolution towards the C-RAN / vRAN can be roughly summarized
in the following phases:
 Phase 0: distributed BBU:
 In most of current deployments the BBU is distributed in each site
 There coud be a local connection (usually with CPRI) between BBU and RRU connected to the
antennas with coaxial cables (non split architectures)
 The RRU are close to the antennas and connected with fibers to the BBU in the site
 Loose coordination via X2 in case of LTE system

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 7
RAN architecture evolution towards C-RAN / vRAN
 Phase 1: BBU hostelling or BBU centralization (Centralized RAN):
 in the first phase, the baseband unit is built with specialized HW and controls a limited number
of cells (~tens). Each baseband unit controls all the cells of one or multiple sites and the
different BBUs can communicate with each others within the central office through standardized
X2 interface. BBUs are not pooled.
 This architecture is suited for LTE Advanced system that will deploy non co-located Carrier
Aggregation and cooperative multi-point (CoMP) functionalities.
 Interface of connection between RRH and BBU (fronthauling) could be CPRI, but also OBSAI
and ORI. CPRI interface compression (based also on proprietary solutions) may allow to use
also microwaves for fronthaul

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 8
RAN architecture evolution towards C-RAN / vRAN
 Phase 2: BBU pooling (Cloud RAN):
 In a second step the baseband hostelling configuration can be combined with a pooling of BBU
resources where the different HW resources can be dynamically allocated (e.g. in time and in
space) to different cells and/or different RAT. This solution uses specialized baseband silicon
(integrated by the vendor)
 BBU pooling improves the utilization and reliability of radio access networks, realizing a more
efficient multi-RAT joint radio operation.
 This solution also simplifies the mobility management and reduces the number of S1 and X2
interfaces to the core network
 Further functional partitioning between RRH and BBU could be specified in the future, leading to
partially centralized solutions and FH bandwidth saving (enabling also other fronthaul
techniques like microwaves)

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 9
RAN architecture evolution towards C-RAN / vRAN
 Phase 3: RAN virtualization:
 The final step of CRAN architectures is the virtual RAN architecture where a reconfigurable HW
(e.g. general purpose Processing, GPP) is used with a significant number of controlled cells
(~hundreds). The baseband resources in principle can be located in the same or different
physical locations (the “cloud”).
 This further evolution step will further facilitate the SW/HW reconfiguration among the different
available RATs to dynamically adapt the processing resources to the traffic request, based on
the SDR (Software Defined Radio) and NFV (Network Function Virtualization) paradigm.

Different functional partitioning

between BBU and RRU can
enable bandwidth saving over
the FH and lead to differenti
virtualization solutions

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 10
Drivers for CRAN/VRAN deployment
 CAPEX/OPEX saving:
 Possible lower costs for rental (it depends on the type of contracts and
installation), when BB are concentrated to the central office.
 Lower footprint and energy consumption coming from reduced air conditioning

needs (when BB are located in a central location instead of multiple locations),

but also from dynamic resource allocation and traffic load balancing.

Energy
stations or
multi-RAT
installations
could
require still
space in
the site Compact solutions are already
installed with very low footprint

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 11
Drivers for CRAN/VRAN deployment
 CAPEX/OPEX saving:
 Easier management and operation is made
when the baseband of one or multiple
systems is concentrated in less sites.
 For new sites, since RRU are functionally
simpler, they probably require lower effort
for site installation and management.
 50%-70% OPEX reduction and 15%-47%
CAPEX reduction based on different
estimation from [1].

From [2]

 In case of virtual RAN the SDR will further make easier the management enabling the
RAN upgrade by simple SW upgrade.
 Moreover virtual RAN architecture will potentially allow lower HW/SW cost for the
operator due to the increased number of vendors (coming from the IT industry) and
further market segmentation and competition.

[1] “AN ANALYSIS OF RAN COST-STRUCTURE” BY NGMN ALLIANCE

[2] C-RAN – The Road Towards Green RAN, Whitepaper, http://labs.chinamobile.com/
iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 12
Drivers for CRAN/VRAN deployment
 Better performance thanks to the tx/rx coordination among the RRUs.
 Multi-site Carrier Aggregation (sites that share co-located BBUs) in case the operator has deployed
LTE in multiple bands.

 This architecture requires

 efficient mobility management algorithms (i.e. flexible secondary cells reconfiguration)
 High number of cells that can be controlled by the baseband
 Higher capacity gains are expected in scenarios with low cositing of different bands

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 13
Drivers for CRAN/VRAN deployment
 Better performance thanks to the tx/rx coordination among the RRUs.
 Inter-site CoMP: both downlink and uplink algorithms (up to Rel. 12) require BB centralization (intra
eNodeB solutions).

 Macro only solutions show limited gains at

cell edge. Higher values for uplink CoMP
and in intra-site only (adressed by first
implementations)

 Higher gains in HetNet scenarios

(for example Stadium) due to the higher interference levels:

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 14
Drivers for CRAN/VRAN deployment
 Capacity improvement & Adaptability to Non-uniform traffic:
 Load sharing among the different baseband units.

 Efficient inter-RAT traffic management (e.g. inter-RAT mobility and load management).

 Other functionalities (like ICIC, feICIC, NAICS), even if designed to support inter-eNB
communication through standardized interfaces (i.e. X2 interface) can exploit centralized
configurations.

 Better HO performances
can be obtained in CRAN
architectures for some
scenarios like high
speed trains
From [1]

[1] R4-150554, High speed train scenarios, CMCC.

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 15
CRAN fronthauling transport challenges (1/2)
 Current optical links between BBU and RRU is realized by means of proprietary
interfaces: CPRI and OBSAI. For CPRI the typical value to link a LTE RRU 20 MHz
MIMO 2x2 is 2,5 Gb/s.

 More efficient solutions, based for example on functional split between BB and RRU
are needed in the long term
considering further evolution of the
standard (higher order MIMO,
carrier aggregation with more than
2 carriers) multi-sectors/multi-RAT From [1]
configurations and HetNet
deployments

 Up to now the RRU are P2P connected with BBU by means a fibre pair each. In a CRAN
architecture with high number of sites connected
to the BBU, if no more efficient solutions are
available (thanks to compressed solutions(*)
or different functional splits), additional transport solutions should be considered
 Passive or active WDM
 Using higher CPRI line bit rate, up to 10 Gb/s or more and electrical multiplexing (daisy chain)
(*) compression ratios are limited to 1/2 or 1/3 with negligible performance
loss iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 16
[1] C-RAN: The Road Towards Green RAN, China Mobile Research
Institute.
CRAN fronthauling transport challenges (2/2)
 Passive WDM is the main available
technology used to multiply several
optical connections over one fiber
(pair), Typical values for the traditional
passive CWDM
 Up to tens CPRI links over a single fiber
 Passive – no power
 Coloured SFP on both RRU and BBU sides
 Lower cost

 Active WDM
 Requires power
 Allow a better network monitoring
 Grey SFP on both RRU and BBU sides
 Both Ring or Bus topology
 Probably Vendor dependent
 More expensive

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 17
Possible coordination schemes with lower requirements
• In the mid term new functionalities, introduced in different releases, could allow
coordination among sites with lower requirements in terms of latency/bandwidth. Lower
performance gain are expected, compared to their fully centralized counterparts but can
be a valid option in areas where no close-to-ideal transport resources are available :

• Enhanced CoMP: allows the coordination

between sites (in principle without a
centralized BB).

• Small Cell Enhancements: several

enhancements are introduced (256QAM,
fast small cell on/off, synchronization
based on radio signals) without requiring
tight coordination between the sites
• eICIC introduces Almost Blank Subframes (ABS)
to reduce the interference of Macro Layer over
the Small Cell Layer (coordinated over X2)

• Dual Connectivity: allows to send multiple

carriers from different eNB, connected via X2
iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 18
 … and virtual RAN
• In this phase, virtualization (on general purpose HW) enables the abstraction from a particular Operating
System. This is usually done by an “hypervisor”. Some functionalities are executed running as Virtual
Machines (VMs). Examples of VMs in CRAN environment are represented by single RATs or by sub-
systems of the protocol stack of a RAT.
• Virtualization approach of RAN functionalities should follow the general ETSI NFV framework.

E-UTRAN

eNB

RAP

RAP
UE
Virtual
BaseBand pool

RAP

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 19
virtual RAN implementation issues

In general, in order to satisfy realtime needs given by radio systems, it

may be difficult to implement all eNBs protocol stack on general purpose
HW: in these cases some functionalities (typically PHY layer) are
implemented on dedicated HW.

In any case, full RAN centralization

implies the usage of Fiber (with high
capacity but also most expensive).
If this cable infrastructure is not
available, partial RAN centralization
solutions should be evaluated.
(e.g. the approach of iJOIN project).

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 20
 Network evolution toward 5G
The need for Mobile edge computing

 C-RAN architecture offers to operator the possibility to use green and efficient
infrastructure in order to save costs.
 Open interfaces between the modules increase the possibility for algorithms
customization (for example in case of SON, Self Organizing Network algorithms).
 Moreover, the path toward RAN virtualization will open new opportunities: HW/SW
decoupling, multivendor I/O, flexible deployments, …
 In addition, new 5G services will introduce more challenging QoS requirements
(especially in terms of latency, energy efficiency, …) that may be difficult to fulfill
only with the implementation of C-RAN.
 Then, in the view of future 5G systems, a significant advancement w.r.t. C-RAN
can be provided by the introduction of mobile edge computing:
moving cloud capabilities towards the network edge (i.e. eNBs)
 and providing the system architecture with a joint management of
communication and computation resources.
iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 21
 Network evolution toward 5G
The need for Mobile edge computing
 Mobile edge computing (MEC) permits to extend cloud platform for applications to
the edge of the network (base stations), in order to improve the user experience
(also thanks to the standardization of proper measurements and network APIs).
E-UTRAN
EPC

eNB
+ MEC
PCRF
server HSS
Application
Server
RAP

RAP MME S/P-GW Web

Virtual
UE BaseBand pool
+ MEC server

RAP

This view is not in contrast with C-RAN architecture: MEC will add flexible
decentralization and proper dynamic instantiation and orchestration of virtual
machines serving for network management in close proximity to terminals (that are
also empowered with additional capabilities through computation offloading).
iJOIN Winter School
Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 22
Standardization activities relevant for MEC
Focus on ETSI

Standardization fora already started working on the above mentioned issues.

 In particular, ETSI has started a number of activities as well, creating two
Industry Specification Groups (ISG):
ISG NFV (Network Function Virtualization): facilitate the development
of an open and interoperable ecosystem through specification,
implementation and deployment experimentations;
ISG MEC (Mobile Edge Computing): provide RAN with IT and cloud-
computing capabilities in close proximity to terminals.

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 23
Conclusions
 Network and RAN evolution, following the LTE path, is driven by several drivers
(throughput, capacity, coverage and also energy efficiency).
 CRAN architecture is promising solution bringing several advantages in some
scenarios:
 Better performances
 Reduced CAPEX/OPEX

 The final step of CRAN architectures is the virtual RAN architecture where a
reconfigurable HW (e.g. general purpose) is used with a significant number of
controlled cells, and BB resources in principle can be located in the same or
different physical locations (the cloud).
 The processing power available at the edge of the network and possible new
requirements enable the addition of mobile edge computing on top of network
virtualization framework creating new opportunities for OTT and operators.

iJOIN Winter School

Marco Caretti – Wireless Innovation 24
 Q&A

Marco Caretti
marco.caretti@telecomitalia.it