July 20 06 Carlo s Cor deiro Slide 1 doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0 Submission Channel Bonding versus Channel Aggregation IEEE P802.22 Wireless RANs Date: 2006-07-05 N am e C om pany A ddress Phone em ail CarlosCordeiro Philips U SA 914-945-6091 Carlos.Cordeiro@ philip s.com M onishaGhosh Philips U SA 914-945-6415 Monisha.Ghosh@ philip s.com Authors: Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.22. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.22. Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair Carl R. Stevenson as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE 802.22 Working Group. If you have
20
Embed
Doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0 Submission July 2006 Carlos Cordeiro, PhilipsSlide 1 Channel Bonding versus Channel Aggregation IEEE P802.22 Wireless RANs.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 1
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Channel Bonding versus Channel Aggregation
IEEE P802.22 Wireless RANs Date: 2006-07-05
Name Company Address Phone email Carlos Cordeiro Philips USA 914-945-6091 Carlos.Cordeiro@philip
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.22. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.
Release: The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.22.
Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair Carl R. Stevenson as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE 802.22 Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at [email protected].>
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 2
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Introduction
• The purpose of this presentation is to compare the Channel Bonding and Channel Aggregation techniques with respect to the following evaluation criteria:– FRD satisfyability– Increased bandwidth– Impact on RF– Impact on PHY– Impact on MAC– Practical Issues
• In this presentation we show that for contiguous channels, channel bonding is the best technical solution– Channel aggregation cannot (does not make sense to) operate over adjacent
channels
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 3
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Outline
• Background
• Review of FRD
• Increased Bandwidth– Theoretical Capacity
– Simulation Results
• Channel Bonding vs Channel Aggregation– An RF Perspective
– A PHY Perspective
– A MAC Perspective
• Practical Issues
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 4
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Background
• Channel bonding is for contiguous channels only
• Thus, for a fair comparison between channel bonding and channel aggregation, only contiguous channels shall be considered
• Throughout this presentation, the following scenario, referred to here as the Comparison Scenario, is used:
Frequency (TVChannel)
TV Channel X-1
Guard BandA
TV Channel X
Guard BandA
TV Channel X+1
Guard BandA
Frequency (TVChannel)
TV Channel X-1 TV Channel X
Guard BandB
TV Channel X+1
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 5
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Review of FRD
• “The typical range of the system is 33 km (based on 4 Watt CPE EIRP and 50% location availability at the edge of the coverage area for a median location and 99.9% time availability F(50, 99.9))”
• “The required minimum peak throughput rate at edge of coverage SHALL be 1.5 Mbit/s per subscriber in the forward direction and 384 kbit/s per subscriber in the return direction”
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 6
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Increased Bandwidth: Capacity Increase
• Bonded TV channels to get more capacity– Shannon: C = B.log2(1+S/N)– Capacity proportional to BW, but logarithmic with SNR or signal
power
• If S/N is fixed, then capacity increases linearly with bandwidth.
• If signal power is fixed, but bandwidth is increased– C = B.log2(1+S/(BNo))– Capacity still increases as bandwidth is increased
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 7
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Increased Bandwidth: Capacity Increase
• Capacity of bonded channels as a given signal power is spread over more channels
• The MAC protocol efficiency with channel bonding outperforms that with channel aggregation
– A consequence of the much lower additional overhead of bonding
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 18
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Channel Bonding vs. Channel Aggregation: A MAC Perspective
• Evaluate the channel utilization
• Bonding can offer much better channel utilization, with less overhead
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 19
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Practical Issues
• Far out CPEs may not be able to be serviced by a BS employing aggregation, but may be serviced by one using channel bonding
• A single customer cannot have more than one CPE in his/her premises, otherwise it will cause harmful interference to nearby TV receivers (as per the 10m separation assumption)
– Therefore, channel aggregation is not possible at the CPE level (even though, in practice, nothing can be done by IEEE 802.22 to avoid it)
– Channel bonding is the only way to offer higher capacity or range at the CPE level
• Channel bonding is a more cost effective than channel aggregation– Does not require additional radios
• Channel bonding is much less complex than channel aggregation– Does not requires a number of other complex features (e.g., load balancing,
sophisticated scheduler, etc.) that are needed with aggregation
July 2006
Carlos Cordeiro, Philips
Slide 20
doc.: IEEE 802.22-06/0108r0
Submission
Conclusions
• For contiguous channels, bonding is a much more technically sound approach– Channel aggregation is not feasible for contiguous channels
• Channel bonding also allows for product differentiation
• We have shown that when considering the FRD, bandwidth, and the impact on RF, PHY, and MAC, channel bonding is the option of choice for contiguous channels