White paper

Designing, Operating
and Optimizing
Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Executive summary
Contents
2. Executive summary
3. The pressures of booming
mobile broadband use
4. Heterogeneous network
deployment and
expansion roadmaps
6. Heterogeneous network
optimization

6. Traffic steering
and mobility
management

8. Interference
management

10. Energy saving

11. Heterogeneous network

configuration
12. Heterogeneous network
fault management

Growing demand for low-cost mobile

broadband connectivity is driving
the development of heterogeneous
cellular networks. A range of different
radio access technologies (RATs)
and WiFi will all co-exist, and macro
cells will be complemented by a
multitude of smaller cells, such
as micro, pico and femto cells.
Such heterogeneous systems will
be significantly more complex to
manage than todays networks and
therefore require fully Self Organizing
Networks (SON).
This white paper gives an overview
of the key challenges inherent in the
design, operation and optimization

HSPA /
LTE

HSPA+ /
LTE

GSM /
HSPA

of heterogeneous networks and

explains how Nokia Siemens
Networks can help communications
service providers (CSPs) address
them. It discusses how to design
roadmaps for expansion and how to
optimize systems to manage traffic
steering and mobility, interference and
energy saving. It also explains how
to automate configuration and fault
management in order to keep OPEX
under control. Its clear that a unified
approach to managing heterogeneous
networks is essential to achieve
the necessary flexibility and costefficiency while delivering the kind of
seamless broadband connectivity that
consumers increasingly demand.

HSPA+
Femto

GSM

LTE
Femto

13. The future of networks

14. Meeting the challenge

Wide area

Medium area

Hot spots

Figure 1. Heterogeneous networks combine a range of radio access technologies.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Indoor

WiFi

The pressures of booming

mobile broadband use
A combination of exponentially
growing demand for mobile data
and flat-lining average revenue per
user (ARPU) makes it tough for
CSPs looking to evolve their mobile
communications networks. The
rules of the game are changing, as
mobile indoor capacity becomes
more valuable and machine-tomachine (M2M) communications
take off and create demand for more
diverse services. At the same time,
factors such as energy efficiency are
emerging as crucial KPIs.
Increasing traffic, novel services, cost
and energy considerations will all lead
to significantly more diverse cellular
networks in the future:
Multi-RAT (sometimes the result
of legacy infrastructure, catering
for multiple cellular standards and
fixed-mobile convergence).
Multi-layered (with macro,
micro, pico and femto cells
of different size).
Multi-vendor (where different
access points have been provided
by different vendors).

This means that the design, operation

and optimization of future networks
present novel challenges and require
new methodologies. While a lot of
hype has already been generated
around specific topics such as
interference management or SON, the
aim of this white paper is to look at the
big picture regarding heterogeneous
systems in general. There are two
key questions:
What will drive particular
heterogeneous deployments
and how can a CSP determine
which is the right roadmap for
expansion?
What are the key challenges
inherent in operating
and optimizing complex
heterogeneous systems and how
can CSPs address them?

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

 Heterogeneous network
deployment and
expansion roadmaps
Multi-RAT
The reason for multi-RAT
deployments is simple. Typically,
CSPs already have wide-area
GSM coverage and WCDMA/
HSPA in densely populated urban
areas. Theyre probably deploying
LTE in hotspots or (in, e.g., the
case of Germany) in rural areas in
order to exploit the digital dividend.
They may also consider re-farming
existing GSM frequency bands to
WCDMA/HSPA or LTE, so they can
update their equipment gradually
to more spectrally efficient radio
standards. Its likely that GSM,
WCDMA/HSPA and LTE will
continue to coexist and evolve in the
long term for several reasons:
GSM may be the only system
providing ubiquitous voice
coverage and may be used
for M2M.
Investments in HSPA may not yet
be amortized.

Long-term spectrum licenses

may require CSPs to use a
particular RAT.
A large population of legacy
terminals can force CSPs to
keep legacy air interfaces
running.
The cellular standards already
mentioned will also coexist with
technologies such as WiFi. In
fact, offloading data traffic from
cellular air interfaces to WiFi is
highly attractive for CSPs from a
cost point of view, allowing them to
reduce traffic in 3G/4G networks
and use comparatively inexpensive
backhaul infrastructure. A mobile
CSP that also owns the WiFi
access infrastructure can deliver a
seamless data experience for end
users.
Multi-layer
Many networks will include an
overlay of cells of different sizes

using a single RAT. For instance,

outdoor terminals may be served by
a combination of micro and macro
cells. Pico cells may provide both
outdoor and indoor coverage in
hotspots such as train stations or
shopping malls with a typical cell
radius of up to 200 meters. Femto
cells are used indoors in cells of no
more than 10-25m radius. While
pico cells are deployed by a CSP,
femto cells are typically userdeployed in the form of private home
base stations, often denoted as
home (e)NBs or H(e)NBs. Theres
also a distinction between open and
closed subscriber group (OSG/CSG)
femto cells, where CSG cells serve
a constrained set of users. Figure 2
shows a typical multi-layer network.
The trend towards multi-layer
deployments is driven by the need
to provide better indoor services and
respond to heterogeneous traffic
demands, as well as by cost and
energy efficiency considerations.

Indoors

Femto cell

Indoors

Femto cell

Cell radius

Tx power

Macro cell

> 300m

46 dBm

Micro cell

100-300m

40 dBm

Pico cell

< 200m

> 24 dBm

Femto cell

10-25m

< 20 dBm

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Figure 2. Illustration of a typical multi-layer setup.

Relaying is an interesting option

in cases where a wired backhaul
connection between the base station
and the network is uneconomical or
technically unfeasible, and where an
in-band or out-band backhaul overthe-air to the donor cell is preferable.
Terminals typically experience relay
cells as individual layers in the system.
How can CSPs determine the
right expansion roadmap?
An optimal network expansion
roadmap depends on various CSPand location-specific parameters and
assumptions, such as:

traffic demand, user mobility

and revenue forecast for a
particular area.
cost-related aspects (such as
backhaul infrastructure cost, site
rental, labor and energy).
general strategic decisions
regarding services to be provided
and the metric to be optimized
(such as ubiquitous connectivity
anytime and for anybody vs. peak
data rates for certain consumers).
Establishing an expansion roadmap
requires sophisticated performance
evaluation methodology, detailed
cost models and measurement
data. The impact of the uncertainty
inherent in parameters such as
traffic forecasts can be mitigated by
investing in flexible base stations,
where changes can be made later
on via a software upgrade.

existing legacy infrastructure in

terms of sites, base stations and
backhaul.
the availability of spectrum and
terminals for specific RATs.

Figure 3 shows an example of an

expansion roadmap.
The traffic distribution can vary
widely throughout a given network.
This, combined with the practical
deployment limitations of different
upgrade options, means that CSPs
may pursue several expansion paths
simultaneously in one network.
CSPs need an automated process
to identify which parts of the network
need which upgrade. In the long run,
many CSPs will also be managing
networks in which equipment from
different vendors is used in the same
geographical area. In this case, it is
particularly important that all network
management functions are multivendor-capable.

WCDMA/HSPA

Existing macro sites

Upgrade to 2nd carrier

Upgrade to 3rd carrier

Upgrade to 6-sector

Add HSPA macro sites

LTE

New LTE RAT

at existing HSPA sites
The take-up time of
LTE strongly depends
on spectrum and LTE
terminal availability

Add HSPA micro cells

Upgrade to the 2nd carrier

Upgrade to 6-sector
Add LTE micro cells
(new or reused HSPA micro sites)

Figure 3. An expansion roadmap for an urban scenario with strongly increasing traffic.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Heterogeneous network

optimization
Operating and optimizing complex
heterogeneous systems presents
several key challenges, such as
how to distribute traffic efficiently
between cells, RATs and layers
while guaranteeing seamless user
mobility, how to alleviate the impact
of interference and how to adapt the
system efficiently to meet changing
traffic demand.

Traffic steering and

mobility management
Traffic steering allows CSPs to
optimize their resources, improve
the way users experience services
and minimize power consumption
by directing the traffic to a particular
RAT or layer. Traffic steering is a
tool for reducing OPEX and limiting
or postponing CAPEX, especially in
complex heterogeneous systems.
It works hand-in-hand with mobility
management to ensure a reasonable
number of handovers and avoid radio
link failures. It also needs to consider
other factors such as the capabilities
of the terminals and network, the
delivery of services and quality
of service (QoS), the load in
different RATs and layers and
power consumption.
Traffic steering in
different standards
Both WCDMA/HSPA and LTE can
perform traffic steering in various
ways. These are typically divided
into those that apply to terminals in
the idle state and those that deal
with the connected state. In the idle
state, the terminals are responsible
for measuring their environment and
deciding which RAT or layer to camp
on. The network can influence these
decisions by applying various means:
Basic biasing involves the
provisioning of cell reselection
hysteresis, (the signal power
thresholds used to prompt cell
reselection) and cell quality offsets
to terminals.
Hierarchical cell structure
in WCDMA/HSPA enables
prioritization for cell reselection.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Absolute priorities can be

assigned for intra- or inter-RAT
carriers to terminals.
Cell barring forbids terminals from
camping on any cells that are
included on a black list.
In a connected state, the network
is responsible for triggering a handover between cells, RATs or layers.
Hand-over decisions are usually
based on terminal measurements, but
WCDMA/HSPA and LTE networks
have various options to influence the
scope of these measurements. The
challenge is to balance the need to let
terminals take enough measurements
to ensure maximum offload and
smooth mobility without taking so
many that the measurements drain
the terminal batteries and degrade
network performance. In general,
all the traffic steering and mobility
management concepts used for idle
and connected state terminals have
to be well-aligned. Further, mobility
robustness optimization (MRO) is
required to identify the root cause of
any radio link failures and call drops,
and to adjust traffic steering and
mobility management parameters as
a result.
Femto cells present special
challenges, since they may be
deployed in large numbers and are
typically outside the CSPs control.
A user can move or turn off a femto
base station at any time, for example.
Mobility is also difficult in the context
of closed subscriber group (CSG)
femtos, and there may be confusion
over cell identities in very dense
deployments owing to limited sets
of scrambling codes or physical cell
identifiers. While both WCDMA/HSPA
and LTE now provide various options
to indicate femto proximity, CSG
identification and disambiguation,
mobility in dense deployments
still calls for sophisticated
proprietary solutions.
Carrier aggregation techniques may
make it possible to schedule traffic
flexibly on multiple (co-located)
layers using simple radio resource
management rather than hand-overs.

HSPA-LTE carrier aggregation will

potentially enable a similar approach
for multi-RAT traffic steering.
Offloading as much traffic as possible
to femto or WiFi cells and balancing
the remaining load between the
remaining layers and RATs helps
CSPs to use their infrastructure
efficiently and offer a homogeneous
QoS for end users. Table 1
summarizes specific solutions for
certain scenarios.
The outlook for traffic steering
and mobility management
There are various ways of achieving
traffic steering and mobility
management in WCDMA/HSPA
and LTE, but they all depend on
networks performing well in two
fundamental areas:
Networks must use the available
resources efficiently and adjust
biases and priorities appropriately.
They must also provide terminals
with up-to-date cell lists and
black lists.
Networks should optimize the
frequency at which terminals
perform measurements.
Clearly, both of these issues
require base stations to monitor
their neighborhood. More than this,
however, CSPs looking for end-toend traffic steering need a unified
heterogeneous network management
solution that spans all RATs and
layers, as well as the backhaul
infrastructure and core network.
Future standardization work
will focus on functions such as
introducing speed-dependent black
list configurations, enhancing the
proximity indication procedure
for CSG cells and adding cell
type indicators to the mobility
state definition.

 Scenario / use case

Recommended idle mode solution

Recommended connected mode solution

Macro-micro / macro-pico deployment

Use a scenario-specific extent of basic biasing

to perform small cell range extensions and
promote macro offload.

Apply cell-specific offsets to terminal

measurements to enlarge small cell
hand-over areas.

In WCDMA/UMTS: Primary scrambling code

(PSC) ranges connected to femtos should be
broadcast to terminals.

Use of proximity indications to promote

hand-over to femto cells with minimal
terminal measurement.

Macro-femto deployment
(CSG-aware terminals)






Macro-femto deployment
(Legacy WCDMA/UMTS terminals)

Inter-RAT traffic steering between
WCDMA/UMTS and LTE
(Low LTE terminal penetration)

In LTE: Physical cell identifier (PCI) ranges of

CSG cells to be broadcasted to terminals.

Adjust biasing concepts and neighbor cell lists to incentivize terminals to or prevent
them from measuring and accessing CSG femto cells.

Use absolute priorities to enforce

offload to LTE.

Inter-RAT traffic steering between
Adjust absolute priorities according to load,
WCDMA/UMTS and LTE
ideally use dedicated absolute priorities
(Medium/high LTE terminal penetration)
(sent to terminals after connection release).


WiFi offload

Not applicable if all LTE-capable terminals

are kept in LTE.

In WCDMA/UMTS: Adjust neighbor cell lists

(NCLs) according to load.
In LTE: Adjust black lists according to load.

End users want a seamless data service experience in which their device is always effortlessly
connected to either cellular network or WiFi access point. Device management and automated
network discovery functions allow CSPs to manage this aspect of traffic steering efficiently, and
logically integrate WiFi networks into their core network.

Fast-moving terminals
In WCDMA/UMTS: Terminals determine speed
(i.e. preventing such terminals
themselves, switch to high mobility state and
from using small cells)
refrain from using small cells via hierarchical

cell structures.


In LTE: Terminals determine speed

themselves and obtain scaling factors

influencing cell reselection.

In WCDMA/UMTS: Network shall

estimate terminal speed based on
previous hand-overs, then provide
neighbor cell lists (NCLs) containing
only macro cells to high-speed terminals.
In LTE: Network shall estimate terminal
speed via history information, restrict
inter-frequency measurements and
provide modified black lists accordingly.

Table 1: Recommended traffic steering and mobility management solutions.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Liq

Interference management
Inter-cell interference is already one
of the limiting factors in todays mobile
communications systems, especially
in dense, urban deployments. The
problem is even worse in the context
of multi-layer networks, as illustrated
in Figure 4.
If both the macro cell and the
smaller cell are using the same
radio resources (so-called cochannel deployment), the following
interference problems can occur:
In the downlink, a terminal
assigned to the macro base station
may see strong interference
coming from a small cell, leading to
a so-called macro layer coveragehole. This problem is particularly
pronounced if the smaller cell
serves a CSG, in which case a
terminal may be very close to
a small cell but not allowed to
connect to it (case A). On the other
hand, a terminal served by a small
cell may see strong interference
from a macro cell, in particular if
a cell range extension is used to
enforce offload (case B).
In the uplink, a terminal assigned
to the macro cell but close
to the cell-edge will typically
create strong interference to the
small cell (case C). However,
this degradation of small cell
performance is often acceptable,

since each terminal connected

to a small cell typically accesses
a much larger share of radio
resources. A more problematic
aspect is the uplink interference
that a potentially large number of
small cell terminals may generate
towards one macro cell (case D).
Interference can be attenuated or
increased if the cell border is shifted
towards the larger or smaller cell, for
example, by traffic steering or mobility
management.
How can CSPs mitigate
interference problems?
Antenna downtilt is a common
approach to avoid interference in a
homogeneous macro deployment,
where it can be achieved flexibly
using smart antenna concepts. In a
multi-layer context, however, downtilt
optimization is rarely applicable, since
CSPs need to ensure macro umbrella
coverage and so tend to leave macro
cell downtilt untouched. In addition,
the antennas used for micro, pico and
femto cells are often mounted at a low
level, so that downtilt is not suitable.
Smart resource reuse is required
when interference cannot be avoided
by physical means. It may be better
to split interfering entities onto
orthogonal resources (divided by time
or frequency) and abandon the idea
of fully using the resources in each

cell. An optimal scheme would let

adjacent cells cooperatively decide
upon resource usage, requiring
complex signaling between cells. A
more pragmatic approach is to employ
static resource reuse concepts:
Reserve some resources for
macro-only, small-cell-only or
constrained usage - so-called
fractional frequency reuse. Escape
carrier concepts are a good
example, where dedicated carriers
are reserved for macro usage
only. LTE Release 10 includes a
feature that allows recurring time
slots to be reserved for some
layers, referred to as enhanced
inter-cell interference coordination
(eICIC). eICIC only works if base
stations can be synchronized and
terminals have good measurement
capabilities.
Certain layers may be allowed
to access some resources only
with a reduced transmission
power. This is called soft frequency
reuse.
Power control parameters can be
adjusted to either define a power
offset to be used by all the elements
in a particular layer and/or to apply
power capping. This is an effective
way to trade the performance of some
layers against others, for example,
by improving macro cell-edge
performance at the price of small cell
performance.

B: Femto terminals seeing

DL macro interference,
esp. under cell range
extension

A: Macro terminal

Many pico cells

seeing strong
downlink interference
from small cell

D: Many small cell

terminals creating uplink

interference to macro cell

C: Macro terminal creating

strong uplink
interference to small cell

Macro cell

Figure 4. Major interference problems in multi-layer configurations.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Pico cell

Optimized interference
management solutions
A combination of smart resource
reuse and power control generally
provides the best solution.
Table 2 summarizes this best use of
this approach in different scenarios.
Figure 5 shows how a particular power
control adaptation and escape carrier
concept can trade femto for macro
performance in the downlink.

0.5
Escape carrier +
power control

High femto density

5th percentile macro user

throughput (Mbps)

0.4

The outlook for

interference management
CSPs must take inter-layer
interference into consideration in
the operation and optimization of
heterogeneous networks. While
both WCDMA/UMTS and LTE
provide the basic functionalities
to address interference issues,
efficient interference management
requires a unified heterogeneous
network solution that includes the
entire network setup. It must also be
well-aligned with traffic steering and
mobility management.

0.3
Escape
carrier
0.2
Co-channel +
power control

0.1

Co-channel
0

10

20

30

40

Median femto user throughput (Mbps)

Figure 5. The impact of power control adaptation and escape carrier concepts on downlink
performance in LTE macro-femto scenarios (CSG case).

Several improvements are under

consideration for LTE Release 11,
including enhanced terminal receivers,
improved eICIC and autonomous
carrier-based interference
management. Autonomous
component carrier selection (ACCS)
Scenario / use case

Low femto density

is being discussed, in which base

stations sense the use of certain
carriers in their neighborhood and
adjust their resource consumption
accordingly. Coordinated multipoint (CoMP) techniques are also
Recommended resource usage

being discussed for heterogeneous

networks. These allow network
operators to exploit interference as
useful signal energy, rather than
treating it as a burden.

Recommended power control adaptation

Macro-femto deployment
Resource reuse (co-channel), but with one

carrier free of femto CSG cells if possible.

Downlink: Femto power calibration based on

network listener mode (NLM), where femtos
sense the level of interference around them.

Uplink: Power capping of WCDMA/UMTS

femto terminals and customized power
control setting for LTE femto terminals.
Mobile voice (16kbps)

Mobile tablet

Macro-micro or macro-pico deployment

Dedicated micro or pico carrier is preferred,

but co-channel operation is also feasible. In

the latter case, eICIC should be used in the

context of small cell range extension.

Mobile laptop

Mobile handheld

Downlink: No power control

adaptation needed.
Uplink: Power capping of WCDMA/
UMTS small cell terminals and customized
power control setting for LTE small cell
terminals for co-channel deployment.

Table 2: Recommended interference management schemes for multi-layer HSPA/LTE.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Energy saving
Energy efficiency is increasingly
important in terms of reducing both
CO2 emissions and costs. Since the
base stations consume the lions
share of energy in a typical network,
efficiency is particularly crucial in
dense heterogeneous systems.
Energy saving through turning
off base stations
While replacing old base stations
with more power-efficient single-RAN
equipment is the most intuitive option,
major savings can also result from
enabling systems to turn off access
points when theyre not needed. In
a homogeneous network of cells,
all but a certain pattern of cells
might be turned off, reducing the
cell density and increasing the size
of the remaining cells. In multi-layer
deployments, CSPs may switch off
the smaller layer of cells in off-peak
situations, so that the larger cells
can take over without changing the
coverage area.

10

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

While it is straightforward to
automatically turn off an access point
when it experiences zero load for
some time, deciding when to turn it
on again could be trickier. There are
several potential solutions:
Turn base stations on or off
based on a predefined schedule
generated from historical traffic
statistics.
Periodically switch on all hotspots
and then switch off those that
experience low load.
Reactivate hotspots when a certain
IoT (Interference over Thermal
Noise) threshold is exceeded, since
this indicates that nearby terminals
are transmitting to an adjacent cell.
An optimized approach
to energy saving
Looking at todays multi-RAT and
emerging multi-layer networks, a
centralized operations, administration
and maintenance (OAM)-based
solution is the most promising energy
saving solution in the short and

medium term. However, this may be

problematic in multi-vendor networks
and in large networks where a
distributed approach could react faster
to changing traffic conditions. Hence,
a fully standardized solution with local
decisions taken by base stations and
exchanged between them looks more
promising in the long term.

Heterogeneous network
configuration
Efficient operation of heterogeneous
networks requires each network
element to be well defined in terms of
its particular role and location within
the network, and to be context-aware.
Clearly, this should be automated as
far as possible to control OPEX.
Auto-connectivity and
auto-commissioning
Automatic provisioning and
configuration of new network elements
reduces the time and effort involved
in getting newly installed hardware
up and running. One simple solution
is to use RFID site tags or GPS
information to automatically keep track
of equipment deployed at different
sites and then obtain the required
configuration information from the
OAM system, as shown in Figure 6.
An alternative approach for automatic
relay-node configuration is for a relay
to connect itself initially to an arbitrary
base station as if it were a terminal in

order to access the configuration

data. It then sets up the feeder
link to its donor base station and
begins relaying.

different layers and RATs. The amount

of information must be balanced
carefully against the effort of making
such measurements.

Automatic neighbor relations

Optimized ANR solutions

After configuration, a network

element has to obtain and update
information on its environment in
order to adjust traffic steering, mobility
management and interference
management settings. In particular,
it needs up-to-date knowledge of
neighboring cells, since missing or
newly added neighbors can result
in poor performance and call drops.
Automatic neighbor relations (ANR)
depend on terminals to detect and
report neighboring cells, providing a
very efficient and always-on way
of keeping base stations updated,
even if radio conditions change. In the
context of heterogeneous networks,
WCDMA/HSPA and LTE use different
techniques to let terminals discover

While terminal-based environment

discovery is certainly a very flexible
and self-adapting mechanism in a
changing network topology, it may be
several years to establish a sufficient
number of terminals capable of
supporting ANR among the terminal
population. Solutions based on
network management systems are
therefore still an attractive option. In
this case neighbor cells identifier and
related IP addresses are provided by
the OAM system. Hybrid architectures
can exploit both the information
collected by terminals, which is
specifically important in the context
of user-deployed femto cells, and
information from the OAM system.

Location / site info

Location

or

Network element

Database
OAM system

HW-ID

HW-ID

Location / site info

HW-ID
Site info

Config Data

(obtained through RFID)

Config Data

Figure 6. Automatic site identification and hardware-to-site-mapping.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

11

Heterogeneous network
fault management
A lot of man hours are already
invested in fault detection, diagnosis
and compensation in todays
networks. This effort will become
prohibitive in heterogeneous
networks, to a point where the high
number of network elements cannot
be managed in a conventional way.
Automatic cell degradation detection,
diagnosis and healing functionality will
be crucial for CSPs looking to control
their OPEX. While the existence of
multiple layers and RATs offers some
redundancy to alleviate the need
for automatic healing, the existence
of user-deployed femto nodes will
require novel fault management.
Faults generally fall into one of
two categories:
Obvious faults in hardware and
software are easy to detect, since
the equipment typically initiates an
alarm.
Other faults are more difficult
to detect, such as RF failures
(antenna direction and connectivity
issues, power amplifier
degradation and so on), scheduling
problems or persistent hand-over
failures because of the wrong
parameter settings. Sleeping
cells are especially problematic.
These cells are not functioning at
all and accept no traffic, but create
no alarm.
The first step in fault management
is to differentiate between normal
and abnormal system behavior. Any
symptoms of abnormal behavior are

12

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

linked to a set of potential causes,

in most cases based on empirical
knowledge supplied to the system
by human operators. In order to
locate specific areas affected by a
problem - such as interference around
a new, user-placed base station, or
hand-over problems in a certain area
- CSPs should consider terminalcentric measurement data, including
timestamps and location information.
This enables them to focus on the
problem from the terminal perspective.
What happens when
a failure is detected?
Often, the most intuitive response to a
failure will be to reset the affected cell
and wait for it to start working again.
If this does not resolve the problem,
further action may be taken:
If a pico or femto cell fails, the
macro layer of the same RAT or a
different RAT may compensate. If
the problem persists, the neighbor
relationships of adjacent cells will
have to be adapted.
If a macro cell fails, smaller cells
may initially compensate for the
reduced coverage, while in the
long term so-called cell outage
compensation (COC) may be used.
This adjusts the transmit power or
downtilt of adjacent macro cells to
re-establish coverage.
If the behavior of a small cell
degrades the performance of a
macro cell, the long-term solution
might be to turn the small cell off.

The outlook for fault management

In summary, the key to fault
management in heterogeneous
networks is to correlate the detection
and configuration management
information from across the different
layers and RATs, diagnose the
problem and decide on a solution.
Often the quality of the decision is
more important than the quality of the
actual solution itself. A well-designed
and aligned fault management
function can significantly reduce the
extent of human troubleshooting
as well as the time required until a
degradation is rectified, leading to
potentially vast OPEX savings.

The future
of networks
The arrival of coordinated multi-point
(CoMP) techniques will add a new
dimension to heterogeneous networks.
CoMP techniques may be based
on baseband pooling and hotelling,
in which the signal processing for
multiple cells is performed in a central
location, or even virtualized in a
cloud RAN.
New cognitive concepts will add yet
another dimension of flexible and
optimized spectrum utilization to the
game. These include ideas such
as femto frequency and/or network
sharing, in which multiple CSPs make
use of the same femto access points,
share parts of their core network or

share the same spectrum bands in a

flexible way.
The introduction of smart sensing,
geo-location and database information
sharing will deliver more agile use
of resources and increased overall
spectrum utilization, both of which will
help to drive down the total cost
of ownership.
All these developments will increase
the complexity of operating and
optimizing future cellular networks
even further. This makes the need
for truly unified heterogeneous
network solutions even greater.

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

13

Meeting the challenge

Mobile CSPs will undoubtedly be
investing in heterogeneous networks
over the next few years, complete
with multiple RATs, multiple layers
and multiple vendors. Traffic growth,
ubiquitous demand for high-quality
services, cost and energy efficiency
considerations are all driving them
that way. While this general trend
is undeniable, the precise choice of
technologies and the corresponding
expansion roadmap that will best suit
each CSPs situation are less obvious.
Dense heterogeneous systems
clearly present novel challenges,
thanks to the high number of base
stations (many of which may be userdeployed) and the resulting complex
interdependencies. CSPs will meet
these challenges with a co-ordinated
set of modular solutions:
Plugnplay. It is essential for OPEX
reduction that all base stations are
self-configurable.
Neighborhood-aware base

stations. Network elements must

measure and share information
about their neighborhood. This is
best done through a hybrid solution
based on a network management
system in conjunction with ANR.
Smart and robust end-to-end traffic
steering. Networks must rely on a
range of context-aware, efficient
and aligned traffic steering and
mobility management strategies.
Minimization of terminal-based
carrier and cell measurements.
Such measurements must be
minimized to prevent them from
sucking the life out of batteries and
impairing performance.
Smart resource reuse and
advanced power control are
essential to alleviate interference.
Smart energy management adapts
the active cell density to traffic
demand.
Automatic cell degradation
detection and a network
management system enable an
effective response to failures.

Nokia Siemens Networks supports

CSPs as they wrestle with the
increasing complexities of evolving
networks. We build smart and unified
heterogeneous networks that enable
all network RATs and layers to be
viewed as a logically unified network
with automated management via
the award winning Nokia Siemens
Networks SON Suite, seamless
interworking and an uncompromising
quality of experience for end users even in a multi-vendor environment.
In other words, we provide a unified
approach that enables CSPs to
serve the growing demand for mobile
data while keeping costs firmly
under control.

Unified Heterogeneous Network Approach

Configuration

Optimization

Auto-Connectivity/
Commissioning

Traffic Steering &

Mobility Management

Deployment

Fault Management
Automatic Neighbour
Relations

Interference
Management

Energy Saving

Neighbourhoodaware base stations

Plug n play

Smart energy
management

Minimization of
UE-based measurement

Smart power control

and resource reuse
Smart E2E traffic steering

Figure 7. Unified heterogeneous network key building blocks.

14

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

Automatic cell
degradation detection

Abbreviations
ACCS
Autonomous Component Carrier Selection
ANR
Automatic Neighbor Relations
ARPU
Average Revenue Per User
CAPEX
Capital Expenditure
COC
Cell Outage Compensation
CoMP
Coordinated Multi-Point
CSG
Closed Subscriber Group
CSP
Communications Service Provider
eICIC
Enhanced Inter-Cell Interference Coordination
(e)NB
Enhanced Node B
GSM Global System for Mobile Communications
H(e)NB
Home Enhanced Node B
HSPA
High Speed Packet Access
LTE
Long-Term Evolution
M2M
Machine-to-Machine
MRO
Mobility Robustness Optimization
NCL
Neighbor Cell List
NLM
Network Listener Mode
OAM Operations, Administration and Maintenance
OPEX
Operating Expenditure
PCI
Physical Cell Identifier
PSC
Primary Scrambling Code
QoS
Quality of Service
RAT
Radio Access Technology
SON
Self-Organizing Network
UMTS
Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
WCDMA
Wideband Code Division Multiple Access

Unified Heterogeneous Networks

15

Nokia Siemens Networks Corporation

P.O. Box.1
FI-020022 NOKIA SIEMENS NETWORKS
Finland
Visiting address
Karaportti 3, ESPOO, Finland
Switchboard +358 71 400 4000

Product code: C401-00727-WP-201107-1-EN

Copyright 2011 Nokia Siemens Networks.

All rights reserved.
A license is hereby granted to download and print a
copy of this document for personal use only. No other
license to any other intellectual property rights is granted
herein. Unless expressly permitted herein, reproduction,
transfer, distribution or storage of part or all of the
contents in any form without the prior written permission
of Nokia Siemens Networks is prohibited.
The content of this document is provided AS IS,
without warranties of any kind with regards its accuracy
or reliability, and specifically excluding all implied
warranties, for example of merchantability, fitness for
purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall
Nokia Siemens Networks be liable for any special,
indirect or consequential damages, or any damages
whatsoever resulting form loss of use, data or profits,
arising out of or in connection with the use of the
document. Nokia Siemens Networks reserves the right
to revise the document or withdraw it at any time without
prior notice.
Nokia is a registered trademark of Nokia Corporation,
Siemens is a registered trademark of Siemens AG.
The wave logo is a trademark of Nokia Siemens
Networks Oy. Other company and product names
mentioned in this document may be trademarks of
their respective owners, and they are mentioned for
identification purposes only.

www.nokiasiemensnetworks.com