3G and HSDPA Internet Access On A High Speed Train

So far I’ve tested HSDPA all across Europe and have enthusiastically reported the great results on this blog (see here). Usually, I use HSDPA in a nomadic fashion, i.e. while being at home, in hotel rooms, on customer sites, etc. This is simple for the network, not much mobility management, no handover, stable radio environments, thus not much of a challenge. But how does HSDPA perform on a high speed train? I didn’t know until recently when I took a German ICE high speed train on the brand new LGV Est Européenne (Ligne à Grande Vitesse) from Paris to Frankfurt.

From a radio point of view the line is kind of black and white. On the French side, UMTS / HSDPA radio coverage is almost non existent. Even while still in Paris, my mobile frequently lost the 3G network once we got out of the train station. Once on the German part of the track, however, I had HSDPA coverage about 70% of the time during the 2h trip between Saarbrücken and Frankfurt. During the rest of the time, my connection fell back to the 2G network and there were only very few places without any network coverage at all.

The Network Under Test: Vodafone Germany’s 3.5G network

The Test Equipment: No fancy stuff, just a notebook and a Motorola V3xx HSDPA category 6 mobile phone, bought back in Rome a couple of weeks ago.

The Result:

During the 2 hours I ran a lot of throughput tests and downloaded around 75 MB of data. The Train speed during most of the tests ranged between 150 and 200 km/h. Very surprisingly, speed did not seem to have a great impact on the data rates. No matter how fast the train was going I always got peak data rates of about 1.5 MBit/s while radio coverage was good.

As there was no dedicated 3G radio coverage for the track there were of course also periods during which radio coverage was poor. Here, data rates dropped but were still at a respectable level of around 250 – 500 kbit/s.

I was also very positively surprised of the handover performance. Shortly before a handover occurred, radio conditions usually got quite bad so the file downloads slowed considerably. Then there’s a gap of around 1 or 2 seconds before the situation improves and the transfer speeds recovered within a few seconds. Downloads of 6 MByte files had an average throughput according to Wireshark statistics of 850 kbit/s with peak data rates of around 1.5 MBit/s. Not a single download failed!

To get a better feeling for the handover behavior I checked the link stability during handovers by sending pings to the network. Packet loss was minimal and seldom were two ping responses lost in a row which would have pointed to a prolonged network outage. To see how many packets are lost during handover I set the ping timeout to 500 ms. Here, single packet loss started to increase which points to a connection interruption during handovers or multiple failed RLC retransmissions during bad radio conditions. Most packets that were reported as lost due to the reduced timeout where nevertheless delivered, just a bit too late to be counted as a valid response. A Wireshark trace revealed that almost all ping responses eventually made it back to the notebook. This test indicates therefore, that HSDPA handovers take between 0.5 and 1 seconds. Sounds almost too good to be true. When analyzing some of the Wireshark traces in which I recorded the throughput tests, however, I could see that at some points the radio connection was lost for about 2.5 seconds (more about this in the next episode). Whether this was due to handovers or simply very bad radio conditions is difficult to say. But even if this can be attributed to handovers only it’s not too bad for a start. It’s probably also important to point out that it’s still early days for HSDPA and optimal handover performance was surely not very high on the R&D agenda so far.

File downloads and ping experiments are not the typical network usage so I also tested sending and receiving eMails and web browsing. I have to say I felt little to no difference in page download times compared while moving at high speed in a train compared to sitting at my desk at home.

Also worth mentioning is the software stability of the Motorola V3xx mobile. While most other mobiles I used in the past have sooner or later become confused by the many handovers and 2G/3G network changes with an active Internet connection, the V3xx was rock stable. Not a single reboot was required during the whole trip and the mobile even performed 2G to 3G network reselections during file transfers.

Apart from the good HSDPA performance, Vodafone has made a good job engineering their network between Saarbrücken and Frankfurt. During the two hours the Internet connection did not drop once  (e.g. due to missing datafill on the SGSNs for intersystem handovers). This is rather exceptional as on other lines, like for example between Munich and Stuttgart, my Internet connection usually drops a couple of times. So whoever did the network verification along that track, please Vodafone, send him to optimize the Munich – Stuttgart line as well. And while you are at it, install additional 3G base stations along the line, I’d really appreciate the same performance as between Saarbrücken and Frankfurt.

Summary

Before doing the tests I was a bit skeptical about the outcome. The good results, however, speak for themselves and certainly answered a lot of questions concerning high speed Internet access on high speed trains. The results also indicate that dedicated 3G train line coverage would fill the gaps observed and result in a very smooth user experience independent of train speed and also without any on board equipment such as 3G/Wifi bridges.

Stay tuned for the technical deep dive once I have analyzed the Wireshark trace I took in more detail.

When Is GSM Going To Be Switched Off?

Back in 2002 the verdict on GSM from most was pretty clear. GSM just celebrated it’s 10th birthday in the real world, UMTS was at the doorstep and looking at lifetimes of analog wireless system it seemed certain that in another ten years (2012) GSM would be a thing of the past. Well, today 2012 is just 5 years away and I think GSM in Europe will stay much longer than that.

So what has changed then since 2002? I think quite a number of things:

Equipment Refresh: In 2002, GSM equipment started to age a bit as the hardware used in the network did not change a whole lot. But since then virtually all network vendors have completely refreshed their network equipment from base station to core network router. This was not only a desire but a straight forward necessity as the parts for aging designs (e.g. 486 processors) were no longer available at reasonable cost. Hardware evolution also meant lower prices. GSM Base Station Controllers sold today, for example, are no less capable than the latest 3G Radio Network Controllers in terms of processing power, memory or storage capacity. GSM Base Station prices and sizes also keep shrinking and shrinking so networks become cheaper and cheaper.

New Entrants: Another reason for refreshing aging hardware designs were surely also Chinese companies like Huawei and ZTE entering the GSM and 3G market with new hardware and lower prices so established vendors could not afford to continue selling expensive hardware.

New Markets: I think only back in 2002 it was not clear to most that GSM would have such a tremendous success in emerging economies in Asia, India and Africa. Compared to the 2.5 billion or so GSM subscribers there are today, the few (hundred million) 3G subscribers almost seem like a single drop of water in the ocean. This created economies of scale beyond anything imagined at first.

Continuous Evolution: Back in 2002, it was assumed that most R&D would be put into the development of 3G networks. This has been true to a certain extent but instead of being dormant, GSM has continued to evolve. Compared to 2002, GSM hardware is much more efficient due the technical and economical hardware refresh described above and new features such as EDGE for higher packet switched data rates have pushed the GSM standard far beyond the circuit switched network it was once designed as.

Network Refresh: Just like the PC at a consumers desk, network equipment such as base stations, controllers, switches and routers have a limited lifetime and need to be replaced. The cycle is a bit longer than the 2 or 3 years for consumer PCs but after 10 years or so, base stations have to be replaced because of aging components or due to their inability to support new features such as EDGE. Also, their power consumption is much higher than that of new base stations so at some point the price of replacing a base station is absorbed quickly by reduced operational costs.

3G Networks Coverage: Even in the most advanced 3G countries such as Italy, Austria, Germany and the U.K., 3G network coverage is nowhere near the almost countrywide GSM coverage. This is different from the 1990’s where GSM coverage quickly came close coverage levels of the analog networks.

Roaming: In analog days, there was no roaming. With GSM, international roaming is a major benefit. Even in the future the majority of roamers will still have a GSM only phone. Switching off GSM networks makes no sense as revenue from roaming customers is substantial.

So what are we going to see in Europe by 2012 then?

In five years from now I expect the majority of subscribers in Europe to have a 3G compatible phone that is backwards compatible to 2G. In urban areas, operators might decide do downscale their GSM deployment a bit as most people now use the 3G instead of the 2G network for voice calls. Cities will still be covered by GSM but maybe with fewer number of available channels / bandwidth.

Such a scenario could come in combination with yet another equipment refresh which some operators require by then for both their 2G and 3G networks. At that time, base station equipment that integrates 2G, 3G and beyond 3G radios such as LTE could become very attractive. The motto of the hour could be "Replace your aging 2G and 3G equipment with a new base station that can do both plus LTE on top!"

I wonder if it is possible by then to only use one set of antennas for all three radio technologies!? If not, adding yet another set of antennas on top of an already crowded mast is not simple from both a technological and psychological point of view.

My PC Detects 13 Wifi Access Points In My Paris Apartment

Wifi_paris_13_networks_visible
Back in April 2006 I reported that the number of Wifi Access points I detected in my apartment in Paris has increased from two to six. Now about a year later the number has once more increased and is now at thirteen (see picture on left)! And that’s only in the 2.4 GHz ISM band! It’s great to see technology prospering but it starts to worry me a bit.

If only a fraction of the access points send more than their beacon frames then the networks on the same frequencies will start to trample over each other which impacts performance and reliability. For the moment things are still o.k. but some DSL operators such as Free now offer an HDTV TV box as part of their standard subscription which talks to the DSL modem via Wifi. So in the evening when lots of people watch TV some Wifi channels will become be quite busy.

Looks like I have to bring my Linksys OpenWRT 54 to Paris to trace which of these networks are really generating traffic.

ARPU Is Becoming Irrelevant

Once upon a time the wireless world was a happy and simple place for bean counters to put together their statistics. The Average Revenue Per User, or ARPU, was invented as a measure of how profitable and successful a network was operated and marketed. Back then, things were simple, one SIM card per user and only two services: Voice and SMS. In this environment, looking at the ARPU made sense. Today, however, the world looks much different and ARPU is quickly becoming an irrelevant key figure.

Use of several SIM cards

There are several reasons for this. First, people in many countries have started using several SIM cards because each SIM card offers an advantage the other doesn’t. The average revenue per user is now split between two SIM cards. Is the business less profitable because of this? Probably not, but the revenue of that user is now split over two SIM cards and that looks quite bad on the ARPU scale.

Same thing for business users: Many of them these days use a SIM card for their mobile phone and a second SIM card for the 3G data card that connects their notebooks to the Internet. The Average Revenue Per User should contain the sum of both. In practice that’s difficult to do because there is usually no way of knowing that both SIM cards belong to the same user, especially if the SIM cards were bought by a company.

Subsidies and Prepaid:

Second, MVNO’s (Mobile Virtual Network Operators) in some countries have started to offer cheap voice minutes but sell SIM cards without phones. So which ARPU is better, 30 euros a month generated with a contract which required a 300 euro subsidize for a cool phone which spread over  24 months reduces the real revenues achieved to €17.50, or 20 euros a month generated via a prepaid SIM without subsidies? Surely the €30.- ARPU looks nicer on the paper but the operator probably makes more money with the prepaid customer and a €20.- ARPU.

Wide Range of Services

Third, mobile networks offer a wide range of services today from voice calls to high speed Internet access. So which customer is more profitable for the operator?: A customer that spends 30 euros a month on voice calls or a customer that spends 30 euros a month for Internet access? In most cases the voice ARPU is probably more profitable than the data ARPU. However, prices for voice minutes keep falling and falling except in countries where there is no real competition among operators (n’est-ce pas? 🙂 So in the end the data customer could eventually become more profitable.

Alternatives

On the long run I guess ARPU has to be replaced by some other, more meaningful key figure adapted to the continuing changes. Maybe it would be a good idea have a range of key figures such as:

  • Average revenue for a voice minute, based on all voice minutes sold in the network over the period of a month.
  • Average revenue per megabyte for mobile services, i.e. web surfing and other Internet activities from mobile phones
  • Average revenue per megabyte achieved with high speed Internet access from notebooks
  • SMS and MMS should also be treated in the same manner.

I wonder if operators would be willing to go down that route!? In the end, these number would give a lot of insight… Also, compared to calculating the ARPU as done today, getting to these numbers would be a bit more difficult. However, if network operators have problems getting this information out of the call data records, they could ask Google or Yahoo to do it for them. They know how to process terabytes of information.

Alternatives, thoughts, anyone?

VoIP’s problem with Wifi

A couple of months ago I’ve been reporting about my experiences with the UTStarCom F1000G Wifi VoIP phone. It went back into the box basically because the software was too unstable. Another reason I didn’t like the phone at the time was that the Wifi reception of the phone was not very strong and voice quality suffered when only two walls were between the access point and the phone. At the time I thought this issue might be related to this type of phone only. Now one of my friends reports that he has the same problem with Nokia E-series phone he tried out. While stability was not the issue, voice quality degrades pretty quickly when moving away from the access point. He also came to the conclusion that the range is no match to those of DECT cordless phones. Looks like good Wifi antennas have not yet found their way into small form factor phones. However, I am afraid that’s a necessity to make VoIP over Wifi work.

Vodafone WebSessions Tested in A1’s 3G Network in Austria

As a frequent traveler I often use Vodafone Germany’s Websession offer which lets me connect wirelessly to the Internet in most countries in Europe and also in some countries overseas using 3G UMTS or 3.5G HSDPA. I’ve first reported about the details of the offer here and also posted reports of how well it performs in Italy, France and Switzerland in the meantime. This blog entry takes a look at how the offer performs in Austria:

A1’s 3G network (Mobilikom) coverage area throughout Austria is excellent and even in areas without 3G coverage, EDGE capable GSM base stations deliver throughput good enough for work and play. While in 3.5G HSDPA coverage, I reached top speeds of about 2 MBit/s when downloading three files simultaneously.

Single file download top speeds where at about 800 kbit/s. As in previous cases I am still a bit puzzled to why that happens as round trip delay time for the file download was around 230 ms. Together with a TCP window size of 65k, the throughput of a single TCP session should be 2.2 MBit/s. Note: For background information on the effect of the TCP window size and round trip delay times on throughput see here.

Nevertheless, 800 kbit/s per file is more than what I observed in Italy and France where bandwidth is throttled to around 500 kbit/s overall, independently of how many files are downloaded at the same time. Looks like Vodafone A1 does something differently with Vodafone Germany then the roaming partners in Italy (Vodafone Italy) and France (SFR).

So all things taken together the Websession performance in Austria is quite convincing, too.

WiMax Matrix A and Matrix B MIMO

Ever wondered what the difference is between WiMAX Matrix A and Matrix B MIMO? As a reader of this blog you just might have. In recent certification reports and functionality comparisons between WiMAX kit of different vendors these acronyms have sprung up but, as usual, without further explanations. Don’t fear, help is on the way! This article written by Shamik Mukherjee of Motorola and published on WiMAX.com gives a very good overview including a look at WiMAX beamforming.

So here’s a quick summary of Matrix A and B:

Matrix A: Coverage Gain

In a 2×2 antenna configuration (2 transmitter antennas, 2 receiver antennas), a single data stream is transmitted in parallel over the two paths. A mathematical algorithm known as Space Time Block Codes (STBC) is used to encode the data streams of the two antennas to make them orthogonal to each other. This improves the signal to noise ratio at the receiver side which can be used to:

  • Increase the cell radius
  • To provide better throughput for subscribers that are difficult to reach (e.g. deep indoors or moving at higher speeds).
  • For terminals which already experience good signal conditions Matrix A has the benefit that higher order modulation (e.g. 64QAM) can be used and fewer error correction bits are necessary which in turn increases transmission speeds to that subscriber.

Matrix B: Capacity Increase

This flavor of MIMO, also known as Spacial Multiplexing MIMO (SM-MIMO), sends an independent data stream over each antenna. Thus, in case signal conditions are excellent, the data rate is doubled, tripled or quadrupled depending on the number of antennas used in both the transmitter and receiver. In practice, WiMAX MIMO is defined for two antennas at each side.

Mandatory and Optional Features

For WiMAX Wave 2 certification, both 2×2 Matrix A and Matrix B capabilities are required according to the article. Beamforming capabilities, also known as Adaptive Antenna Systems (AAS), is optional.

A Wiki For the 3G Traveler

It’s summer time in the northern hemisphere and I keep getting eMails from people asking for my advice on how to access the Internet in countries to which they intend to travel. In the past I’ve reported on quite a number of 3G prepaid wireless Internet access offers mostly of operators in Europe. Prepaid is the important word in the previous sentence as travelers can not get postpaid contracts even if they are without a minimum subscription time or monthly fee.

Over time, these reports have become a bit difficult to find on the blog. Those that dig a bit eventually end up with this summary. However, it’s still not ideal to search through the collection of articles in the hope to find the right piece of information. Thus, I’ve decided to open a Wiki for everyone to participate and share information! All the information I have collected so far on how to wirelessly access the Internet with a prepaid SIM card can be found there now.

One person can not do it alone! So if you have additional information, please consider updating the pages or to create new ones. No login required, just hit the edit button. If you think this information is useful for others please consider linking to the Wiki or writing a blog entry about it! That’s the only way people will eventually find the information when searching on Google, Yahoo, etc.

Femto Technical Questions

UMTS Femto cell solutions are being announced lately by both startups and established players such as Nokia Siemens Networks. Leaving aside the question of whether femto’s make sense or not I tried to find out how femto’s can be integrated with the macro layer of the network. It seems not to much information is available about the technical part on the net. So here are my questions, maybe some of you know more. If so please consider leaving a comment.

Basically I’ve seen two approaches to femto. For both cases, the cells are connected to the network via DSL or cable:

Pure Base Station Approach

In this approach the femto cell is included as part of the overall radio network. This should require configuration of both the femto cell and the macro cell layer for handovers and cell reselection. I’ve seen some patent applications from Ericsson which describe that the pico cell is equipped with a receiver that can scan the environment for neighboring cells. The result is then reported to the network which in turn sends the required neighboring cell lists to the femto for broadcast. Nothing is mentioned, however, of how the macro layer is configured. If this is not done, I wonder how a mobile in idle mode can change to the femto cell.

Also, I wonder if it is foreseen to restrict access to a femto cell to the owner of the cell? After all, if I had a femto cell at home, would I want my 25 neighbors to also use it for free? If access can be restricted how is that done? Should the macro layer broadcast the cell info for my femto cell, others will see it as well. And if it doesn’t, how can my own mobile detect the femto cell once I arrive home and still have coverage from the outdoor macro cell?

Speculation: While a mobile has a connection established to the network it can be asked to report cells which are not in the cell info list (the so called "detected cells" broadcasting on the same frequency as the current cell). This could then be used by the RNC in combination with with my user ID to decide whether to hand over the connection to the femto cell, in case the owner of the mobile is the owner of the femto or to leave the call on the macro layer. This does not work when the mobile looses connection to the macro cell layer, however. In this case the network search of the mobile will detect the femto and the mobile will try to attach. How can this be gracefully prevented in case the femto only allows a select few users?

Scalability: If it can be avoided that the macro cell layer has to broadcast information about the femto cell layer then I don’t see scalability issues on the Node-B side. If it can’t be avoided then I wonder how the solution scales. A macro layer cell is usually designed for about 2000 users. If ‘only’ 50 of them use a femto cell at home I wonder how this can be accommodated for in the neighboring cell list!?

The Network In A Bottle Approach

Another femto approach used for example by 3WayNetworks is to combine the complete functionality of the network from base station to MSC into the femto base station. On their web site, 3WayNetworks mentions that the femto base station can use a different Mobile Country Code and Mobile Network Code and thus runs completely independent from the macro layer. This might make rejecting unauthorized users a bit simpler than in the approach above but still leaves open the question of how authorized mobiles find and use the cell in the first place in case the macro layer is still strong enough where the femto cell is to be used (e.g. to increase overall network bandwidth).

Speculation: Here, an old GSM trick could help which probably still exists for UMTS: For national roaming the mobile can be instructed to scan for the home network every couple of minutes. Femto subscribers could be given a SIM card which the femto’s MCC/MNC as home network. Thus, femto subscriber mobiles would keep looking for femto cells while other subscribers could automatically be barred. UMTS also knows the concept of equivalent network which might also help here (see 3GPP TS 22.011 chapter 3.2.2.5).

A lot of questions… If you have an answer, please leave a comment.

Wireless Internet Access: Consumer Theory and Reality

Due to my recent reports on high speed wireless Internet access via prepaid SIMs in Italy (like here, here and here) I recently got an eMail from somebody who will go there for some time asking for my advice. At first, I wanted to write a short and crisp reply saying “no problem”. Once I started typing, however, I realized there are actually more than just a few things to consider. So here’s my response:

[…]

The Theory

You know I’d really like to give you the following answer: Yes, no problem, go ahead, buy the HSDPA card, go to Rome, pick up a prepaid SIM and you are all set. Or even better, just take your notebook to Rome, visit a TIM shop and they’ll sell you a prepaid SIM, a data card for a reasonable price, and install it on your notebook while you are in the shop. Reality, however, is a bit more complex. Not because it has to be but because of a less than ideal way of how things are handled by the parties involved.

The Reality

Buying a Mobile Phone or PC Card

Buying an HSDPA Express card in the US and bringing it to Italy should work. Before you buy however, make sure of two things: For once, the card must not be locked to a specific network it must be open to all. Therefore, buying an HSDPA card from a network operator will not work as they are usually locked. […] Second, you should make sure the card supports the European UMTS band, which is 2100 MHz. The US uses different frequency bands so if the card is limited to them it won’t work in Europe. Third, you should also make sure you can get software updates via the web page of the manufacturer. It’s not uncommon that cards get pushed out the door with an unstable software version at the beginning so being able to update it is important.

Getting a SIM and Activating Mobile Internet Access

So let’s say you have a card and you’ve arrived in Italy. TIM definitely has the best HSDPA network for your purpose so I advise you to go for one of their prepaid SIM cards. Try to find a TIM shop with a helpful and friendly shop assistant and buy a prepaid SIM. Once you’ve got it, put it into a normal GSM phone and make a phone call which gets connected. This way the card is activated and only after that is it possible to put some more money on the account in order to enable the data option. Note: Just calling another party which does not pick up does not work, the call needs to be connected. Don’t ask me why. To top up, buy a top up card and be prepared to read the Italian instructions. In the TIM network you can top up your prepaid SIM by buying a scratch card and sending the secret digits via SMS to the network. Some shops also offer top ups by giving them the telephone number of the line. Works nice as well. Once there is enough money on the prepaid SIM you can activate the data offer. I think the offer is called WEB FACILE 500 MB so ask the shop attendant in the TIM store how to activate this option. Afterwards, happy surfing.

House Keeping

I don’t think TIM warns you when you are close to having used up the 500 MB or when the 4 weeks for which it is valid expire. God only knows why. So you have to check every now and then how much is left on your card by calling the TIM voice server and go to menu 3. If you are close to your limit, put some more money on the SIM card and extend the option. I am not sure how to do this as I tried as described and it didn’t work. An Italian friend of mine then called the TIM hotline and after 20 minutes of heated discussion in Italian they did it manually.

Another option is to buy a prepaid SIM card of WIND. They also seem to have an HSDPA network in Rome now. Their network performance is not as good as TIM’s when I was there but it probably also will do the job. However, you’ll get more bits for your buck  🙂  Their offer is called WIND MEGA NO LIMIT 15000.

In Building Coverage

As long as you have a window in the room and are not underground it should be all right. It’s still a bit of a gamble but you should be fine, Rome is well covered.

Misc Stuff

Other options: In case you can’t find an unlocked HSDPA card to buy in the US you can buy an HSDPA capable card or phone in Italy. If you buy a card it’s probably locked to the operator. USB adapters are another interesting alternative because you can place them in a good spot without moving the notebook if coverage is less than ideal. Phones can be bought unlocked, you might have seen that I choose to do this when I was there and bought a Motorola V3xx with a branding from TIM. As it turned out it worked fine in all networks except for TIM’s. Again, completely beyond me.

So I hope I haven’t discouraged you from going ahead with your plan. It can be done and if you have an Italian friend who knows a thing or two about computers and maybe also something about how to connect wirelessly to the Internet you should get it working without too much trouble.

Looking at it from the bright side I think one could say that there is lots of room for improvement. All it takes is the will and a bit of work from network operators…

Hope this helps,
Martin

So to me, how things could be (an not unrealistically so) sounds a lot nicer than how things actually are. As I said, there’s a lot of room for improvement…