Connection Admission Control For UMTS Transport (CAC) : Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke

Connection Admission Control
for UMTS Transport (CAC)
Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Paris, 29.06.2004

Agenda
1. Presentation UTRAN CAC UMR3.0

2. Evolution of CAC in UMR3.5 and UMR4.0
3. UMR3.5 bypassing solution for setting up priority to
voice and video telephony access (already in UMR3.0)
4. Impact of PS Streaming users on CAC performances
5. Detailed description of new UMR3.5 feature load based
BRA and interaction with other features (RRM feature)
6. Impact of HSDPA on CAC UTRAN
7. Exchange of information / discussion on specific
dimensioning issues and traffic models
8. Miscellaneous (e.g. Shaping)
Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 2 © Siemens, 2004

Agenda


Network Design Principle
 In the Siemens transport network design, RNC and

Node B rely on virtual paths
AAL-2
(VCI)
AAL-2
(VCI/CID)
VP
VP
AAL-5
(VCI)
AAL-5
(VCI)
No
de
RNC B
A
T
M
STM-1
ATM N x E1 IMA
N * E1 IMA
Edge Switch Netw Edge Switch
ork

Overview
 Connection Admission Control is responsible for the

efficient use of transport resources on the corresponding
interfaces
 CAC supervises resources on external interfaces as well
as for internal resources
 Different levels of Admission Control are to be
distinguished
– Admission Control on VP, VC and AAL layer
 RNC is responsible for CAC on Iub, Iur and Iu interfaces
 NodeB performs CAC on Iub interface
 Focus: CAC for AAL2 traffic on Iub and Iur

CAC for AAL2 Traffic
- Principles -
 CAC for AAL2 traffic is handled in the RNC

 No CAC for AAL2 is performed in the NodeB
 Various services and QoS requirements
 The function of the TNL Connection Admission Control

Mechanism is closely related to the Radio Admission
control (RRM)
– Radio Admission can reject calls even if transport capacity
is available
– Radio Admission Control related parts will be handled in a
different workshop

Call handling in UMR3.0
 For each single call 2 CIDs are used on AAL2 layer are
set up on Iub
– One CID reserved for DTCH one for DCCH
– 3.4 kbps DCCH is used within the RNC
 For a multi-call (CS+PS) 3 CIDs are used
 In case of adjacent RNC handover also 2 CIDs are used

between the S-RNC (Serving RNC) and the D-RNC (Drift
RNC)
– S-RNC controls the user equipment and acts as the
interface to the Core Network
– D-RNC is used by the corresponding S-RNC to add further
handover branches towards the UE (User Equipment)

RNC acting as S-RNC
 RNC requests the connection using the ALCAP Request

Message (ERQ Establishment Request)
 ERQ message contains the AAL2 Link Characteristics
Element (ALC)
 The parameters contained in the ALC element are
– Average and Peak Bandwidth of the connection
– Average and Peak SDU size
 CAC is based on these signalled values
 For the CS services and PS streaming peak rates are

used for bandwidth reservation on Iub and Iur
 PS best effort bandwidth reservation is based on
effective bandwidths taking into account
– Multiplexing gains
– Activity of the services

Admission Control for Iub and Iur
 Summary of main AAL2 parameters used in ERQ

– Input parameters are the average and Peak AAL2 SDU
rate
– Distinction in CS and PS services
Transport Max. frame Frame protocol DL max. DL average DL peak DL average

channel protocol header [octets] CPS-SDU CPS-SDU CPS-SDU bit rate CPS-SDU bit rate
type payload (incl. size size [bit/s] [bit/s]
padding) [octets] [octets]
[octets]
RACH - - 45 45 0 0
PCH 30 7 42 42 33600 33600
5 (PI-bitmap)
FACH for 42 7 45 45 39232 39232
CCCH
and
DCCH
FACH for 45 7 45 45 41600 41600
DTCH
DCCH 19 5 24 24 4800 4800
3.4kbit/s
DCCH 19 5 24 24 19200 19200
13.6kbit/s
AMR 32 7 39 39 15616 15616
12.2
kbit/s CS services (voice, UDI)
UDI 160 5 45 45 65984 65984
64kbit/s
Streamin 328 5 45 45 66624 66624 PS streaming
g 64kbit/s
BE 0 5 5 5 1984 1984
0kbit/s
BE 42 5 45 45 9408 9024
8kbit/s
BE 168 5 45 45 69184 17984 PS best effort services
64kbit/s
BE 336 5 45 45 136384 17984
128kbit/s
BE 504 5 45 45 407232 36032
384kbit/s

Admission Control for Iub and Iur in UL
 AAL2 CPS-SDU rates and CPS SDU sizes for Iub and Iur
in UL direction
Transport Max. frame Frame protocol UL max. UL average UL peak UL average

channel protocol header [octets] CPS-SDU CPS-SDU size CPS-SDU bit rate CPS-SDU bit
type payload (incl. size [octets] [bit/s] rate
padding) [octets] [bit/s]
[octets]
RACH 45 7 45 45 20800 20800
PCH - - - 42 7040 896
FACH for
CCCH
- - - 45 5056 640
and
DCCH
FACH for - -
- 45 5056 640
DTCH
DCCH 19 7
26 26 5184 1024
3.4kbit/s
DCCH 19 7
26 26 20800 4160
13.6kbit/s
AMR 32 9
12.2 41 41 16384 8576
kbit/s
UDI 160 7
45 45 66816 66816
64kbit/s
Streamin 42 7
45 45 19584 19584
g 64kbit/s
BE 0 7
7 7 2816 0
0kbit/s
BE 42 7
45 45 9792 0
8kbit/s
BE 168 7
45 45 70016 0
64kbit/s

CAC Procedure
 Effective Bandwidth
 For PS services effective bandwidth near to the average
bandwidth
 Per VC
 Maximum Link utilization, maximum number of users
 QoS Differentiation
 Internal resources (e.g. buffer, internal connections, etc.)
 No link between shaping and CAC procedure

 CIDs are selected in a round robin manner

CAC Performance in UMR3.0
 Justification of CAC is a trade off between link

utilization and QoS requirements (Delay) for the
different services
– For initial UMTS rollout the link utilization is maximized
100%
90%
80%
Improved
Improved QoS 70%
Link Utilization
for BE services 60%
UMR 3.0
50% UMR 3.5
"Ideal" CAC
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0,5*E1 1*E1 1,5*E1 2*E1 4*E1 6*E1 8*E1
Example:
Iub link bandwidth (E1 = 1920 kbit/s)
40% CSD : 60% PSD

The 100 % Link Load Problem
 How to guarantee the QoS

 Assignment of traffic classes based on the radio
bearers
– 3 prios
– no customization necessary
 Priority for CS services (AMR, UDI) and PS streaming
AAL2 Priority Queues in RNC
Prio1: Voice, UDI, PS Streaming
ATM VC
Cell discard may happen
Prio2: Common Channels

Prio3: Best Effort PS

RNC as D-RNC
 ALC element is passed from the S-RNC to the D-RNC

 Corresponding bit rates are signalled during ERQ and are
considered by the admission control
 Average rate is used for call admission as the service type
can not be signalled via Iur (3GPP limitation)
 User traffic via Iur expected to be low

Admission Control Decision on Iub
 The Admission control decision is the following
bandwidthS  RNC  bandwidthD RNC  bandwidthAAL2
Bandwidth reserved Bandwidth reserved Bandwidth reserved

by the S-RNC by the D-RNC by the RNC per VC

Agenda


Changes in UMR3.5
 Bit rate adaptation is introduced in UMR3.5

 One AAL2 connection throughout the lifetime of the PS
BE DCH
Bandwidth reservation based on effective bitrate of
maximum possible bearer
No decrease in call processing performance due to
massive re-establishment of AAL2 connections
 Quality of the PS BE bearers is increased
 New values used in the ERQ are introduced
 Average CPS SDU rates are increased


different services
– For initial UMTS rollout the link utilization is maximized
– In UMR3.5 the reserved bandwidth for BE services will
be increased (better QoS for PS BE services)
100%
90%
80%
Improved
Improved QoS 70%
Link Utilization
for BE services 60%
UMR 3.0
50% UMR 3.5
"Ideal" CAC
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Example:
0,5*E1 1*E1 1,5*E1 2*E1 4*E1 6*E1 8*E1
40% CSD : 60% PSD

CAC Evolution
Summary UMR3.x Transport Bearer Modification

(UMR 4.0 Feature)
 Static reservation of bandwidth
at RL setup.  Dynamic adaptation of reserved
 Reserved rate corresponds to bandwidth to the varying rates
peak rate for CS-traffic and to of PS radio bearer.
effective rate for PS-traffic.  Reserved rate corresponds to
 Effective rate is based on a the peak rate of the actual radio
function value between average bearer
CPS-SDU rate and peak CPS-
SDU rate
“Maximum Usage” “Optimum QoS”
 More PS BE users are admitted  Improve QoS for BE users

than mere peak rate reservation  Guaranteed throughput per user
would allow (e. g. 384 kbit/s)
 Protect AMR, UDI, Streaming  Avoid congestion on Iub
and other services by strict
priority queuing
 Guarantee minimum average
throughput per PS BE user
through the lifetime of the radio
bearer (about 64 kbit/s)
Transport Bearer Modification
- Mechanism -1-
 In UMR4.0 Transport Bearer Modification (TBM) is

introduced
AAL2 VC Max Bandwidth
Bandwidth
Not in Use
Exessive Allocation Bandwidth on Iub in case
of peak rate reservation
Bandwidth Exessive Allocation
in Use
Call A Setup Call B Setup Call A BRA Call B BRA

（384kbps）（384kbps）（384->64kbps）（384->64kbps）
AAL2 VC Max Bandwidth
Bandwidth
Not in Use
Bandwidth on Iub is
adapted to the actual
Bandwidth
in Use
needs of the DCH
Call A Setup Call B Setup Call A BRA Call B BRA Call A BRA
（384kbps）（384kbps）（384->64kbps）（384->64kbps）（64->384kbps）

Transport Bearer Modification
- Mechanism -2-
BRA
(bps)
Request Rate
384k (RAB ASSIGNMENT REQUEST
Maximum Bit Rate)
256k
128k Actual Rate

(Change by Admission
Control or BRA)
64k
(Time)
:(bps)
RAB RAB Release
13.6k SETUP Request Rate
(SDCCH) (13.6k which is the SDCCH
Rate)
3.4k Actual Rate

(DCCH)
(Time)


different services
– Performance is under investigation
100%
90%
80%
Improved
Improved QoS 70%
Link Utilization
for BE services 60%
UMR 3.0
50% UMR 3.5
"Ideal" CAC
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0,5*E1 1*E1 1,5*E1 2*E1 4*E1 6*E1 8*E1
Example:
40% CSD : 60% PSD

Agenda


HSDPA Iub Network Design
 In the R’99 network design, RNC and Node B rely on virtual paths
 An optimized bandwidth control mechanism is provided to
guarantee maximum throughput inside the ATM VP for HS-DSCH
data streams and to protect R’99 traffic.
AAL-2
(VCI)
AAL-2
(VCI/CID)
VP
VP
AAL-5
(VCI)
AAL-5
(VCI)
No
de
RNC B
A
T
M
STM-1
N * E1 IMA
ATM N x E1 IMA
Edge Switch Netw Edge Switch
ork
 With introducing HSDPA TNL principle of R’99 is continued!

HSDPA Transport Iub Interface Structure
modifie
d NEW
 The impact to User Plane is that in parallel to the

existing FPs HS-DSCH FP is introduced on Iub interface
 The only impact to Control Plane is that NBAP is
adapted to the needs of HSDPA by inserting new HS
specific IE
Iur, Iu Interface
 Support of HSDPA over Iur Interface is not needed,

because of cell reselection that is provided; no HS-
DSCH protocol stack is needed.
RNC relay best effort PS RB from Iub interface to Iu-ps

stack.
 Either R’99 PS RB and high speed PS RB are mapped to
same RAB on Iu-ps.

TNL Impact
 TNL layer principle is continued

 The ATM/AAL2 layer remains unchanged
 Additional transport channels only needed by request of new
CID
 Bandwidth requirements increase
 HS-DSCH FP flow control inside an AAL2 connection is
established
DTCH DCCH DCCH DTCH
MAC-d MAC-d
MAC-hs MAC- HS - HS -
hs DSCHFP DSCHFP
PHY PHY TNL TNL
UE Uu NodeB Iub SRNC

HS-DSCH Frame Protocol
Flow Control
 On Iub interface the flow control has to provide a controlled

data flow between the MAC-d and MAC-hs taking into
account the transmission capabilities of the air interface
 The HS-DSCH FP flow control between RNC and NodeB is
based on a message based mechanism
RNC NodeB
Iub Uu
HS-DSCH Capacity Allocation DCH
DCH
Credits/Interval/Rep.Period
Priority
Queues
Filling Level
MAC-hs
Scheduler
HS-DSCH Rate
Scheduler
Priority
Scheduler
HS-DSCH

Flow Control
Message Flow
 Capacity request and

allocation message Priority Queue NodeB RNC
fillling level
 Simple on/off control
 All messages are protected
first HS-DSCH CAPACITY ALLOCATION
(credit > 0)
against message loss by
timer supervision CAPACITY
HS-DSCH CAPACITY ALLOCATION
(credit = 0)
HS-DSCH CAPACITY REQUEST

(credit = 0)
(credit > 0)

HS-DSCH Frame Protocol
Reference Configuration
 In DL MAC-d layer maps the logical channel DTCH to MAC-d

PDU.
 MAC-d flow is controlled by the HS-DSCH FP, all the MAC-d
PDUs are of same priority and size
 MAC-d flow is mapped to MAC-hs layer by NodeB
UE x UE y
RB wRB
RB zRB v RB m RB n
RNC
RLC MAC- MAC- MAC-
SDU1 SDU2 SDUn
Logical
Channels
MAC -d C/T Mux MAC-d MAC-d MAC-d

PDU1 PDU2 PDUn
FP MAC -d
Transport bearer HS-DSCH MAC-d MAC-d MAC-d HS-DSCH
Iub interface Data Frame Header PDU1 PDU2 PDUn Tail
FP
MAC -hs MAC -hs
functionality MAC-d MAC-d MAC-d Padding
MAC-hs Header PDUn (opt.)
PDU1 PDU2
Node B Transport Channels

Rel. 5 QoS Concept
3GPP TS25.434 require QoS Differentiation of R’99 and HS traffic
There are two concepts to differentiate QoS

1. Priority queuing on ATM layer; HS traffic and R’99 use separate VC
2. Priority queuing on AAL 2 layer; HS traffic and R’99 traffic use shared ATM VC
1. Separate ATM VC 2. Shared ATM VC
Current (R99) HSDPA

Current (R99) HSDPA
Traffic Traffic
Traffic Traffic
AAL2 AAL2
AAL2 AAL2
VC VC
VC VC
VP
VP
(Planned for UMR 5.0 or later)

QoS Differentiation Proposal
 HSDPA release is also based on QoS differentiation on AAL2

layer
 The ATM VP concept is continued
 Assignment of traffic classes to radio bearers

– 4 prios
– no customization necessary
AAL2 Priority Queues in RNC
Prio1: UDI, PS Streaming, Common Channels, PS Converstional

Prio2: Voice
ATM VC
Cell discard may happen
Prio3: Best Effort PS

Prio4: HSDPA

Benefit of AAL2 QoS Differentiation
The benefits of AAL2 QoS differentiation are

 The ATM VP CBR concept is continued
 Number of HSDPA users on Iub is maximised
 Current ATM VC can be reused for HS traffic but it
looses the CBR behaviour
 Configuration effort remains low
 The VP based Iub transport structure that assign every
NodeB via a VP to RNC is continued
And
 R’99 is protected against HSDPA bursts by strict AAL2

priority scheduling.
– UDI, Streaming and AMR have highest priority
– HS get lowest priority.

Bandwidth Reservation on Iub
 HSDPA traffic (e. g. data rate) on Iub can neither be

predicted nor controlled in RNC
 Strict priority scheduling of AAL2 connections
according to QoS protects traffic with higher QoS e.g.
UDI, Streaming and AMR
 CAC is under investigation
 First proposal:
Use similar mechanism as in UMR 3.0 for the PS BE
traffic (max. number of users)

AAL2 Signalling
 RNC maintain R’99 principle of setup and release of

AAL-2 connections for HSDPA DTCH
 For each HSDPA user 3 AAL2 connections on the Iub
interface are setup
– HS-DSCH DL data stream (MAC-d flow),
– UL-DCH and the
– DCCH
 Setup of the AAL-2 connections on Iub for the MAC-d
flow and UL-DCH is initiated by the SRNC NBAP during
RAB setup or by CTS
 In case of leaving cell UL-DCH AAL-2 connections will
be reused in DL by CTS of HS-DSCH channel to DCH
 ALCAP uses Q.2630.2 signaling for setup and release of
AAL 2 connections
 AAL2 CPS SDU rate supports only high bit rate
connections beyond 2 Mbps

Connection Admission Control For UMTS Transport (CAC) : Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Connection Admission Control For UMTS Transport (CAC) : Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Connection Admission Control

for UMTS Transport (CAC)

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Paris, 29.06.2004

1. Presentation UTRAN CAC UMR3.0

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 2 © Siemens, 2004

1. Presentation UTRAN CAC UMR3.0

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 3 © Siemens, 2004

 In the Siemens transport network design, RNC and

Edge Switch Netw Edge Switch

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 4 © Siemens, 2004

 Connection Admission Control is responsible for the

 Focus: CAC for AAL2 traffic on Iub and Iur

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 5 © Siemens, 2004

 CAC for AAL2 traffic is handled in the RNC

 The function of the TNL Connection Admission Control

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 6 © Siemens, 2004

 In case of adjacent RNC handover also 2 CIDs are used

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 7 © Siemens, 2004

 RNC requests the connection using the ALCAP Request

 For the CS services and PS streaming peak rates are

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 8 © Siemens, 2004

 Summary of main AAL2 parameters used in ERQ

Transport Max. frame Frame protocol DL max. DL average DL peak DL average

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 9 © Siemens, 2004

Transport Max. frame Frame protocol UL max. UL average UL peak UL average

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 10 © Siemens, 2004

 No link between shaping and CAC procedure

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 11 © Siemens, 2004

 Justification of CAC is a trade off between link

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 12 © Siemens, 2004

 How to guarantee the QoS

Prio1: Voice, UDI, PS Streaming

Prio2: Common Channels

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 13 © Siemens, 2004

 ALC element is passed from the S-RNC to the D-RNC

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 14 © Siemens, 2004

 The Admission control decision is the following

bandwidthS  RNC  bandwidthD RNC  bandwidthAAL2

Bandwidth reserved Bandwidth reserved Bandwidth reserved

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 15 © Siemens, 2004

1. Presentation UTRAN CAC UMR3.0

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 16 © Siemens, 2004

 Bit rate adaptation is introduced in UMR3.5

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 17 © Siemens, 2004

 Justification of CAC is a trade off between link

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 18 © Siemens, 2004

Summary UMR3.x Transport Bearer Modification

“Maximum Usage” “Optimum QoS”

 More PS BE users are admitted  Improve QoS for BE users

 In UMR4.0 Transport Bearer Modification (TBM) is

Call A Setup Call B Setup Call A BRA Call B BRA

AAL2 VC Max Bandwidth

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 20 © Siemens, 2004

128k Actual Rate

3.4k Actual Rate

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 21 © Siemens, 2004

 Justification of CAC is a trade off between link

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 22 © Siemens, 2004

1. Presentation UTRAN CAC UMR3.0

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 23 © Siemens, 2004

Edge Switch Netw Edge Switch

 With introducing HSDPA TNL principle of R’99 is continued!

Thomas Reim, Ingo Wittke Page 24 © Siemens, 2004