WiMAX and Mobile WiMAX

802.16-2004 (d), 802.16-2005(e)

Presentation Overview
• Standard Overview • WiMAX Family
– WiMAX, Mobile WiMAX Specification Overview

• Algorithm descriptions
– PHY, MAC

• Mobile WiMAX performance
– Link, System, Comparative

• WiMAX Availability/Deployments • Further amendments
– 802.16h, 802.16j, 802.16m

Specification Overview

802.16 Family (WiMAX)
• • • • • • • • • • • • 802.16 LOS 10-66 GHz 802.16a 2-11 GHz (superceded by 802.16-2004) 802.16c 2-11 GHz (superceded by 802.16-2004) 802.16d Combined 802.16, 802.16a, 802.16c into 802.16-2004 802.16e Approved Dec 7 2005
– – – – Published Feb 2006 Published Dec 1, 2005 Draft Feb 2006 Draft

802.16f Network Management Information Base (MIB) 802.16g Network management plane 802.16h Coexistence with license-exempt 802.16 protocols 802.16i Mobile Management Information Base (explicitly to handle updates from 802.16e) – Just accepted contributions 802.16j Mobile Multihop Relay (More later in presentation) 802.16k Network Management/Bridging 802.16m 4G WiMAX
– Just started http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/16/milestones_active.html

IEEE 802.16 Standards

Source: www.wimaxforum.org/news/events/wimax_day_agenda/Gordon_Member_IEEE_802.16.pdf

WiMAX Schedules

WiMAX Forum (2006): Mobile WiMAX – Part I: A Technical Overview and Performance Evaluation. Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Relationship Between Players

www.wimaxforum.org

802.16 Standard and Usage Model Mapping

Source: www.wimaxforum.org/news/events/wimax_day_agenda/Gordon_Member_IEEE_802.16.pdf

802.16-2004
• Actually a suite of PHY protocols

High Speed Unlicensed MAN

Source: www.wimaxforum.org/news/events/wimax_day_agenda/Gordon_Member_IEEE_802.16.pdf

WirelessMAN-SC
• • • • • • • Single Carrier Licensed operation LOS only, >10 GHz FEC = Reed-Solomon, optional Block Turbo Codes, Convolutional Turbo Codes Power Control Directional antennas at subscriber units Channel quality measurements
– RSSI – CINR

Source: www.wimaxforum.org/news/events/wimax_day_agenda/Gordon_Member_IEEE_802.16.pdf

WirelessMAN-SCa
• • • • • • • Licensed operation < 11 GHz TDD and FDD duplex TDMA uplink Single Carrier Variable bandwidths Reed-Solomon and trellis coded modulation • Optional block and convolutional Turbo codes • Framing for equalization, channel performance • Robust modes for low SINR • Space time coding transmit diversity option • Block adaptive modulation

WirelessMAN OFDM
• • • • Licensed operation NLOS, < 11 GHz, TDD, FDD TDMA OFDM modulation, 256 point FFT
– BPSK, QPSK, 16-QAM, 64QAM

• • • •

Uplink power control Optional space time coding
– 2 Tx (BS), 1 RX (SS)

RSSI, CINR measurements
– Adaptive modulation

Includes Mesh Frame (optional)

Reed Solomon, Optional BTC, CTC

From IEEE Std 802.16-2004

Subcarriers: 192 Data, 8 Pilot, 28 Low Guard Band, 27 High Guard Band

WirelessMAN OFDMA
• • • • • Licensed operation NLOS, < 11 GHz, TDD, FDD Channel Bandwidths > 1.0 MHz, 2nxregulatory bandwidth OFDM modulation, 256 point FFT
– BPSK, QPSK, 16-QAM, 64-QAM
From IEEE Std 802.16-2004

Subchannelization
– OFDM FDMA = OFDMA – Gives flexibiltiy in channel assignment in time and frequency

• • • •

Convolutional code, Optional BTC, CTC Uplink power control Optional space time coding
– 2 Tx (BS), 1 RX (SS)

RSSI, CINR measurements
– Adaptive modulation

Wireless HUMAN

• • • • •

Unlicensed operation NLOS, < 11 GHz, TDD Supports all PHY but 802.11SC Adds DFS to the MAC Defines center frequencies at 5 GHz
– 5000 + 5 nch (MHz)

From IEEE Std 802.16-2004

802.16e (Mobile WiMAX, 802.162005)
• Ideally, 802.16 + mobility
– Really intended for nomadic or low mobility – Not backwards compatible with 802.16-2004 • http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_ id=76862

• Approved Dec 7 2005
– Published Feb 2006 – http://www.ieee802.org/16/tge/schedule.html

• Direct competitor to 3G, 4G, 802.20 though WiMAX Forum says otherwise • Receiving significant attention • Not intended for compatibility with 802.162004

Scalable OFDMA
• PHY for 802.16e • Modifies OFDMA so FFT size varies with channel bandwidth
– Keeps carrier spacing constant

• Channel update rate of 1 KHz
– Channel estimation, equalization
WiMAX Forum (2006): Mobile WiMAX – Part I: A Technical Overview and Performance Evaluation. Available at www.wimaxforum.org

H. Yaghoobi, “Scalable OFDMA Physical Layer in IEEE 802.16 WirelessMAN,” Intel Technology Journal, Volume 8, Issue 3, 2004. Available online: ftp://download.intel.com/technology/itj/2004/volume08issue03/art03_scalableofdma/vol8_art03.pdf

Mobile WiMAX Peak Rates
• Block Turbo Code and Low Density Parity Check Code (LDPC) are optional • Convolutional Codes (CC) and Convolutional Turbo Codes must be supported

WiMAX Forum (2006): Mobile WiMAX – Part I: A Technical Overview and Performance Evaluation. Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Optional Antenna Array Support
• • • • MIMO-STC (defined in Matrix A) MIMO-Spatial Multiplexing (defined by Matrix C) Beamforming Operation defined by three classes matrices for antenna different number of antennas (2x2 STC is Alamouti) Support for switching between approaches Not being deployed initially, but more later

WiMAX Forum (2006): Mobile WiMAX – Part I: A Technical Overview and Performance Evaluation. Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Peak Data Rates

• •

MAC/Mobility Features
• • • • • Frame-by-frame resource allocation Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) UL and DL Scheduling Variable QoS Three handoff methods
– A traditional Hard Handoff (HHO) – Fast Base Station Switching (FBSS)
• A list of reachable base stations is maintained by mobile and base stations, but base stations discard packets if not the active BS

– Macro Diversity (MDHO)
• Same list is maintained, but all base stations in the list can participate in the reception and transmission of packets.

WiBro
• • • • Korean version of 802.16e
– – – – – – – Phase 1 standardized by TTA of Korea (2004) Phase 2 standardized in 2005 2.3 GHz (100 MHz) Samsung joined WiMAX Forum Dec 2004 May indicate Samsung’s guess on 4G direction KT & SK Telecom launched June 30, 2006 in Seoul http://kt.co.kr/kthome/kt_info/pr/news_center/news_view.jsp?pa ge=1&no=397&gubun=1 KT and Hanaro Telecom to jointly deploy outside of Seoul and 6 other cities http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/tech/200501/kt2005011117243 611810.htm

Korean spectrum allocated 2002 Harmonization 802.16e/WiBro agreed Nov 2004 Plans for Nationwide Korean deployment

How does WiBRO relate to 802.16e?
• WiMAX Forum: (http://www.wimaxforum.org/news/press_releases/WiBro_and_Mobile_WiMAX_Bac kgrounder.pdf)
– “WiBro is the service name for Mobile WiMAX in Korea. WiBro uses the Mobile WiMAX System Profile. The system profile contains a comprehensive list of features that the equipment is required or allowed to support, and, as a result, WiBro offers the same capabilities and features of Mobile WiMAX.” – It’s Mobile WiMAX, just with a different profile (frequency, bandwidth…)

Vendors: WiBRO is compatible with 802.16e, but there’s more to Mobile WiMAX than just 802.16e compatibility and many choices in WiBRO are different from what is mandatory in 802.16e
– From (http://www.nortel.com/solutions/wimax/collateral/wimax_wibro_white_paper.pdf)

Some more important differences from white paper
– Mandatory Handoff
• 802.16e = HHO • WiBRO = FBSS

– HARQ
• 80.16e = Chase combine HARQ • WiBRO = Incremental redundancy HARQ

– Likely (though unclear) network layer differences

Reality on compatibility
• All of these different profiles would be quite difficult for a hardware radio to support (as the white paper points out), but… • 802.16 is likely the first SDR standard • Leading implementation approaches appear to be using specialized processors • Further, there exists a certification body for interoperability (WiMAX Forum) with the first certified Mobile WiMAX products expected for the end of 2006 or the first quarter of 2007 • And a Global Roaming Alliance

Algorithm Descriptions
PHY, MAC, Security

Mandatory Convolutional Encoder in 802.16e
• Constraint length 7 • Rate ½ • Initialization
– OFDM mode:
• Zeros encoder • Blocks padded with byte 0x00 at end Encoder

– OFDMA
• Tailbiting • 6 bits appended to front, output from last six bits of previous block discarded

Supported Data Rates

– Tailbiting is slightly more bandwidth efficient (and mandatory), but much more computationally intensive
J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007

Optional Codes
802.16-e Turbo Encoder

• Optional codes:
– block turbo codes, – convolutional turbo codes, – low density parity check (LDPC) codes

• Significant performance gains over mandatory convolutional codes without a lot of added complexity J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed,Hall, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice
2007

Code performance

Subcarrier Permutations
• • • • Subcarrier permutation – how subcarriers are allocated across subchannels Burst profile – predefined combinations of modulation, code rate and FEC type Full Usage of Subcarriers (FUSC)
– Pilots independent, data subcarriers evenly spread out Subcarriers “randomized” Supports segmentation and frequency reuse factors of 1 Subcarriers divided into tiles (4 subcarriers over 3 symbols) 8 data, 4 pilot Good for high Doppler spread Downlink version of uplink PUSC

Downlink Partial Usage of Subcarriers
– –

Uplink Partial Usage of Subcarriers
– – –

• •

Tile Usage of Subcarriers (TUSC)

Band Adaptive Modulation and Coding (AMC)
– All subcarriers are adjacent
• • Hurts frequency diversity, but simplifies multiuser divserity “Bins” defined as 8 data symbols plus 1 pilot (in center of data) •J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007

Specified PHY Information
• Channel Quality Measurements
– Used to adapt transmission parameters
• Modulation, coding, burst profiles, power

• Power Control
– Only directly supported on uplink – 30 dB/s fluctuations – Should account for PAPR – MS maintains same transmit power density (power/subcarrier) – Maximum MS power for various modulations (backoff can vary to control PAPR)

– Received signal strength indicator
• Mean, standard deviation

– SINR
• Mean, standard deviation • Requires demodulation

Open Loop MIMO
• Transmit diversity/space time coding
– Numerous optional schemes for 2,3,4 antennas – Most common:
• Spatial Multiplexing • Alamouti

Frequency Hopped Diversity Code
– Optional mode – First antenna transmits without modification – Second encodes over two consecutive subchannels

J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007

Closed Loop MIMO
• Feedback mechanisms
–Antenna selection. The MS indicates to the BS which transmit antenna(s) should be used
• Useful at highspeeds

–Antenna grouping. The MS indicates to the BS the optimum permutation of the order of the various antennas to be used with the current space/time encoding matrix –Codebook based feedback. The MS indicates to the BS the optimum precoding matrix to be used, based on the entries of a predefined codebook.
• Sum capacity and MMSE most popular

–Quantized channel feedback. The MS quantizes the MIMO channel and sends this information to the BS, using the MIMO_FEEDBACK message.
• High bandwidth, but usable in low speed environments

–Channel sounding. The BS obtains exact information about the CSI of the MS by using a dedicated and predetermined signal intended for channel sounding.
• Maximum (theoretical) capacity, maximum required bandwidth

J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007

Hybrid ARQ
• • HARQ – ARQ, but receiver can use previous failed transmissions to improve estimates Type I HARQ
– Chase combining – Retransmits until receiver gets the packet right of failure propagates up to the network layer Type II HARQ

Type II HARQ
– Incremental redundancy – Retransmits with successively lower rate codes until receiver gets the packet right of failure propagates up to the network layer

J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007

MAC Convergence Sublayers
• Supported Networking protocols
– – – – – – – – – – ATM CS Packet CS IPv4 Packet CS IPv6 Packet CS 802.3 (Ethernet) Packet CS 802.1/Q VLAN Packet CS IPv4 over 802.3 Packet CS IPv6 over 802.3 Packet CS IPv4 over 802.1/Q VLAN Packet CS IPv6 over 802.1/Q VLAN Packet CS 802.3 with optional VLAN tags and ROHC header compression – Packet CS 802.3 with optional VLAN tags and ERTCP header compression – Packet IPv4 with ROHC header compression – Packet IPv6 with ROHC header compression

Scheduling/QoS
• Actual algorithms vendor specific, but 802.16e assumes MS requests performance based off of a number of messages which the BS may or may not be able (or willing) to accommodate.
– – – – – – – Max data flow per stream Requested minimum data rate Request for MBS Maximum latency Retransmission policy Traffic priority (8 classes) Tolerated Jitter

Mobile WiMAX MAC QoS Classes

WiMAX Forum (2006): Mobile WiMAX – Part I: A Technical Overview and Performance Evaluation. Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Network Entry Process
Network Entry Steps Negotiated Parameters

J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007

Other Services
• Network discovery
– WiMAX supports either manual or automatic selection of networks based on user preference – Defines protocols to support this

• •

IP address management
– Note: packet transmission in WiMAX is based on connection identifiers instead of MAC addresses, so multicasting in IPv6 needs work

Radio Resource Management
– Mostly information management in standard, vendors can do different things with information – Activities
• • • • • Controlling measurements by BSs and MSs Delivering measurements to required databases maintaining RRM databases exchanging information between these databases within or across ASNs, making radio resource information available to other functional entities, such as HO control and QoS management.

802.16-2004 Security Vulnerabilities
• Replay Attack • • • •
Nonetheless, Boom writes: – Resend detected valid messages “In the author’s opinion, the – Intention is to induce BS to send SS a reset standard is an excellent starting message point for the basis of a military AP Spoof tactical network. Given that the – Subscribers are authenticated, but not above recommendations have access point been applied, there would remain MAC Address Spoof changes required to create a RNG-RSP Denial of Service military wireless network. – Weaknesses in ranging (not encrypted, automatic acceptance of adaptations by SS) Because of the unique military environment and requirement for Auth Invalid Attack very high availability, DoD should – “Auth Invalid” (possibly spoofed) puts adopt an appropriately robust subscriber in a vulnerable state spread spectrum physical layer to – Followed with a “Permanent Auth Reject” message prevents all future communications improve conventional jamming until MAC reset resistance. Second, DoD should continue to use higher layer encryption to protect end-to-end transmissions.”
Based on D. Boom, “Denial of Service Vulnerabilities in IEEE 802.16 Wireless Networks,” Thesis, Naval Post Graduate School, Sep 2004. Available online: http://www.ieee802.org/16/tge/contrib/C80216e-04_406.pdf

802.16e Security
• Multiple layers of security • Many aspects added to address WiMAX problems

D. Pang, L. Tian, J. Hu, J. Zhou, J. Shi, “Overview and Analysis of IEEE 802.16e Security,” Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/2100/172

Security Improvements in 802.16e
• Authentication
– BS identity now verified in PKMv2

• Data authenticity
– AES CCM-Mode

• Replay attack
– Some added protection, but still vulnerable

• Authorization
– RSA-based authorization and EAP – PKMv1 (2004) AAA in application layer, but in PKMv2 (802.16e) in different hierarchy

• Handoff support
– Possibly problematic – 802.16e suggests, but does not define, preauthorization – Leads to key sharing between BS

• Data confidentiality
– Many more crypto algorithms

D. Pang, L. Tian, J. Hu, J. Zhou, J. Shi, “Overview and Analysis of IEEE 802.16e Security,” Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/2100/172

Mobile WiMAX Performance
Effect of varying parameters on link and system performance

Link Simulation Parameters
• From Chapt 11 of J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007 • Scenarios:
– AMC vs PUSC – Effect of HARQ – MIMO + Fading + AMC – Open loop vs closed loop – Common nonlinear receiver structures

SISO AMC vs PUSC, Pedestrian
AMC vs PUSC: QPSK, Ped B
10-0
R1/2 PUSC R1/2 AMC R3/4 PUSC R3/4 AMC

AMC vs PUSC: 16QAM, Ped B
10-0
R1/2 PUSC R1/2 AMC R3/4 PUSC R3/4 AMC

10-1

10-1

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0

SNR AMC vs PUSC: QPSK, Ped A
10-0
R1/2 PUSC R1/2 AMC R3/4 PUSC R3/4 AMC

5

10

15

20

25

30

SNR AMC vs PUSC: 16QAM, Ped A
10-0
R1/2 PUSC R1/2 AMC R3/4 PUSC R3/4 AMC

10-1

10-1

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

5

10

15

20

25

30

SNR

SNR

SISO AMC vs PUSC, Vehicular

AMC vs PUSC: QPSK, VehA30
10-0
R1/2 PUSC R1/2 AMC R3/4 PUSC R3/4 AMC

AMC vs PUSC: QPSK, VehA120
10-0
R1/2 PUSC R1/2 AMC R3/4 PUSC R3/4 AMC

10-1

10-1

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

5

10

15

20

25

30

SNR

SNR

SISO AMC vs PUSC, Summary

• AMC (modulation adaptation) outperforms PUSC (carrier adaptation) at slow speeds • PUSC outperforms AMC at high speeds • Why?
– At Pedestrian (3 kph) coherence time is 150 ms – At 120 kph channel coherence time reduced to 3 ms – Feedback duration (5 ms) – At high speeds channel feedback needed for AMC is poor predictor

• Moving from Pedestrian to Vehicular 120 causes drop in link performance
–QPSK ~1-1.5 dB –16-QAM ~ 2-2.5 QAM

• Why?
–OFDM sensitive to frequency offsets (Doppler) –Higher order modulations more sensitive to channel estimations

• Insights:
–Channel state information very important to performance –Value to adjusting adaptation schemes based on Doppler

Effect of Channel Estimation (PUSC)
QPSK Real vs Perfect
10-0
R1/2 Veh A30 R1/2 Veh A120 R3/4 Veh A30 R3/4 Veh A120 R1/2 Perfect R3/4 Perfect

16-QAM Real vs Perfect
10-0

10-1

10-1

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0

BER

10-2 10-3 10-4 0
R1/2 Veh A30 R1/2 Veh A120 R3/4 Veh A30 R3/4 Veh A120 R1/2 Perfect R3/4 Perfect

5

10

15

20

25

30

5

10

15

20

25

30

SNR

SNR

• • • •

Channel estimation via frequency domain linear minimum mean square error + partial information about channel covariance (from RMS delay spread) At low SNR, noise dominates At high SNR, estimation imperfections dominate Higher order modulation more sensitive to estimation imperfections

Effect of Hybrid-ARQ
4

HARQ, QPSK
4
R1/2 No HARQ R1/2 HARQ I R1/2 HARQ II R3/4 No HARQ R3/4 HARQ I R3/4 HARQ II

HARQ, 16-QAM
R1/2 No HARQ R1/2 HARQ I R1/2 HARQ II R3/4 No HARQ R3/4 HARQ I R3/4 HARQ II

Transmissions

2

Transmissions
21

3

3

2

1

1

0 0

3

6

9

12

15

18

0 6

9

12 15

18 21

24

27 30

SNR

SNR

• Type I HARQ = Chase Combining
– All retransmissions identical to first transmission

• Type II HARQ = Incremental Redundancy
– Puncture patterns vary by retransmission

Hybrid ARQ Summary

• Benefit of HARQ is at low SINR • No Benefit at high SINR • Type II HARQ gives highest gain due to reducing code rates

SIMO Performance and Correlation
R1/2 Ped B Varying Correlation R3/4 Ped B Varying Correlation

• QPSK, MMSE receiver, AMC

SIMO Correlation Summary

• Performance gain
– 1x2 yields 3 dB gain (low SINR) – 1x4 yields 6 dB gain (low SINR) – Even more at high SINR

Effect of Correlation
AMC, R 1/2, Ped B AMC, R 3/4, Ped B

Complex correlation, ρ=0.5

PUSC, R1/2 Ped B

PUSC, R3/4 Ped B

Correlated/Uncorrelated Fading Summary
Gain versus SISO with AMC

• • • • • •

At low SNR, correlation has little effect At higher SNR, however, the multiantenna gain is reduced by 1dB to 0.5dB, owing to the correlation in the fading waveform. Lower code rates are more sensitive to this correlation than are higher code rates. Figure 11.20 and Figure 11.21 provide link-level results for various possible open-loop and closed-loop transmit diversity schemes in WiMAX. The open-loop diversity considered here is the 2 x 2 Alamouti pace/time block cde (STBC). For AMC subcarrier permutation, STBC’s benefit is marginal, especially with correlated fading because STBC hardens the channel variation that band AMC is designed to exploit. On the other hand PUSC subcarrier permutation, as shown in Figure 11.22 and Figure 11.23 benefits significantly from 2 x 2 STBC

Open Loop MIMO with Multiple Streams
AMC QPSK R1/2 in Ped B AMC QPSK R3/4 in Ped B

Dual Stream, Matrix B

Open Loop Diversity Summary
Open Loop Gains over 2x2, AMC, Ped B, Dual Streams

• Greater benefit for higher rates • Why?
– More sensitive to fades and added diversity reduces fades

Closed Loop Scenarios
AMC, QPSK, R1/2 Ped B AMC, QPSK, R3/4 Ped B

• • • •

Antenna selection feedback (1/frame)
– 3-bits specify antenna pair for each subchannel

Codebook feedback (1/frame)
– 6-bits that specify code for linear precoding for each subchannel – Code minimizes postdetection mean square error of both streams

Quantized channel feedback
– MS quantizes channels; BS chooses code as above

Per subcarrier SVD
– Optimal precoding

Open versus Closed Summary

• Closed loop reasonably close (~1-2 dB) to each other • However, closed loop techniques can add 5 dB in link gain over open loop techniques

Effect of Receiver Structures
PUSC, QPSK, R1/2 Ped B PUSC, QPSK, R3/4 Ped B

• Ordered Successive Interference Cancellation (O-SIC)
– SIC from highest SINR to lowest

• Maximum Likelihood Detection (MLD)
– Search for most likely combination of transmitted symbols – Simplified by using MMSE followed by sphere-decoding – Optimum noniterative algorithm for MIMO receivers

Receiver Structure Summary
Gain over MMSE receiver at 10-4 BER 2x2 PUSC, Ped B

• An iterative MAP will outperform MLD • QRM-MLD is suboptimal (and “low-complexity”) but performs within a dB of MLD
– K. Kim, J. Yue, “Joint channel estimation and detection algorithms for MIMO OFDM,” Proceedings of Asilomar Conference of Signals, Systems, and Computers, Nov 02.

Link Performance Summary
• Adaptive modulation lets WiMAX approach at low SINR
– High SINR limited by discrete modulation set

• Turbo codes yield significant performance gain over mandatory convolutional codes • AMC is better at low speeds, PUSC at high speeds • HARQ most effective at low SINR,
– HARQ II better than HARQ I in terms of BER

• Closed-loop gives > 5 dB gain over open-loop at low speeds (not practical at high speeds) • Advanced MIMO structures can give another 5 dB gain

System Level Performance
Simulation Parameters

• From Chapt 12 of J. Andrews, A. Ghosh, R. Muhamed, Fundamentals of WiMAX, Prentice Hall, 2007

System Configurations

• • • •

Basic assumes the BS is able to separate the two MSs using the two receive antennas. Enhanced configuration 1 increases the number of receive antennas in the DL from two to four thus providing higher order receive diversity in the DL, but is otherwise the same Enhanced configuration 2 increases the number of transmit antennas in the UL and DL Enhanced configuration 3 uses 4 x 2 closed-loop MIMO in the DL with antenna selection and quantized channel-feedback-based closed loop MIMO . Feedback once every 10 ms over two bands.

Basic Configuration
Ped B Ped A

Handheld assumes omnidirectional antennas Desktop device has low-gain (3dBi-6dBi) directional antennas Desktop implements selection diversity from 6-8 antenna

Average Throughput, Ped B Average Throughput, Ped A

Basic Configuration Summary

• • •

Directionality does better, but limited benefit when already sectored (1,1,3) is more spectrally efficient, but has poor cell-edge performance General tradeoff between reliability and spectral efficiency

Effect of Scheduling and Subcarrier permutations (Handheld)
PUSC vs AMC PF vs Round Robin

• (1,1,3) configuration • Without precoding, AMC offers limited benefit (though still non-negligible ~14-18%) • Proportional fairness scheduler has slightly more flexibility in exploiting multi-user diversity so sees better performance in capacity (~25%)

Effect of MIMO Configurations
Downlink Uplink

Note: Same uplink used for basic and enhanced 1 configurations

Enhanced Profile Summary
Total Throughput per Cell, Ped B, (1,1,3), 30 MHz

Both receive diversity and transmit diversity improve the average throughput of a WiMAX network. • By increasing the number of transmit antennas from two to four, the per sector throughput improves by 50 percent. • Similarly, by increasing the number of receive antennas from two to four, the per sector throughput is increased by 80 percent • UL throughput results do not account for the fact that a part of the UL bandwidth is used by the closed-loop MIMO feedback

Enhanced Profiles
Downlink, Ped B Downlink, Ped A

Enhance Profile Summary
5% & 10% Data Rate, Band AMC, Ped B (1,1,3)

• • • •

Fifth and tenth percentile DL data rates are not improved by increasing either transmit or receive diversity order. Implies that transmit diversity with antennas in DL is not sufficient to improve the cell-edge data rate in the case of (1,1,3) reuse Closed loop (4x2) however, provides significant (1,1,3) frequency reuse will not be able to provide carrier-grade reliability and guaranteed data rate unless closed-loop MIMO features are used.

System Performance Comments
• Frequency planning
– (1,1,3) gives highest per-sector
• But unequal distribution – cell edge performs poorly

– (1,3,3) gives good cell edge performance
• But requires additional spectrum

– (1,1,3) with segmentation is a compromise solution

• •

Scheduling algorithms w/ multi-user diversity can significantly improve cell throughput – up to 25% Diversity (receiver more so than transmitter) gives significant gain in average throughput – 50-80%
– Cell-edge behavior still bad enough that (1,1,3) is hard to justify – Needs closed-loop MIMO

• •

Closed loop MIMO gives big gains Overall spectral efficiency (throughput/sector/total deployment bandwidth)
– Open loop MIMO 1.7 Mbps/Hz – Closed loop pedestrian 3.9 Mbps/Hz

Interference Patterns with Reuse = 1

http://www.wimaxforum.org/technol ogy/downloads/mobile_wimax_depl oyment_alternatives.pdf

Relative Capacity as function of
• 19 BS, 3 sectors, spaced 2.8 km, mix of users • Proportional Fair scheduling

WiMAX Performance Comparisons

Technology Comparison

WiMAX Forum (2006): Mobile WiMAX – Part II: Competitive Analysis. Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Performance Comparisons with Existing 3G, 3G+

WiMAX Forum (2006): Mobile WiMAX – Part II: Competitive Analysis. Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Performance Comparisons

Mobile WiMAX: The Best Personal Broadband Experience! June 2006, Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Cost Comparison
• • • • Fewer base stations to provide same level of service with Mobile WiMAX than HSPA or EVDO RevB Less cost tied up in IP royalties (~2-3% vs 10-15%) New spectrum costs http://www.wimaxforum.org/technology/faq/
– The second generation of Subscriber Equipment is expected to be priced from $200 - $300 in 2008. – The third-generation CPEs will be integrated into laptops and other portable devices and are expected to initially cost approximately $100 and be available in 2nd half 2008.

Mobile WiMAX: The Best Personal Broadband Experience! June 2006, Available at www.wimaxforum.org

Summary of comparisons
• Mobile WiMAX is most directly comparable not to existing 3G or 3G+ standards, but to ones coming out in a few years
– LTE – EVDO, Rev C (UMB)

• Similar performance comes from similar technologies
– OFDMA, MIMO, MBS, HARQ, Turbo codes, Adaptive modulations, bandwidths, IP core, VOIP

• So some convergence in technologies (at last!)
– Yet these “converged” standards have a huge number of options available, so will be difficult for a single ASIC solution – Likely need for SDR

Mobile WiMAX Deployments and Availability
Certification, Chipsets, Products, Spectrum, Deployments

WiMAX Certification Schedule
• The WiMAX Forum plans to have five certification test labs located in the U.S., Europe, China, Korea and Taiwan by end of 2007.
– http://www.wimax.com/commentar y/news/wimax_industry_news/wim ax-forumae-designates-first-northamerican-based-certification-lab

Certification Waves
– (.16-2004) Wave 1 enables a simple air link – (.16-2004) Wave 2 adds QoS, security, and advanced radio features for outdoor CPEs – (.16-2004) Wave 3, adds indoor CPEs and PCMCIA cards for fixed and nomadic networks – (.16e) Wave 4, adds hand-offs and simple mobile for 802.16e or mobile WiMax – (.16e) Wave 5 adds full mobility

Source: http://www.wimaxforum.org/technology/downloads/ WiMAX_and_IMT_2000.pdf

WiMAX Certification Labs
• AT4 Wireless Parque Tecnologico de Andalucia Calle Severo Ochoa 2 29590 Campanillas, Málaga Spain Telecommunications Technology Association 267-2 Seohyun-dong Bundang-gu Seongnam-City Gyeonggi-do 463-824 Korea China Academy of Telecommunication Research 52 Hua Yuan Bei Lu Haidian District Beijing 100083 China • • 31 certified products http://www.wimaxforum.org/kshow case/view/catalog_search

Chipsets (1/4)
• Beceem Communications (BCS2000)
– – – – Wave 2, SIMO, MIMO, baseband IC + RFIC (all PHY, MAC, RF) 2.x and 3.x GHz bands http://www.beceem.com/products/ms120.shtml Wave 2 SOC 2-11 GHz, 802.16e compliant Either base or subscriber http://www.fujitsu.com/downloads/MICRO/fma/pdf/wimax_mobilefs.pdf

Fujitsu MB86K21 SoC is Wave 2
– – – –

Sequans Communications (3 mobile products)
– SQN2110
• 3 FPGA chipset for base stations • Wave 2,

– SQN1130 SOC
• Baseband PHY, MAC • Wave 2

– SQN 1110
• Like 1130, but for Wave 1 • http://www.sequans.com/site/products.html

Chipsets (2/4)
• Wavesat Umobile SOC
– – – – – Wave 2 Programmable PHY, MAC 2x2 MIMO Support for 802.11a/g www.wavesat.com RNA 200
• • • 802.16e-2005 Full PHY/MAC (no RF) http://www.runcom.com/upload/infocenter/info_images/28012007194733RNA200%20ASIC.pdf RNF2000 is FPGA version RNA2000 ASIC version

Runcom Technologies Ltd

Others:
• •

TeleCIS Wireless
– – – – – – TCW 1620 Portable 802.16-2004 implementation Lowest power SoC PHY/MAC MAC supports Wave 2 and Wave 3 2x2 MIMO Built in PCI interface

Chipsets (3/4)
• Comsys Mobile
– CM1100
• • • • • • • • Mobile WiMA baseband Wave 2 compliant High speed support http://www.comsysmobile.com/commaxcm1100.html GSM/EDGE + Mobile WiMAX Baseband PHY/MAC Class-12 E/GPRS mobile http://www.comsysmobile.com/commaxcm1125.html.

– CM1125

Altair Semiconductor
– ALT2150
• Mobile WiMAX SOC • Wave 2 Handset • http://www.ccpu.com/

ApaceWave Technologies
– APW-2000 SoC – Wave 2 MIMO A,B – http://www.apacewave.com/

Chipsets (4/4)
• picoChip
– WiMAX Reference Designs – http://www.picochip.com/solutions/wimax – PC8520 802.16-2004 base station – PC8530 Mobile WiMAX base station – PC6530 Femtocell base station – PC8532 Wave2 Basestation PHY – All software upgradable

Intel
• Chipsets still in the works, but… • Service providers already have expressed a preference for Intel
– http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20070831PD215. html – Nokia already ordered
• http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2007/09/27/nokia-orders-intelchips-intel/

– Microsoft working on WiMAX drivers
• http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2006/11/07/runcom-signs-dealwith-microsoft/

– Apple rumored to want Intel chips
• http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/06/01/apple.and.wimax/

More Intel
• Already secured deals for use of WiMAX chips in laptops
– – – – – Hoping to repeat Centrino success 2008 "Montevina" both Wi-Fi networking and WiMAX Deals: Lenovo, Acer, Asus, Panasonic and Toshiba No Deals: Dell, HP Part of a planned “WiMAX Inside” Marketing campaign
• http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2007/08/03/intel-plans-%e2%80%9cwimaxinside%e2%80%9d-marketing

Investing in WiMAX service providers
– Bulgaria with Nexcom Bulgaria
• http://www.wimax.com/commentary/news/wimax_industry_news/intelcapital-and-mci-have-invested-in-bulgarian-wimax-operator-nexcom

– Japan with KDDI
• http://www.wimax.com/commentary/news/wimax_industry_news/intelcapital-and-mci-have-invested-in-bulgarian-wimax-operator-nexcom

More 802.16e equipment
• Adaptix
– SDR OFDMA/TDD platform – Salvaged technology from Broadstorm

ArrayComm
– – – OFDM + smart antennas Uses IntelliCell beamforming technology Applied to other standards Adds smart antennas to nomadic OFDM Wireless broadband Georgia – BellSouth August 05 Multicarrier Synchronous Beam Forming Adaptive modulation QPSK – 64 QAM

• Alvarion
– Devices support 802.16-2004 and e

Navini
– – – –

Other Product Vendors
• From http://www.wimaxforum.org/kshowcase/view
– Redline, Selex, Nokia-Siemens, ET Industries, Axxcelera, Aperto Netwrosk, Alvarion, Airspan, Siemens, SR Telecom, Telsima

WiMax Frequency Allocation

http://www.wimaxforum.org/news/downloads/supercomm_2005/WF_Day_in_a_Life_with_WiMAX_Final.pdf

3.5 GHz is the international band for WiMAX

Other WiMAX Spectrum Opportunities
• 700 MHz band
– http://www.xchangemag.com/articles/501/79h139171 83935.html?cntwelcome=1 – Needs to support public safety in the nationwide band – No plan for WiMAX certification profile unless band becomes global

• 3G Spectrum
– Push to be included as a 3G standard
• http://www.livemint.com/2007/09/06000634/India-backsWimax-techon-3G-n.html

WiMAX Spectrum Alliances
• Regulatory Database
– – – AT4 Wireless Launched November 2006 http://www.wimaxforum.org/join/spectrum_demo/ Brought together unlicensed providers to promote global roaming Now defunct Will probably come back in some form http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/29/oz_wimax_roaming_alliance/ http://www.wisoa.com/ Promotes roaming agreements Participants: Unwired Australia, Network Plus Mauritius, UK Broadband, Irish Broadband, Austar Australia/Liberty Group, Telecom New Zealand, WiMAX Telecom Group, Enertel and Woosh Telecom

WiMAX Global Roaming Alliance
– – – –

WiMAX Spectrum Owners' Alliance
– – – –

WiMAX Trials
M. Giles, “Wireless Broadband,” EDUCAUSE 2006, October 9, 2006

150 Fixed WiMAX trials are underway around the world.

Technology Deployment Timeline
• 2006
– Mobile WiMAX Trials – Fixed WiMAX Ramp – >150 WiMAX Trials/Networks Planned

• 2007
– Mobile WiMAX (MIMO) Trials – Mobile WiMAX (SISO) Ramp

• 2008
– Dual-Mode & Multi-Mode Handhelds – Mobile WiMAX (MIMO) Ramp

• Source: M. Giles, “Wireless Broadband,” EDUCAUSE 2006, October 9, 2006.

Clearwire Coverage
• Provides Fixed WiMAX based wireline replacement service to home + portability within coverage area • 2 Mbps data + voice
http://www.clearwire.com/

• Founded in October 2003 by Craig O. McCaw

Fixed WiMAX for AT&T
• Fixed WiMAX services as DSL/cable competitor (like ClearWire)
– Launch in 2Q 2008 for the US South in old BellSouth spectrum – 2.3 GHz band – Already trialing system in Alaska – http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_ id=133853&f_src=unstrung_gnews

Fixed WiMAX Deployments
• WiMAX I – IEEE 802.16 – 2004
– – – – – – – IEEE Standard issued WiMAX Forum specification Fixed point-to-point/point-to-multipoint First WiMAX certified products end of year Certified in 3.5 GHz band (Intel) Alvarion Ltd., Aperto Networks Inc., Proxim Corp., Redline Communications Inc., Siemens AG, and China's Huawei Technologies Co. and ZTE Corp Other: Picochip, WaveSat $1.4 billion in revenue in 2004 (Marvedis) Altitude (France) voice over pre-WiMAX Seattle - Sprint http://www.wimaxxed.com/wimaxxed_news/sprint_motorol.html London (2006) http://www.wimaxxed.com/wimaxxed_news/london_councils.html Xbox360? http://wimax.com/commentary/spotlight/wimax-xbox

Equipment

• •

Current Deployments
– – – – –

Trial Deployments

Sprint XOhm
• • Mobile WiMAX focus of next generation Sprint cellular network XOhm
– http://www.xohm.com/latestnews.html

Fast extensive rollout planned
– http://www.wimaxday.net/site/200 7/09/28/sprint-dominates-andtantilises-wimax-world-usa-withxohm/

Expects $2-2.5 billion in revenue by 2010, of which 80% comes from new revenue and 20% is from cannibalization. Assuming an ARPU of $30 per month ($360/year), that means 6.2 million subscribers by 2010
– http://www.wimax.com/commentary/spotligh t/zoom-on-xohm-2013-an-update-from-thesprint-technology-summit

Sprint device expectations – Sprint partners (Motorola, Intel, Samsung) have said embed 50 million units by 2010 in the US. These will be mainly laptops and PDAs. Sprint alluded that it expects chipset cost to go down to $5-$15 – WiMAX incorporated in cameras and televisions, household appliances, and security systems, as well as over 50 million hand-held devices

– Precommercial launch in two markets by end of 2007 – Multi-market launch in early 2008 – 10,000 sites in preparation – 1750 base stations delivered in 2007, 20,000 antennas – 2010 coverage
• 48 million homes, 4.5 million offices, 130 million consumer electronic devices

Open network – “As long as the device is WiMAX
certified, it will work on Sprint’s network after provisioning. Sprint wants to sell services, not devices.”

More Sprint
• Partnering with ClearWire to accelerate WiMAX deployment
– Roam between networks and exchange spectrum – http://www.xohm.com/news_071907.html

• Going to provide federal government connectivity via WiMAX
– http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2007/06/05/sprint-plans-wimax-forgov%e2%80%99t-services/

• Partnering with Google to provide services
– Aiming for the “digital lifestyle” – Gmail, social networking tools, location-based services and multi-media services. – http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2007/07/27/sprint-and-google-willpartner-for-mobile-wimax-services/

Motorola
• Focusing on being an infrastructure vendor • Lots of test trials • 2.5 GHz band in Chicago for Sprint
– http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2007/09/26/it-worksmotorola-takes-wimax-out-of-the-lab-and-into-the-city/

• 25 other trials around the world
– http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2007/03/28/motorola-in25-wimax-trials/

First WiBRO Deployment
• Nov 15, 2005 – Launch of KT’s personal broadband service • “To prove its mobility, KT delivered two-way video, Internet and messaging broadband services, a range of devices that were located in a traveling shuttle bus that allowed conference attendees to experience mobile broadband.” • Given Mobile WiMAX certification in late 2006.
– http://www.wimaxforum.org/news/press_releases/AP EC_release_111505_FINAL_FINAL1.pdf

Additional Deployments of Mobile WiMAX
• • • • • • Arialink with Samsung products (rural Michigan)
– http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/April2006/2948.htm

Islanet (Puerto Rico)
– http://www.techweb.com/wire/networking/193402237

Wateen in Pakistan (Motorola)
– http://news.com.com/2100-1039_3-6075684.html

AT&T (Soma) in Nevada
– http://telephonyonline.com/wimax/marketing/att_mobile_wimax_111606/

Taiwan (Far Eastone)
– http://www.wimaxday.net/site/2007/09/28/far-eastone-plans-wimax-rollout/

Telecom (Bahrain)
– http://www.gulf-dailynews.com/Story.asp?Article=194068&Sn=BUSI&IssueID=30181

Projected Market Breakdown

http://www.wisoa.net/members_logos/ecosystem-2-big.jpg

Further amendments
802.16h, 802.16j, 802.16m

802.16h
• Improved Coexistence Mechanisms for License-Exempt Operation Basically, a cognitive radio standard Incorporates many of the hot topics in cognitive radio
– Token based negotiation – Interference avoidance – Network collaboration – RRM databases

• •

Coexistence with non 802.16h systems
– Regular quiet times for other systems to transmit
From: M. Goldhamer, “Main concepts of IEEE P802.16h / D1,” Document Number: IEEE C802.16h-06/121r1, November 13-16, 2006.

General Cognitive Radio Policies in 802.16h
• Must detect and avoid radar and other higher priority systems • All BS synchronized to a GPS clock • All BS maintain a radio environment map (not their name) • BS form an interference community to resolve interference differences • All BS attempt to find unoccupied channels first before negotiating for free spectrum
– Separation in frequency, then separation in time

DFS in 802.16h
• Adds a generic algorithm for performing Dynamic Frequency Selection in license exempt bands • Moves systems onto unoccupied channels based on observations

Generic DFS Operation Figure h1
(fuzziness in original)

Adaptive Channel Selection
• Used when BS turns on • First – attempt to find a vacant channel
– Passive scan – Candidate Channel Determination – Messaging with Neighbors

• Second – attempt to coordinate for an exclusive channel • If unable to find an empty channel, then BS attempts to join the interference community on the channel it detected the least interference

Figure h37: IEEE 802.16h-06/010 Draft IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems Amendment for Improved Coexistence Mechanisms for License-Exempt Operation, 2006-03-29

Collaboration
• BS can request interfering systems to back off transmit power Master BS can assign transmit timings
– Intended to support up to 3 systems (Goldhammer)

Slave BS in an interference community can “bid” for interference free times via tokens. Master BS can advertise spectrum for “rent” to other Master BS
– Bid by tokens

Collaboration supported via Base Station Identification Servers, messages, and RRM databases Interferer identification by finding power, angle of arrival, and spectral density of OFDM/OFDMA preambles Every BS maintains a database or RRM information which can be queried by other BS
– This can also be hosted remotely

802.16h Status
• Currently in letter ballot
– Draft 2c (password protected): http://www.ieee802.org/16/private/drafts/le/P8 0216h_D2c.zip

802.16j Mobile Multi-hop Relay
• Expand coverage, capacity by adding relay stations • Intended for licensed operation • Not intended as a mesh network
– Actually a tree

• • •

Relays controlled from base stations Fixed Relay
– Permanent installation – Useful for coverage holes

• Support mobile units

Nomadic Relay
– Temporary fixed installation – Extra capacity for special events (military SDR conferences)

Mobile Relay
– Placed on mobile platform to support users on the platform – Useful for public transport (buses, trains)

Modified from Fig 1 in IEEE 802.16mmr-05/032

802.16j Requirements
• Backwards compatible frame structure supporting both relay frames and legacy frames • Definition of RF requirements including the relay link frequency, duplexing and channel B/W • Relay shall support network entry for the mobile station QoS and HARQ shall be supported by relay as defined in legacy 16e systems • Relay supports mobile station handover • The specification shall support relay mobility • The use of multiple antennas to enhance the spectral efficiency of the relay link • The support of more than one relay hop between MMRBS and MS
– http://www.ieee802.org/16/relay/docs/80216j-06_016r1.pdf

802.16j Status
• Failed letter ballot 9-25-07
– 67% (needed 75%) http://ieee802.org/16/ballots/ballot28/report28. html

• Last open draft
– http://www.ieee802.org/16/relay/docs/80216j06_026r4.zip

Mesh in 802.16-2004
• Mesh protocols not fully specified in 802.16-2004
– Network Entry supported, some neighbor services – Routing? Congestion?

• 802.16-2004.3 (WirelessMAN OFDM) PHY includes frames for Mesh operation between subscribers • SkyPilot is developing a layer for Mesh operation that sits atop 802.16-2004.3
– Targeted for Public safety applications in 4.9 GHz band – http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/news/article.php/3549846

• 802.16f should aid creation of fixed mesh networks • 802.16i may help for mobile devices • If market demand exists, would likely be an amendment that specifies mechanisms for mesh as 802.11s did for 802.11’s ad-hoc mode

802.16m
• • • Intended to be 4G (satisfy requirements of IMT-Advanced) http://www.ieee802.org/16/tgm/ Requirements still being defined
– – – – – – – – – – – http://www.ieee802.org/16/tgm/docs/80216m-07_002r1.pdf Backwards compatible with 802.16j Support MMR (802.16j), though not specifically part of the standard Will define new profile WirelessMAN-OFDMA/2008 Support interoperability with other systems Bands under 6 GHz Bandwidths of 5-20 MHz (others may be used based on ITU and operator requirements) TDD and FDD Support MIMO and beamforming Mobile expected to have 1 transmit and 2 receive antennas Support E-911 services

IEEE C802.16m-07/002r1

More Draft 802.16m requirements
• • • Minimum Peak Rate
– Downlink 6.5 bps/Hz – Uplink 2.8 bps/Hz

Latency less than 802.16e Radio Resource Management
– Reporting, interference management – Multicast broadcast service – “High-resolution” location determination

• • • • • •

Internetworking with:
– 802.11 3GPP, 3GPP2

Coverage optimized for 5 km, functional to 30-100 km Optimized for low mobility (<15kph), maintain connection up to 350 kph Optimized for contiguous spectrum but support discontiguous Reuse/share bandwidth with legacy systems Direct migration from 802.16e

IEEE C802.16m-07/002r1

802.16m Usage models
• High data rates and improved performance in legacy cell sizes • Very high data rates in smaller cells • High mobility support • Deployment with MMR • Co-deployment with other networks • Collocation/coexistence with PAN/LAN/WAN

WiMAX Summary

Points to Remember
• Very flexible standard
– Modulation, subcarriers, coding, antenna arrays

• Big performance gain from Turbo codes and closed-loop MIMO • Different scheduling/subcarrier allocation algorithms work better in different environments • WiMAX receiving massive commercial interest at the moment
– Sprint is way out in front with XOhm in the US – WiBRO has been doing well in Korea for a while

• Intel is a little late, but will likely dominate
– “WiMAX Inside” push on laptops – Backing service providers, so they’ve doubled their bet

Points to Remember
• People are already looking towards 802.16m • WiMAX is emerging primarily as a cellular competitor
– Previously viewed as more of a backhaul

• Lots of software radio based implementations coming out
– picoChip,

Useful WiMAX Resources
• WiMAX Standards
– http://ieee802.org/16/pubs/80216-2004.html – http://www.ieee802.org/16/pubs/80216e.html

• Mobile System Profile Rev 1.4 (May 2007)
– http://www.wimaxforum.org/technology/documents/wi max_forum_mobile_system_profile_v1_40.pdf

• WiMAX News
– http://www.ieee802.org/16/relay/docs/80216j06_026r4.zip

• WiMAX Forum:
– http://www.wimaxforum.org/home

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful