Regular readers of this blog probably remember that I'm a fan of Voice over LTE via GAN (VOLGA). For those who don't, have a look here on more details on why I think it has a good chance of becoming THE voice solution for LTE. It's amazing how fast the Volga-Forum is pushing out the specifications. In May, they published the stage 1 specification document, which contains a high level architecture and the requirements. Now only a month later, a first version of the stage 2 specification is available. Stage 2 specifications as per 3GPP contain a detailed architecture description and all procedures required from connecting to the network, originating and terminating calls, doing handovers, etc.
While their speed is incredible, maybe it should not be that surprising, because VOLGA is based on the already existing 3GPP GAN (Generic Access Network, i.e. GSM over Wi-Fi) specification. That's a good thing because that means that VOLGA could thus be developed quite quickly as it's likely that existing products can be modified instead of being designed from scratch. In addition, this should also mean that the first version of the standard is already quite mature as many areas were already verified during implementation and rollout of GAN in current networks.
I did a quick comparison between the two stage 2 specs and as I expected, many parts are very similar. While the GAN stage 2 specification has 126 pages, the current VOLGA stage 2 specification has 87 pages. This is probably because VOLGA is simpler than GAN. There are fewer handover procedures and most of the handover details are part of the 3GPP Single Radio Voice Call Continuity (SR-VCC) specification (for IMS) so they don't have to be included in the VOLGA spec. In addition to fewer handover scenarios, handovers are a bit more simple with LTE from a VOLGA perspective, as the network takes care of it unlike with GAN, where the mobile has to force the network into a handover. Also, there's no need to support the packet switched part of the network which also significantly lowers the complexity.
Well done, I am looking forward to the stage 3 specification which will contain the details on all messages and information elements used.
What is your opinion on the big disadvantage on VoLGA of requiring dedicated terminals?
T-Mobile is the only operator supporting Volga. 3GPP is not supporting it. VoLGA would further delay IMS deployment (it would be yet another reason to not deploy IMS).
Only time will show what is going to happen, but it seems to me that 3GPP will not accept Volga, neither other operators for the reason that too many believe that the disadvantages of VoLGA are bigger than the advantages.
Hello Davide,
Thanks for your comment! I think voice over LTE is a tricky thing, both technically and from an operator expectation point of view. I would have much preferred a single solution that “just works well” like in GSM and UMTS. Unfortunately it hasn’t happened so I guess now the next best thing kicks in: competition. Some call it fracturization, which has already happened before VOLGA, but I can see a positive spin in this so so I don’t like the word. As you say, only time will tell what is going to happen. I think to have a choice will help to ensure there is a good solution for voice over LTE in the future.
Kind regards,
Martin
hi, what is the list of ip in TFT? Can some body tell IP address of what ? UE have just one ip address
Hi,
I guess by TFT you mean the traffic flow template? Here’s some more background info that might help:
http://tinyurl.com/n7ofa3
and
http://tinyurl.com/b52ztb
Cheers,
Martin