This document is a master's report on quality of service parameters in WiMAX technologies. It contains an introduction that outlines the objectives of comparing the capital expenditures of deploying different broadband network access technologies, including ADSL, ADSL2+, cable, FTTH, and WiMAX. It also discusses geographical and service profiles that will be examined. The methodology draws on several previous European research projects focused on techno-economic analysis of telecommunications networks. The model developed will evaluate the costs of network deployment scenarios across different access technologies and regions.

1. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF UKRAINE
KHARKOV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF RADIO ELECTRONICS
DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION MEASUREMENT
TECHNICAL
DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS (ТСS)
MASTER’S REPORT
TO THEME « SCINTIST PARAMETERS OF QUALITY OF SERVICE IN
WIMAX TECHNOLOGIES »
Made by Examer
St.gr. TSNmi-08-1 Saburova S.A.
Hussein Yahya Tariq Hussein
KHARKOV
2010

2. CONTENT
Page
ABBREVIATIONS 3
INTRODUCTION 5
1 SURVEY WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES 9
1.1 Executive summary 9
1.2 Backbone Segment 11
1.3 Cost analysis for WiMAX 12
1.4 Calculations of the WiMAX model 15
1.5 Network architecture in future 16
1.6 Mobile WiMAX 20
1.7 Wireless technologies WiFi 22
1.8 Use case analysis 25
1.9 FMC Architecture 29
CONCLUSION 31
REFERENCES 32
2

3. ABBREVIATIONS
AA Authentication and Authorization
AEN Access Edge Node
AN Access Node
AP Access Point
ARP Address Resolution Protocol
ASN Access Service Network
ASN-GW ASN-Gateway
ASP Access Service Provider
BE Best Effort
BS Base Station
CAPWAP Control And Provisioning of Wireless Access Points
CARD Candidate Access Router Discovery
CBS Committed Burst Size
CID Connection Identifier
CIR Committed Information Rate
CN Correspondent Node
CoA Care-of Address
CP Connectivity Provider
CSMA/CA Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance
CSN Connectivity Services Network
CTN Candidate Target Network
CTP Context Transfer Protocol
DCF Distributed Coordination Function
DHCP Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
DNS Domain Name System
DS Directory Service
EAP Extensible Authentication Protocol
EAPoL Extensible Authentication Protocol over LAN
EBS Excess Burst Size
EDCF Enhanced DCF
EIS Excess Information Rate
EMSK Extended Master Session Key
EN Edge Node
FA Foreign Agent
FHR Frequent Handover Region
HA Home Agent
HCF Hybrid Coordination Function
HLR Home Location Register
HO HandOver
HoA Home Address
HOKEY Handover Keying
HSS Home Subscriber Server
ID-P Identity Provider
IEFT Internet Engineering Task Force
IPTV Internet Protocol Television
IRTF Internet Research Task Force
LAN Local Area Network
LMA Local Mobility Agent
MAC Medium Access Control
MAG Mobile Access Gateway
MIP Mobile IP
MIPv4 Mobile IP version 4
MIPv6 Mobile IP version 6
MMP Mobility Management Protocol
MN Mobile Node
3

4. MobOpts Mobility Optimization
MS Mobile Station
MPA Media-independent Pre-Authentication
NAI Network Access Identifier
NAP Network Access Provider
NAS Network Access Server
NFC Near Field Communication
NPM Network Policy Manager
nrtPS Non-real-time Polling Service
NSP Network Service Provider
OS Operating System
OSS Operation Support System
PANA Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access
PCF Point Coordination Function
PEP Policy Enforcement Point
PKM Privacy and Key Management
PHT Proactive Handover Tunnel
PMIP Proxy MIP
QoS Quality of Service
RADIUS Remote Authentication Dial In User Service
RGW Residential Gateway
RRA Radio Resource Agent
RRC Radio Resource Controller
rRK Re-authentication Root Key
RRM Radio Resource Management
RM Resource Manager
rtPS Real-time Polling Service
SA Security Association
SCN Service Class Name
SFID Service Flow Identifier
SIM Subscriber Identity Module
SIP Session Initiation Protocol
SLS Service Level Specification
SM Service Manager
SSID Service Set Identifier
TC Traffic Categories
TCP Transmission Control Protocol
UDP User Datagram Protocol
VoD Video on Demand
VoIP Voice over IP
VLAN Virtual Local Area Network
VNO Virtual Network Operator
VPN Virtual Private Network
WG Working Group
WiFi Wireless Fidelity
WiMax Worldwide interoperability for Microwave Access
WLAN Wireless Local Area Network
UGS Unsolicited Grant Service
UPM User Policy Manager
4

5. INTRODUCTION
The objective of this study is to create an up-dated techno-economic model
for comparing different ways of deploying broadband communication networks
and services. The resulting simulation model Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) of
different implementation strategies comprising of predefined access technologies,
service profiles, and geographical scenarios. More specifically the model shall
include the following components (definitions and term descriptions follow later in
the report):
Access Technologies:
· ADSL
· ADSL2+
· HFC Cable modem
· FTTH
· WiMax
Service Profiles:
· S1: Slow Internet Browsing
· S2: Fast Internet Browsing
· S3: Multimedia
· S4: Interactive Multimedia
Geographical Profiles:
· Urban
· Suburban
· Rural
Scenarios:
· Greenfield
· Existing Infrastructure Upgrade
5

6. Methodology and Relation to other Research Projects
The model developed in this report draws on the work carried out in various
other research projects. The terminology, methodology, and theoretical framework
are influenced by European techno-economic research projects:
TONIC, TETRA, ECOSYS and BROADWAN while the infrastructure and
technology aspects draw from BREAD, FAN and BROADWAN. More specifically
the relationship to these projects is as follows:
BREAD
Broadband in Europe for All: a multi-disciplinary approach aims at
developing a roadmap for the deployment of broadband and realisation of the
'broadband for all' concept within Europe. This report relies on the access and
backbone network overview provided in deliverable 2 [2]
TONIC
IST-2000-25172 TONIC (TechnO-EcoNomICs of IP optimised networks
and services) concentrates on techno-economic evaluation of new communication
networks and services. Following up on older projects, TONIC was carried out in
1998-2002 and provides the foundation of most theoretical and methodological
work on techno-economic studies. This project therefore provided a starting point
for development of the simulation model [11].
ECOSYS
An ongoing research project on the techno-economics of integrated
communication systems and services. The most interesting part of the ECOSYS
project for this study is the advancement and evolution of the theoretical and
methodological framework developed for techno-economic analysis of
telecommunications networks in the TONIC project. [5]
BROADWAN
The goal of the “Broadband services for everyone over fixed wireless
access networks” is to investigate how wireless networks can be used to provide
true broadband services.
6

7. The most interesting aspects of the BROADWAN project for this study is
the analysis of market potential and deployment scenarios and future development
of wireless access technologies. Additionally, the project has developed a
simulation model for deployment cost based on methods developed in the TONIC
project. [3]
FAN
EURESCOM P1117-FAN evaluates the technical specifications of future access
networks, the impact of IP and infrastructure architectures. For this report it was
used to reinforce the infrastructure and access technology selection. [6,7]
Model Structure and Functionality
The overall model structure is based on dividing the network into two
segments: Access Segment and Backbone Segment. The Access Segment covers
the so called “first mile” from user premises to an aggregation node in the
respective zone. This part is characterized by a diversity of transmission media
(copper, fibre, cable, radio), and topologies (star, tree).
Several technical solutions exist for provision of broadband to customers in
different types of demographic areas.
Research indicates that the future market will be characterised by different
coexisting technologies, the choice of which is determined by technological
capabilities as well as economic factors.
The BREAD project has on basis of results from other projects in the EU
Framework Program 6 analysed technological alternatives, future trends, and
status of broadband initiatives. Results from following European techno-economic
projects have been applied in the modelling work: BREA D, TONIC, ECOSYS,
BROADWAN and FAN. For the purpose of this report techno-economic methods
are used to analysed and compare deployment scenarios for five of the most
widely used technological alternatives. A simulation model has been developed to
examine the effect of influential factors, such as transmission speed and level of
existing infrastructure, in providing broadband connectivity in urban, suburban
and rural areas. For those technologies building on use of existing infrastructures
calculations are made both for a two different scenarios: Upgrade of existing
infrastructures and greenfield.
7

8. The strength of this study in comparison to many of the detailed feasibility
studies of broadband deployment is the general overview and comparison of the
deployment cost for different technologies and deployment scenarios.
The goal of this study is therefore to provide rough estimates that indicate
competitive strengths and weaknesses of technologies, rather than to aid in
execution. In the absence of reliable data on operational cost from operators, the
model only calculates CAPEX.
This century, wireless has grown rapidly as one of the most cost effective
ways of delivering broadband to rural areas. The main reasons are:
•Wireless equipment has dropped in price, reducing the cost for
organisations wishing to deliver data over wireless.
•Availability of radio spectrum – no need to obtain a license before
providing a service.
•Low cost end user equipment.
There are a number of different types of wireless broadband, each offering
different levels of performance, security and robustness. This paper will cover
some of the main technologies and examine the issues around them. It focuses on
wireless technologies that are being used to deliver broadband in rural areas now.
The key technologies which will be discussed are:
•WiFi
•WiMax
•GPRS / 3G
This report does not aim to be overtly technical and is aimed at people who
are working to provide broadband in rural areas. It looks at services that end users
can access directly and will not cover microwave and other carrier class wireless
technologies.
The report gives an overview of the benefits and disadvantages. We then
look at the radio spectrum to how this impacts on service delivery. The main
technologies are then examined, with a look at what will happen in the future.
In master’s report about externship is present “SURVEY WIRELESS
TECHNOLOG”
8

9. 1 SURVEY WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES
1.1 Executive summary
The study reveals and verifies the current trend of DSL & Cable dominance
in the urban market segment, where existing infrastructure facilitates inexpensive
equipment upgrades. There is a fundamental trade-off between reach and capacity
in most access technologies and extending the coverage of xDSL technology to
provide higher capacities for less populated areas will be expensive and the study
reveals a clear window of opportunity for wireless technologies in rural and
suburban areas.
Future service scenarios are expected to demand increasing transmission
capabilities and with the introduction of TRIPLE-PLAY services, substantial new
infrastructure investment is needed. For these scenarios, comparison of
deployment cost becomes more subjective.
While wireless and copper/coaxial based infrastructures require less capital
investment it is unrealistic since fibre based infrastructures provide a more future
safe solution. For these new infrastructures, optimisation of network structures is
critical and merely replacing copper with fibre would result in substantially higher
cost than otherwise required.
Figure 1.1- Comparison of technologies for service profile 3
9

10. The cost study examines CAPEX cost structures involved in deployment of
DSL, HFC, FTTH and wireless technologies (WiMAX). The study reveals
difference in cost structures between technologies and their ability to handle
varying services and transmission speeds. The study reveals that currently all
technologies are competitive in the urban settings, with the exception of FTTH,
which is only feasible if other groundwork is carried out at the same time.
For the suburban and rural areas, there will be a gap between those living in
the vicinity of existing telecommunications infrastructure, such as PSTN, and
those living further away.
Although detached DSLAMs have the possibility of decreasing this gap for
DSL, the additional cost of establishing a backbone fibre connection to these
aggregation points results in a ten times higher cost. For these users, WIMAX
provides and excellent short-term solution for providing internet connectivity. The
drawback of WiMAX is the temporary nature due to expensive transmission pr.
bit and thus high upgrade costs for increased throughput.
In all areas, FTTH provides an expensive but future-proof solution. Our
analysis shows that roughly 60% of the CAPEX for FTTH in all scenarios is due
to civil work, ducts, and cables. In rural and suburban areas, the result of this could
be smaller deployment zones where citizens reduce the cost by participating in
ground work, and / or local governments reduce the cost by granting connectivity
to established backbone networks.
Of the technologies studied, DSL and cable modem (HFC) are currently by
far the most dominating broadband access technologies worldwide in terms of
volume. These two technologies are now quite mature – a fact that is reflected in
the price evolution of equipment during the past few years. Given a similar
evolution for fibre and wireless equipment, the dominant cost component,
Customer Premises Equipment, will greatly improve competitiveness in urban
areas, and similarly advanced digging methods have the potentials of greatly
reducing the dominant cost of civil work of fibre in rural areas.
10

11. 1.2 Backbone Segment
The Backbone Segment is an aggregation network connecting all
Aggregation Nodes to Service Nodes. This part is characterized by one
transmission media, optical fibre connections but a diversity of topologies (star,
tree, ring). See Figure 1.2.
Layer 1: Access Segment Layer 2: Backbone Segment
Figure 1.2. Two segment, access and backbone infrastructure model
Configuration parameters for the model can be classified into Scenario
Parameters (Geo-graphic, Population Distribution, Existing Infrastructure, and
Available Service) and Technology Parameters (Access Technology and topology,
Backbone Technology and topology etc.).
Together, geographic information and population distribution determine to a
large extent the investment cost of access networks. The most relevant parameters
are number of buildings/customers and the distance between them. The model can
either take note of already existing infrastructure or assume “Greenfield”
deployment.
11

12. 1.3 Cost analysis for WiMAX
WiMAX: WiMAX refers to broadband wireless networks that are based on
the IEEE 802.16 standard, which ensures compatibility and interoperability
between broadband wireless access equipment. WiMAX, is an acronym that
stands for Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access.
General Description
A fixed wireless access network architecture can be described by the
following figure 1.3:
Figure 1.3. Example of a fixed wireless network architecture
Technical Description
The approach is to use the same head-end architecture and fibre network
costs then to replace the cost relative to the coaxial networks by the base station
and households equipments of WIMAX network.
Main Cost Components
This technology being still quite new, it's hard to estimate the real cost of
non-existing components or prototypes. These costs are estimated assuming a
successful trend of this technology deployment.
12

13. Base station
The cost of installation and equipment of a base station is reduced to the
following items (tabl.1.1)/
Table 1.1.- The cost of installation and equipment of a base station
Base station 40 000,00 €
Sector antenna 3 000,00 €
Total base station 43 000,00 €
Total bandwidth (Mb/s) 320
The WiMAX Model
In this section we will calculate the required CAPEX for a greenfield scenario.
Deployment cost of WiMAX networks is to traffic characteristics where increased
traffic e.g. results in higher number of sector antennas and/or smaller coverage
area pr. base station. The details of the scenario and assumptions as well as a
demonstration of the calculation can be seen in Appendix II.
Cost Structure
The simulation reveals a relatively simple cost structures where the base
station equipment along with CPE dominates the cost. The study also reveals that
despite the focus on MiMAX deployment in rural areas, it can provide a
competitive solution in urban areas too.
Figure 14. Breakdown of cost structures for WiMAX greenfield scenario
13

14. Cost Comparison
The most obvious conclusion when comparing the cost of different service
profiles for WiMAX is that the technology is not well suited for high transmission
rates. The cost of SP4 is 400% more expensive than SP1. Despite this, WiMAX
provides an inexpensive solution to low speed transmission rates where other
infrastructure is missing (fig.1.4).
Figure 1.4. Comparison of HFC CAPEX for different scenarios
Findings
Our analysis highlights the competitive nature of WiMAX as a short time
solution for providing internet connectivity. The mild increase in cost for rural
areas indicates a clear window of opportunity for the technology. The drawback of
WiMAX is the temporary nature due to expensive transmission pr. bit and thus
high upgrade costs for increased throughput.
14

15. 2. Calculations of the WiMAX model
According to the services definition as described in the HFC chapter, we can compute
the number of base stations needed in the different cases (tabl.1.2):
Table 1.2. The number of base stations needed in the different cases
A new cost per subscriber is then computed and replaces the cost of the
coaxial network (table 1.3):
Table 1.3. A new cost per subscriber is then computed
Cost per subscriber for the different services:
Service S1 (table 1.4)
15

16. Service S2 (table 1.5)
Service S3 (table 1.6)
Service S4 (table 1.7)
1.5 Network architecture in future
16

17. The network architecture considered in this deliverable consists of a
heterogeneous network, which includes fixed and mobile access networks. It is in
line with the overall FMC access architecture defined in DTF1.8 [4]. As the scope
is limited to session continuity in a single operator domain, there is no need for
roaming agreement in order to support mobility within or between the different
networks. Session continuity in case of roaming was not considered because it is
an additional level of complexity. Note that also today's GSM networks generally
do not support session continuity when crossing provider domains. However, all
the technical details that are required to maintain and transfer an ongoing session
must be worked out. To begin with the user devices must have multiple types of
interface cards to be able to communicate with the different types of networks.
Before a user is allowed to connect to the fixed or the Mobile access networks she
has to be authenticated and authorized to connect and access her subscribed
services.
Figure 1.5. Reference Network architecture
17

18. As a result of the authorization process, a layer-2 connection is provisioned
between the user device and the Edge Node (EN) in the access network. And
when the user moves to a -different attachment point new layer-2 connectivity has
to be re-provisioned after the user has been re-authenticated and authorized.
Therefore the provisioning, authentication and authorization architecture must be
designed to support the required horizontal and vertical HandOver (HO) processes
under the prescribed HO delay. In this deliverable, as the user mobility is
constrained within the same provider domain, the HO delay can be minimized by
using pre-authentication or by transferring user and session related information,
such as session keys, user policy, QoS, etc to the new attachment point.
The reference architecture used in this deliverable is depicted in Figure 1.5. It
shows a fixed network, which in this case is the MUSE SPC type of access
network, and a mobile network, which could either be a mobile WiMAX or 3GPP
network.
In this model, end users will be able to access their services from different
networks, and are not tied to a fixed only or mobile only type of subscription as is
the case in today’s subscription offers. In DC1.7 we have provided a solution for
the inter-working and integration of the SPC access solution and WiMAX
network.
WiMAX was selected for the implementation of a session continuity solution
instead of 3GPP, because the interworking with 3GPP is far more complex. TF1.8
has defined the interworking architecture, but only at a later stage of MUSE and
hence too late for a detailed study in WPC1. Session continuity between a fixed
access network and 3GPP is a topic that deserves more attention in future research
during FP7.
Platform Overview
The SPC platform is aimed at providing a multi-access, multi edge, multi
service platform for public broadband access. The network architecture is Ethernet
based, although different technologies are supported for end user access, e.g.,
FTTx and xDSL.
18

19. Network Model
The network reference model of the architecture creates basically three
different regions that can be possibly managed by distinct business entities. The
first region is the last mile network, where a wired or wireless technology can be
employed. The second one is the access network, where all the traffic coming
from the customers’ premises is aggregated. The third one is the regional network,
the first layer-3 network in the system. The model is depicted in Figure 1.6. The
key concepts of the architecture is the support for equal access, which means that
subscribers have the ability to select the network service provider or the
application service provider independently of the access type or access domain to
which they are connected. This allows network and application service provider to
broaden their offers to new areas, reaching subscribers independently of the access
domain they are connected to.
Figure 1.6. Network Reference Model
The services delivered through the platform can have guaranteed QoS in
needed cases.
19

20. This is done through the negotiation of connection parameters with the
Resource Manager, performed at service subscription and/or execution time.
In case the resources are not available for a given customer and traffic class,
he may be offered other options spanning from access with reduced quality to
denial of access to the service depending on the domain policies and traffic load of
the network. For example, if the traffic is best effort it can be accommodated with
no bandwidth guarantees, despite of the current usage of the link. In this respect
the resource manager performs functionalities of admission control of new
subscriptions. Traffic separation is performed via the use of different VLANs. In
order to simplify the authentication of end-user in nomadic scenarios in an access
domain and across access domains boundaries a framework was developed. This
framework is strongly founded in the Identity Provider (IDP) functionalities.
Service subscriptions, along with identity, are stored there for future use when the
end-user is not located at his home network.
1.6 Mobile WiMAX
In order to support end-to-end mobility, the WiMAX forum has defined an
end-to-end Network Reference Model (NRM), consisting of the Access Service
Networks (ASN) run by a Network Access Provider and Connectivity Service
Networks (CSN) run be a Network Service Provider (NSP). As shown in Figure
1.7, the standard specifies the interfaces between the different network functional
nodes and different networks. Within the ASN there are two key elements dealing
with the mobility of the Mobile Subscriber Stations (MS), these are the Base
Station (BS) and the ASN Gateway (ASN-GW). The BS is responsible for
managing the radio resource over the air interface while the ASN-GW is
responsible for control and aggregation of the traffic from one or more WiMAX
base stations and managing handover between them, including authentication,
service flows and key distribution between base stations.
20

21. Figure 1.7. WiMAX Network Reference Model
The R6 interface between the BS and the ASN GW specifies an IP network
or alternatively a pure layer 2 network, which means that it should be possible to
manage all the connections between the different BSs associated with that
particular ASN GW at link layer.
Furthermore, the specification of the R4 interface, for communication
between ASN-GWs in different ASNs will enable multi-provider WiMAX
networks in line with the MUSE Access Network Architecture. The R3 Interface
specifies the communication between the ASN and the CSN which is at the core
of the network providing control and management functions such as AAA, HA
and DHCP
Within the WiMAX specifications, different types of ASN Profiles have
been specified as a tool to manage diversity in ASN node usage and
implementation. The main 3 ASN profiles are:
− Profile A:
− Centralized ASN Model with BS and ASN GW in separate platforms
through
R6 interface
− Split RRM: RRA in BS and RRC in ASN-GW
− Open interfaces for Profile A: R1, R6, R4, and R3
21

22. − Profile B:
− Distributed ASN solution with the BS and ASN GW functionalities
implemented in a single platform
− Open interfaces Profile B: R4 and R3
− Profile C:
− Similar to Profile A, except for RRM being non-split and located in BS.
1.7. Wireless technologies WiFi
WiFi: Short for ‘wireless fidelity’. A term for certain types of wireless local
area networks (WLAN) that use specifications conforming to IEEE 802.11b. WiFi
has gained acceptance in many environments as an alternative to a wired LAN.
Many airports, hotels, and other services offer public access to WiFi networks so
people can log onto the Internet and receive emails on the move.
The IEEE 802.11b Standard was accepted in 1999 in development of the
standard IEEE 802.11 accepted before. He also foresees the use of range of
frequencies 2,4 GGts, but only with the DSSS modulation. This standard provides
the carrying capacity of to 11 Mb/with calculating on one point of access.
The products of the IEEE 802.11b standard, supplied by different
manufacturers, are tested on compatibility and is certified by the Wireless
Ethernet Compatibility Alliance (WECA) organization, which presently is
anymore known under the Wi-Fi Alliance name. Compatible wireless products,
the last tests on the program of the WH "Alliance can be marked by the Wi-Fi
sign.
Presently EEE 802.11b it is the most widespread standard which most
wireless local networks are built on the base of.
One of the most widely available wireless connections, WiFi is split into
different standards, capable of different speeds and penetration. They each offer
different rates of data transfer. Manufacturers develop equipment, which works
together and this has helped to dramatically reduce costs. WiFi is typically used to
provide a low cost link to a home or business from a central access point in a
village or town. In most cases, a fast internet link arrives via a local council,
22

23. business or school and this is “shared out” using a wireless network to customers
in a community.
The main WiFi standards are:
802.11a – capable of high data speeds over relatively short distances using
the 5Ghz frequency. This is good for delivering video and large amounts of data,
but the limited range means it is hard to make a case for dispersed rural areas.
802.11b – capable of 11Mb/s although in reality the throughput is closer to 5Mb/s.
Equipment is now available at relatively low cost and most new laptops have
WiFi connectivity built in as standard. It is good at covering short distances and is
popular with many WiFi operators.
802.11g – capable of 54Mb/s is capable of high data rates but can only
cover relatively short ranges compared to 802.11b.
Spectrum
These standards do not require a license in most European countries,
making them quick and easy to deploy. They mainly operate in the 5Ghz and
2.4Ghz range. For details on licensing for each EU state, check with the national
government.
Case Study
Cybermoor in the UK uses WiFi to deliver broadband to a remote rural
community. Cybermoor takes a broadband service from the school.
802.1x pre-authentication
This enhancement to 802.1X authentication is presented in [19] and is aimed
at speeding up the authentication process of a 802.11 MS by doing an
authentication with a new point of attachment before actually moving to this point
of attachment.
The main principle, as depicted in Figure 1.8, is that the serving AP is used
to communicate with the target AP via the distribution system that connects both
APs together. Hence, the MS will exchange all the authentication information
with the target AP via the serving AP. Once the authentication is done, the MS
could move to the new AP, where access would be granted for it.
23

24. Figure 1.8. 802.1X pre-authentication principle
For this scenario to be completely inline with MUSE requirements
regarding trust of RGW devices, the CAPWAP approach should be applied. As
described in [18], this approach enables the separation of the radio and the
management functions for the APs. In this situation the authenticator function of
the AP is located at the ANs. However, this fact does not change the pre-
authentication principle described above. The only difference is that the
authenticator entity for each AP is located at the AN instead of being physically
located at the AP itself. This is depicted in Figure 1.9. However, for the sake of
simplicity, the remaining text refers only to the APs as whole (regardless if the
functions are physically separated or not, the AP could still be seen one element).
Figure 1.9. Pre-authentication principle for extended APs due to the separation
proposed by CAPWAP
24

25. As described in [19], there are a number of issues related to 802.1X pre-
authentication deployment:
-The MS starts the authentication with the target AP. There should be a
mechanism through which the MS decides which is the best AP to move to.
This mechanism is not defined by the 802.1X pre-authentication and could
be based on basic signal strength measurements or on more sophisticated
mechanism as describe in [20] and [21], where a Frequent Handover Region
(FHR) is defined.
-In order to forward the 802.1X pre-authentication packets correctly to the
target AP, the BSSID of the target AP is used as its MAC. This might have
certain configuration constrains
-Another Ethertype is defined to differentiate between 802.1X pre-
authentication frames and normal 802.1x frames. This is due to the switch
traversal problem of 802.1X messages.
As stated before, the distribution system that connects the APs is used to
forward the 802.1X messages between the MS and the target AP. Hence, layer 2
connectivity between APs is required because 802.1X is encapsulated directly
over L2 frames.
For this communication to take place in the SPC platform there are two
different approaches that could be taken:
1.The first approach would be that messages between APs are forwarded
via EN. This way, the forwarding principles of the SPC platform persist.
2.Another possibility would be to configure the intermediate switches in the
aggregation network to permit inter AP communication. This mechanism
would go against the SPC forwarding principles but would still be possible
1.8 Use case analysis
As can be seen by the use cases studied in the previous section, there are
several mobility types that need to be considered.
25

26. In order to get a clear understanding of the issues related to session
continuity, let us decompose the use cases into simple “mobility types”. Ordered
by their complexity, all the different “mobility types” are shown in Figure 1.7 in
order to illustrate the different problems that need to be overcome in each
situation. Mobility types 1 to 3 in Figure 1.7 deal with the same access
technology, namely Wi-Fi terminal connectivity in the SPC access network, while
scenarios 4 and 5 deal with Ethernet and WiMAX respectively.
In the first use case, subscriber is making a VoIP call using the available Wi-
Fi access point while he is walking. If we have a closer look to what at it means,
we realize that several types of handovers can be identified as subscriber walks
towards home. In the case of mobility type-1 in Figure 1.9, subscriber’s terminal
changes connection between two APs connected to the same AN. This type of
change implies that a service binding already exists for subscriber at the serving
AN but the same service binding can not be used in the new attachment point,
since the parameters of this service binding that relate to the AN port would be
incorrect at the visited AN
Figure 1.9. Mobility scenarios
26

27. In mobility type 2, subscriber´s terminal is changing its point of attachment
between two APs connected to different ANs but under the same EN range (both
AN connected to the same EN). This implies that the service binding connection is
completely new for the new AN.
However this information is already known for the EN, which will not need
to create a new record for subscriber but only an update of his point of attachment.
Mobility type 3 imposes a stronger impact for the network adaptation. In this
case subscriber´s terminal moves between AN connected to different ENs. This
means that the service binding is completely new for both the AN and the EN and
needs to be updated accordingly.
These three “mobility types” described above could be seen as L2 mobility
scenarios. The reason for this is the L2 orientation of the SPC platform together
with the single operator scope of this work.
The L2 orientation means that connections between the end user and the edge
of the access network are managed at L2. Accordingly an appropriate adaptation of
the L2 parameters will enable the continuation of the end user session as long as
the IP parameters are not changed.
However, these are not the only “mobility types” to be considered if we
analyze the second use case, where Eva changes her point of attachment between
her Ethernet network and external WLAN network when she is at a patient’s
house. Mobility type 4 in Figure 1.8 depicts this case. In this case the L2 mobility
management is not enough. Using a different type of interface would mean, most
likely, a new IP address assignment. For this reason, higher layer mobility
management, such as MIP, is needed to guarantee the continuation of the session
in Eva’s terminal.
A similar approach is true for the “mobility-type” 5 in Figure 1.8. In this
situation Eva changes her point of attachment between a WLAN AP and a
WiMAX BS. As before, the new technology will impose a change of the IP
address and accordingly L3 mechanisms need to be considered. However, this is
not the only adaptation that the network needs.
27

28. Since WiMAX has its own access network specification, a proper alignment
between WiMAX architecture and the SPC platform is needed in terms of service
binding configuration and mobility management coordination (table 1.5).
Table 1.5. Attachment point change possibilities
From To Use- Description Technology SB Solution
Case specific reloc
same SSID, therefore the client
can move seamlessly within
their range. This solution
already exists today.
WLAN change can be managed SSID no
by the OS. A TCP session can change
survive for a few seconds.
See the use-case. There are No SSID port Section 6.
technical differences, based on change
SSID change or SB relocation SSID port
change
No SSID AN
change
SSID AN
change
No SSID EN
change
SSID EN
LAN change
2 See the use-case and previous no
comment about the differences. port
AN
EN
28

29. WLAN LAN ~2 This is the inverse direction of no
the use-case. From a technical port
point of view, there is no new AN
requirement.
EN
WiMax WiMax Simple WiMax session AN Solved in
continuity EN WiMax
LAN
Similar to #15-16, except the AN
access technology EN
WiMax LAN
Inverse direction of #23-24 AN
EN
WLAN WiMax 2 This is a change AN Section 6
between different wireless EN
access types.
WiMax WLAN ~2 Inverse direction of #27-28. AN
EN
A summary of the different mobility types is shown in Table 1.5. It should be
noted that even for the simple types of mobility, such as mobility types 1 and 2,
maintaining the session requires much more complex issues than simply re-
creating the service binding at the new location.
When moving to a new AN, support of session continuity requires the tasks
of authentication and authorization, admission control and resource management.
1.9 FMC Architecture
Architecture for FMC is still in its early stage and many issues are still to be
resolved. However, a few working assumptions already exist and will act as the
base for the architectural development:
•WiMax is considered in MUSE as an important access technology to be
able to interwork (roaming to and from) with. WiMax has already solved
session continuity inside a WiMax domain.
29

30. •SIP and IMS are included in MUSE from an interacting perspective; no real
protocol development is included.
•The focus for MUSE FMC architecture is for network layer solutions.
•SAE/LTE architecture is considered in the work but 3GPP drafts are
currently not stable enough to base a FMC architectural solution on.
•I-WLAN is considered as one of the most reasonable starting points even
though many challenges remain.
With these assumptions the following architecture pictures can be drawn.
The initial access shows a user using a DSL, Fibre or WLAN connection in his
home and connecting via a RGW to a broadband access network. The device can
be SIP/IMS enabled but it is more likely that the RGW (NT12) will have this
capability.
The next access shows a dual hand-set where access can be achieved by
either 3GPP or WLAN. For pure 3GPP access the terminal accesses the IP
network through the 3GPP network.
For the non-3GPP access the terminal either connects through the
broadband access network as in the first case (#1).
Alternatively, the terminal establishes a tunnel through the broadband access
network to the 3GPP WLAN access network where the tunnel is terminated in the
WAG (#2). The preferred solution depends on the type of terminal and the type of
clients it supports. The preferred solution for this case is currently being studied
and includes investigations of I-WLAN, SAE/LTE etc.
The WiMax access is an access that uses its own architecture and connects
to the IP network through an edge node (ASN-GW) that is WiMax specific.
The hot-spot access is separated from the broadband access since the access
point (AP) is typically not belonging to the residential gateway (RGW). But
towards the IP transport network, this access connects in the same manner as the
broadband access edge node (Fig.1.10).
30

31. Figure 1.10. FMC architecture
The description above is focused on describing the access technologies that
are considered by MUSE. However, when considering multi-access scenarios with
roaming between different accesses and possibly also between different providers
as well as session continuity, an architecture with well defined interfaces both
towards the access and towards the IP-transport and application level must be
considered. This is currently being studied in MUSE with the prime focus on how
to re-use 3GPP I-WLAN architecture and to understand the development of
SAE/LTE. Since none fully align with the MUSE objectives many challenges
remain.
CONCLUSION
Present survey wireless technology:
1. Future service scenarios are expected to demand increasing transmission
capabilities and with the introduction of TRIPLE-PLAY services, substantial new
infrastructure investment is needed. For these scenarios, comparison of
deployment cost becomes more subjective.
31

32. 3.The cost study examines CAPEX cost structures involved in deployment
of DSL, HFC, FTTH and wireless technologies (WiMAX). The study
technologies and their ability to handle varying services and transmission
speeds.
4.For these users, WIMAX provides and excellent short-term solution for
providing internet connectivity. The drawback of WiMAX is the temporary
nature due to expensive transmission pr. bit and thus high upgrade costs for
increased throughput.
5.Research cost structure of WiMAX and network architecture in future.
In this model, end users will be able to access their services from different
networks, and are not tied to a fixed only or mobile only type of subscription as is
the case in today’s subscription offers. In DC1.7 we have provided a solution for
the inter-working and integration of the SPC access solution and WiMAX
network.
6.Present FMC Architecture and wireless technologies WiFi. In the first
use case, subscriber is making a VoIP call using the available Wi-Fi access
point while he is walking.
Architecture for FMC is still in its early stage and many issues are still to be
resolved. However, a few working assumptions already exist and will act as the
base for the architectural development
REFERENCES
[I] BREAD (FP6-IST-507554), Deliverable 1 “First, combined, report on the multi-
technological and multi-
disciplinary analysis of the ‘broadband for all’ concept“, April 2004.
[2] BREAD (FP6-IST-507554), Deliverable 2, “Second report on the multi-technological
analysis of the
‘broadband for all’ concept, focus on the listing of multi-technological key issues and
practical roadmaps on how to tackle these issues“, August 2005.
[3] BROADWAN (FP6-2002-IST-1), Deliverable 15 “Broadband access roadmap
based on market
assessment and technical-economic analysis” , February 2005.
[4] BROADWAN (FP6-2002-IST-1), Project Web Page: http://www.telenor.no/broadwan/
[5] ECOSYS (CELTIC CP1-021), Project Web Page:
http://optcomm.di.uoa.gr/ecosys/index.html
32

33. [6] FAN (Eurescom P-1117), Deliverable 1 “IP based access technologies and QoS”, May
2003.
[7] FAN (Eurescom P-1117), Deliverable 2 “Broadband access network target architectures -
access network
evolution scenarios and strategies”, May 2003.
[8] Green P.E., “Fiber To The Home – The New Empowerment”, Wiley Interscience, N.J.,
2006
[9] Indenrigs- og Sundhedsminesteriet (e. Danish Ministry of the Interior and Health),
Statistical Database
on the Internet: http://www.noegletal.dk/, Accessed March 2006
[10] Sigurdsson H.M., “Implementing Next -Generation-Networks in Iceland”, CTI M.Sc.
Thesis, Danish Technical University, June 2003.
[II] TONIC (IST-2000-25172), Deliverable number 7 “Report on tool and methodology”,
February 2002.
[12] TONIC (IST-2000-25172), Project Web Page: http://www-nrc.nokia.com/tonic/
[I] Technical Annex MUSE Phase II
[2] DC1.5 “Network Solution to Support Nomadism in a fixed access network and
dual packager roaming in a multi operator scenario”, MUSE Phase II, deliverable,
June 2007. [3] DC1.6 “Solution to Support Nomadism and roaming in between fixed
and wireless
networks in a multi operator scenario”, MUSE Phase II, deliverable, June 2007. [4]
DTF1.8 "FMC in Fixed Access Architecture", MUSE Phase II, deliverable,
June 2007. [5] http://www.airspan.com/pdfs/WP_Mobile_WiMAX_Security.pdf [6]
Tanenbaum, A. S., “Computer Networks”, Fourth Edition, Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-066102-3. [7]
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/columns/cableguy/cg0405.mspx [8] P.
Arvidsson and M. Widell, “Design of a session layer based system for endpoint
mobility”. Master's thesis, KTH, 2006. [9] Y. Ismailov, J. Holler, S. Herborn, A.
Seneviratne, “Internet Mobility: An Approach
to Mobile End-System Design”, International Conference on Mobile
Communications and Learning Technologies, ISBN 0-7695-2552-0, IEEE
Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2006. [10] Microsoft: “Performance
Enhancements in the Next Generation TCP/IP Stack”,
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/columns/cableguy/cg1105.mspx,
2005
[II] Microsoft: “Windows TCP/IP Registry Entries”,
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/158474, 2007
[12] R. Stewart, Q. Xie, K. Morneault, C. Sharp, H. Schwarzbauer, T. Taylor, I. Rytina,
M. Kalla, L. Zhang and V. Paxson: “Stream Control Transmission Protocol”,
Request for Comments: 2960, 2000 [13] L. Ong and J. Yoakum: “An Introduction to the
Stream Control Transmission
Protocol (SCTP)”, Request for Comments: 3286, 2002 [14] Perkins, Ed. C., IP Mobility
Support for IPv4, RFC 3344, August 2002. [15] S. Gundevelli, K. Leung, V. Devarapalli,
K.Chowhury and B. Patil: “Proxy Mobile
IPv6”, Internet Draft 2007 [16] MUSE D T1.8 – “FMC Support in Fixed Access
Architecture”, MUSE Phase II,
deliverable, June 2007 [17] Stefan Mangold, et al, “IEEE 802.11e Wireless LAN for
Quality of Service” [18] T. Clancy et al, “EAP Re-authentication Extensions”, draft-ietf-hokey-
erx-02, work
in progress, July 2007 [19] “IEEE Std 802.11i™-2004 (Amendment to IEEE Std
802.11™, 1999 Edition
(Reaff 2003))” [20] S. Pack and Y. Choi, “Fast Inter-AP Handoff using Predictive-
Authentication
Scheme in a Public WirelessLAN,” IEEE Networks 2002, August [21] S. Pack and Y.
Choi, “Pre-Authenticated Fast Handoff in a Public Wireless LAN
based on IEEE 802.1x Model,” IFIP TC6 Personal Wireless Communications
33

34. 2002 , October 2002. [22] M. Liebsch et al, “Candidate Access Router Discovery”
RFC 4066, July 2005
34

35. 35