See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/334030028

LTE-LAA and WiFi in 5G NR Unlicensed: Fairness, Optimization and Win-Win

Solution

Conference Paper · June 2019

DOI: 10.1109/SmartWorld-UIC-ATC-SCALCOM-IOP-SCI.2019.00292

CITATION READS
1 758

1 author:

Yayu Gao
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
36 PUBLICATIONS   149 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Network Simulation View project

Next-generation IEEE 802.11ax standard View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Yayu Gao on 11 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 LTE-LAA and WiFi in 5G NR Unlicensed:
Fairness, Optimization and Win-Win Solution
Yayu Gao
School of Electronic Information and Communications
Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
Email: yayugao@hust.edu.cn
Abstract—LTE Licensed Assisted Access (LTE-LAA) has been
considered as a promising solution for harmonious coexistence
with WiFi in the 5G NR Unlicensed. In this paper, we study the
open question of how to adaptively tune system parameters to
maximize the total network sum rate with the prerequisite that
the 3GPP notion of fairness is guaranteed between LAA and
WiFi in LTE-WiFi-coexisting networks. Explicit expressions of the
maximum network sum rate and the corresponding optimal initial
backoff window sizes of WiFi nodes and LAA UEs are obtained,
and verified by simulation results. The analysis further shows
that there exists a win-win solution for LAA design, where not
only the 3GPP fairness can always be maintained, but the new-
installed LTE-WiFi coexisting network can outperform a legacy
WiFi network as well. To achieve it, the transmission opportunity
(TXOP) of LAA needs to exceed a certain threshold. The analysis
provides direct guidance for network optimization and protocol
design for LTE-LAA and WiFi coexistence.
Index Terms—LTE, Licensed Assisted Access (LAA), Wi-Fi,
coexisting, fairness, optimization
I. I NTRODUCTION
The scarcity of available licensed spectrum relative to ex-
ponentiating network traffic growth has become a key limi-
tation in achieving the performance requirements for future
5G networks, such as 20 Gbps peak data rates [1]. To
overcome such bottlenecks, among other ideas, 3GPP Long
Term Evolution (LTE) is increasingly considering the use of
unlicensed spectrum. Consequently, a major focus has emerged
on enabling friendly coexistence between LTE and WiFi in 5G
NR Unlicensed. To tackle this issue, 3GPP introduced LTE-
LAA [2], [3], which adopts a listen-before-talk (LBT) based
random access mechanism similar to the carrier sense multiple
access (CSMA) based distributed coordination function (DCF)
in IEEE 802.11 [4].
As expected, how to achieve a notion of ’fair sharing’ for
LTE-LAA and WiFi coexistence has been of great interest to
both industry and academia. 3GPP has presented a fairness
definition for LTE-LAA/WiFi as follows: “the LAA design
should target fair coexistence with existing Wi-Fi networks
to not impact Wi-Fi services more than an additional Wi-Fi
network on the same carrier, with respect to throughput and
latency” [5]. [6]–[10] pursued exclusively either via (in-house)
network simulation or test-bed prototyping. Specifically, [9],
[10] demonstrated that WiFi performance can be severely de-
graded with the presence of LTE-LAA, while [6]–[8] claimed
that LTE and WiFi could fairly share the unlicensed spectrum,
and even see aggregate performance gains in some cases.
A number of research works have studied the proportional
fairness issue of LTE-WiFi-coexisting networks [11]–[14],
where each node achieves an identical fraction of time over the
common channel by tuning the system parameters. Neverthe-
less, little consensus has been reached on this important matter
due to non-public nature of simulation models and various
assumptions in analytical models.
Furthermore, in the above studies, the performance opti-
mization of the LTE-WiFi-coexisting networks is commonly
ignored. Given the wide deployment of legacy 802.11 WiFi
networks, if LAA expects to succeed in the market and even
replace some WiFi hot-spots, a more intriguing question is:
With the prerequisite of fair coexistence between LAA and
WiFi, can the heterogeneous LTE-WiFi-coexisting networks
achieve better performance than the legacy WiFi networks?
What is the maximum network sum rate than can be achieved
by a LTE-WiFi-coexisting network? How to properly tune the
system parameters to achieve it?
In this paper, we provide closed-form solutions to the
above open questions. We consider a coexistence scenario
with n(L) LTE-LAA nodes and n(W ) WiFi nodes, where
different types of nodes employ distinct initial backoff window
sizes. By extending a unified analytical framework proposed
for heterogeneous IEEE 802.11 WiFi networks in our recent
work [15], [17], the fairness-constrained network sum rate
optimization of LTE-WiFi-coexisting networks is derived as
an explicit function of the system parameters. To achieve it,
the initial backoff window sizes of LTE-LAA and WiFi nodes
need to be optimally adjusted according to the number of nodes
in each network.
The analysis further shows that there exists a win-win
solution for LAA design, where not only the 3GPP fairness
can always be guaranteed, the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network
can also achieve a higher maximum network sum rate than
the legacy pure WiFi network. To achieve it, the TXOP of
LAA needs to be higher than a certain threshold, which
is determined by the packet length of WiFi nodes and the
transmission rates of both WiFi and LTE-LAA nodes. If the
TXOP of LAA is lower than the threshold, on the other hand,
the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network can only achieve the same
maximum network sum rate as the legacy WiFi network, which
is, nevertheless, achieved at the cost of the starvation of the
LTE-LAA nodes. Therefore, the selection of TXOP value for
LTE-LAA is crucial for the rate performance of LTE-WiFi-
 :L)L$3 :L)L$3
:L)L$3
:L)L$3 :L)L$3
:L)L$3 /7(H1%
/7(H1%

(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Graphic illustration of a a) WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network (before replacement) and b) LTE-WiFi-coexisting network (after replacement).

coexisting networks. range as illustrated in Fig. 1a, the network is equivalent to a

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section single-BSS IEEE 802.11 DCF network. The maximum total
II presents the system model and preliminary analysis. Section network throughput λ̂W iF i
max , which is defined as the fraction
III presents how to maximize the network sum rate under the of time that is used for successful transmissions, in the WiFi-
3GPP fairness requirement, which is verified by simulation WiFi-coexisting network can be written as [15]
results in Section IV. Finally, concluding remarks are summa-  
1
rized in Section V. −W0 − (W )
e(1+1/τF )
λ̂W iF i
max =     . (1)
II. S YSTEM M ODEL AND P RELIMINARY A NALYSIS (W )
τF
(W )
τF −1
(W ) − 1− (W ) W 0 (W )
τT τT e(1+1/τF )
Consider a saturated WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network as il-
lustrated in Fig. 1a, where two WiFi networks collocate in where W0 (·) is the principal branch of the Lambert W func-
a local area. Denote the number of nodes in Network 1 and tion [16], τT
(W ) (W )
and τF denotes the holding time of HOL
Network 2 as n(L) and n(W ) , respectively. With the current packets in successful transmission and collision (in the unit
IEEE 802.11 standard, each node adopts identical backoff of time slots) of nodes in a WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network,
parameters, including the initial backoff window size W (W ) respectively. With the RTS/CTS mechanism, τT
(W ) (W )
and τF
and the maximum backoff stage K (W ) . When a node accesses can be written as
to the channel, it will transmit a packet payload of P L(W ) bits
with a transmission rate R(W ) Mbps. (W ) P L(W )
τT = + OH (2)
Now assume that the WiFi AP 1 in Network 1 is replaced R(W ) σ
by a LTE-LAA eNB, and the stations associated to AP 1 are and
then connected to the LTE eNB for transmissions, as illustrated RTS/BR+DIFS
(W )
τF = , (3)
in Fig. 1b. The LTE-LAA network operates on the same 20 σ
MHz channel at the 5 GHz unlicensed band with the WiFi respectively, where σ denotes the slot length and OH denotes
network. Assume that each node adopts identical initial backoff the overhead (in the unit of time slots) including the PHY
window size W (L) and the maximum backoff stage K (L) . In header, RTS, CTS and ACK frames that are transmitted with
contrast to WiFi nodes, when an LTE-LAA node accesses to a fixed basic rate (BR) and several interframe spaces, which
the channel, it is allowed to transmit for a TXOP duration T (L) can be written as
µs with a transmission rate R(L) . In this paper, we focus on the (PHY header+RTS+CTS+ACK)/BR+DIFS+3SIFS
effect of initial backoff window size on optimizing the network OH = .
σ
sum rate while maintaining the 3GPP fairness. Without loss (4)
of generality, we assume that all the groups have the same Note that the node throughput evaluates how efficient the
maximum backoff stage, i.e., K (W ) = K (L) = K. time is used for successful transmissions. It, however, does not
In the following, we will study the network performance reflect how much information can be transmitted in terms of bit
of the WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network and LTE-WiFi-coexisting per second. In real-life applications, the data rate performance
network as illustrated in Fig. 1a and Fig. 1b, respectively. is usually of more concern. Data rate is defined as the number
of information bits that are successfully transmitted per second.
A. WiFi-WiFi-coexisting Network The network sum rate D̂ is determined by 1) the network
For a WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network where two Wi-Fi APs throughput, 2) the fraction of time that is used for packet
collocate and all the nodes are in each other’s carrier sensing payload transmission in each successful transmission, and 3)
 W iF i
the transmission rate. The maximum network sum rate D̂max The steady-state probability of the channel being idle αW L
of the WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network can be written as can be obtained as [17]
P L(W ) 1
W iF i R(W ) σ αW L = . (9)
λ̂W iF i
· · (W ) P n(Ψ) τ (Ψ)
D̂max = R

max (W ) T
τT W (Ψ)
  1+τF −τF pA −ΨP n(Ψ)
−τFpA ln pA
1 (Ψ)
(W ) Ψ W
−P L /σW0 − (W )
e(1+1/τF )
= , (5)
Similarly, the sum rate D̂(W ) and D̂(L) of the WiFi network

(W ) (W ) (W ) 1
τF − (τT − τF )W0 − (W ) 2 and the LTE-LAA network 1 in the LTE-WiFi-coexisting
e(1+1/τF )
network can be written as
according to (1), where P L(W ) is the packet payload length (W )
n(W ) λout · P L(W )
for each transmission (in unit of bits) in the Wi-Fi network. D̂(W ) = (W )
(10)
στT
B. LTE-WiFi-coexisting Network
and
For a LTE-WiFi coexisting network where one Wi-Fi AP (L)
n(L) λout · T (L) · R(L)
and one LTE-LAA eNB collocate as illustrated in Fig. 1b, the D̂(L) = (L)
, (11)
στT
network can be regarded as a two-group network. In particular,
denote nodes in the Wi-Fi network 2 as Group W , and nodes respectively. The total sum rate of the LTE-WiFi-coexisting
in the LTE-LAA network 1 as Group L. Different from the network D̂W L is then given by
legacy wifi nodes in Group W , each node in Group L has a
different initial backoff window size W (L) , and transmits for D̂(W L) = D̂(W ) + D̂(L)
a duration of TXOP T (L) µs once it accesses to the channel n(W ) (W )
· P Lσ + W n(L)
(L) ·
T (L) R(L)
W (W ) σ
successfully. =  (W ) (W )
 (Ψ)
, (12)
1+τF −τF pA (W ) P n(Ψ) Pn(Ψ) τT
Firstly, nodes in distinct groups now have different holding −pA ln pA −τ F · W (Ψ) + W (Ψ)
Ψ Ψ
times in successful transmission state in such a LTE-WiFi
coexisting network. For each LTE-LAA node, the holding time by combining (7), (10) and (11).
(L)
in successful transmission τT of a LTE-LAA node can be
written as III. FAIRNESS -C ONSTRAINED M AXIMUM S UM R ATE FOR
(L) T (L)
+ D LT E
LTE-LAA AND W I -F I C OEXISTENCE
τT = , (6)
σ In this section, we will demonstrate how to optimize the
where DLT E is the delay for the next transmission which is network sum rate of the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network while
one LTE slot (500 µs) as a LTE-LAA node will not transmit maintaining the 3GPP fairness constraint. Based on that, we
until the beginning of the next LTE slot. will compare the rate performance of a LTE-WiFi-coexisting
The collision time, on the other hand, depends on the network and a WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network, and further
specific protocol that determines how each Wi-Fi AP/node obtain a win-win solution for LAA design to not only maintain
and LTE eNB/UE get aware of the collision. For simplicity, 3GPP fairness with WiFi, but outperform legacy pure WiFi
we assume that the LTE nodes adopt a similar scheme to the networks as well.
RTS/CTS access mechanism, and the collision time is the same
as that in the WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network, which is denoted A. Fairness-Constrained Maximum Sum Rate
(W )
as τF as given in (3). In the WiFi-WiFi coexisting network, each WiFi node
In a LTE-WiFi-coexisting network, the node throughput has the same backoff and transmission parameters and thus
(Ψ) maintain an identical data rate performance. To maintain 3GPP
λout of each node in Group Ψ is then given by
fairness, we need to guarantee that the sum rate of the WiFi
(Ψ)
(Ψ) 2αW L pA τT network 2 in the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network is no lower
λout = , (7)
than that in the WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network, i.e., D̂(W ) ≥
  
p p
W (Ψ) 2pAA−1 + 1− 2pAA−1 (2−2pA )K n(W ) W iF i 3GP P
n(L) +n(W )
· D̂max . Let D̂max denote the maximum total
Ψ = W, L, where pA and αW L denote the steady-state sum rate of the LTE-LAA and Wi-Fi coexisting network given
operating point and the steady-state probability of the channel the requirement of achieving the 3GPP fairness by optimally
(Ψ)
being idle in a LTE-WiFi-coexisting network, respectively. In tuning the initial backoff window sizes {W } of the LTE-
particular, pA is characterized as the non-zero root of the LAA and Wi-Fi nodes, which can be written as
following fixed-point equation [15], 3GP P
D̂max = max D̂W L (13)
  W (L) , W (W )
(Ψ)
 X 2n 
n(W )
p ≈ exp −   . (8) s.t. D̂ (W )
≥ W iF i
· D̂max (14)
p p

ΨW (Ψ) +(1 −
2p−1 )(2 − 2p)K 
2p−1
n(L) + n(W )
Theorem 1 presents the 3GPP fairness constrained maximum B. Rate Performance: LTE-WiFi-Coexisting versus WiFi-WiFi-
3GP P
network sum rate D̂max and the corresponding optimal initial Coexisting
(Ψ)
backoff window sizes {Wm }. To take a closer look at the gain of the LTE-WiFi-coexisting
Theorem 1. If network, which is established by replacing a WiFi network as
  a LTE-LAA network, let us consider the performance in terms
(W ) (L) (W ) −1 of the following three aspects 1) the total network sum rate,
(W ) τF −(τT −τF )W0 (W )
P L e(1+1/τF )
∗
γ = (L) (L) ·   ≤ 1, 2) the sum rate of the replaced network 1, and 3) the sum
T R (W ) (W ) (W ) −1 rate of the unreplaced WiFi network 2. Recall that for a WiFi-
τF − (τT − τF )W0 (W )
e(1+1/τF ) WiFi-coexisting network, the maximum total network sum rate
W iF i
(15) is D̂max , and the corresponding sum rate of the replaced
3GP P WiFi network 1 and unreplaced WiFi network 2 are given by
the maximum network sum rate D̂max defined in (13)-(14) n(L) (W )

is given by n(W ) +n(L)

W iF i
· D̂max and n(Wn) +n(L) · D̂max
W iF i
, respectively.
Theorem 1 clearly shows that the performance of the LTE-
n(W ) γ ∗ + n(L)
3GP P
D̂max = ∗ (W ) W iF i
· D̂max ≥ D̂maxW iF i
, (16) WiFi-coexisting network is closely dependent on the value
γ (n + n(L) ) of γ ∗ . In the following, let us compare the performance of
which is achieved when the initial backoff window size of LTE the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network and that of the WiFi-WiFi-
and WiFi are set as coexisting network in the case of γ ∗ > 1 and γ ∗ < 1,
 !  respectively.
(W ) (L) (W ) −1
−(τT −τF )W0
 (W ) F
τ
e(1+1/τ
(W )
) 1) Case of γ ∗ > 1: Let us first take a look at the case
2 n · F ! +n(L) 

(W ) (W ) (W ) −1
of γ ∗ > 1. Theorem 1 shows that if γ ∗ > 1, to maintain
τF −(τT −τF )W0
(L) e(1+1/τ
(W )
F
) the 3GPP fairness, the LTE-WiFi coexisting network can only
Wm =  ,
achieve an identical maximum network sum rate to the WiFi-
 ∗
∗ pA p∗ ∗
− ln pA · 2p∗ −1 + (1 − 2p∗ −1 )(2 − 2pA )K
A
3GP P W iF i
A A WiFi case, i.e., D̂max =D̂max . The corresponding sum rates
(17) of the LTE-LAA network 1 and the Wi-Fi network 2 are given
and by,
 !
(W ) (W ) (W ) −1 (L)
τ −(τT −τF )W0 D̂γ ∗ >1 = 0 (22)
 (W ) (L) F e(1+1/τ
(W )
)
2 n +n · F !

τ
(W )
−(τ
(L)
−τ
(W )
)W0 −1 and
F T F (W )
e(1+1/τ )
(W ) F (W )
Wm = 
p∗ p∗
 , W iF i
D̂γ ∗ >1 = D̂max , (23)
− ln p∗A · 2p∗
A
+ (1 − 2p∗
A
)(2 − 2p∗A )K
A −1 A −1
(18) by substituting (20) and (21) into ∗(10) and (11), respectively.
  (23) clearly shows that when γ > 1, the unreplaced WiFi
∗
respectively, where pA = −(1+1/τF )W0 −
(W ) 1
. network 2 in the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network can achieve a
(W )
(W )
+n(L)
e(1+1/τF ) maximum sum rate n n(W ) times higher than that in the
3GP P
Otherwise, the maximum network sum rate D̂max defined in WiFi-WiFi-coexisting network. The improvement is, neverthe-
(13)-(14) is given by less, achieved at the cost of the performance of LTE-LAA
3GP P W iF i
D̂max =D̂max , (19) network as shown in (22). It indicates that in this case, although
the 3GPP fairness is satisfied, no gain can be maintained in
which is achieved when the initial backoff window size of LTE terms of the maximum network sum rate, and the network sum
and WiFi are set as rate optimization leads to starvation of LTE-LAA nodes.
(L)
Wm =∞ (20) 2) Case of γ ∗ < 1: When γ ∗ < 1, Theorem 1 shows
that in contrast to the former case, the LTE-WiFi-coexisting
and network can always achieve a higher maximum network sum
(W )
(W ) 2n rate that the WiFi-WiFi-coexisting case, i.e., we always have
Wm = , 3GP P W iF i
D̂max >D̂max . The corresponding sum rates of the LTE-
 ∗ ∗
p p
− ln p∗A · 2p∗A−1 + (1 − 2p∗A−1 )(2 − 2p∗A )K
A A LAA network 1 and the Wi-Fi network 2 are given by,
(21)
(L) n(L) W iF i
respectively. D̂γ ∗ <1 = ∗ (W ) · D̂max (24)
γ (n + n(L) )
We can clearly see from (16) and (19) that for a LTE-WiFi and
coexisting network, the maximum network sum rate that can be
achieved under the 3GPP fairness constraint is always no lower (W ) n(W ) W iF i
D̂γ ∗ <1 = (W ) (L)
· D̂max , (25)
than the maximum network sum rate of a WiFi-WiFi coexisting n + n
network. It implies that if the 3GPP fairness is concerned, LTE- by substituting (17) and (18) into (10) and (11), respectively.
LAA can serve as a good candidate to coexist with a WiFi We can clearly see from (25) that when γ ∗ < 1, the
network by replacing another collocating WiFi network. unreplaced Wi-Fi network 2 achieves an identical sum rate
     
(W ) (W ) 1
P L(W ) σ · τF − DLT E − σ · τF W0 − (W )
e(1+1/τF )
T (L) >        , (26)
(W ) 1 1 (W ) 1
R(L) σ · τF − P L(W ) − + σ · OH − σ · τF W0 −
R(W ) R(L) (W )
e(1+1/τF )

TABLE I
S YSTEM PARAMETER S ETTING
PHY header 20 µs
Basic Rate (BR) 1 Mbps
ACK 112 bits+PHY header
RTS 160 bits+PHY header
CTS 112 bits+PHY header
DIFS 34 µs
SIFS 16 µs
Slot Time σ 9 µs
in both the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network and the WiFi-WiFi-
coexisting network, where the 3GPP fairness is satisfied.
The new-installed LTE-LAA network, on the other hand, can
achieve a sum rate 1/γ ∗ times higher than the replaced WiFi
network 1 according to (24). It implies that in this case,
when a LTE-LAA network replaces the Wi-Fi network 1 to
coexist with the Wi-Fi network 2, not only 3GPP fairness can
be guaranteed, both the new-installed LTE-LAA network and
the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network can outperform the replaced
counterparts as well.
C. A Win-Win Solution
It is clear that we should always have γ ∗ ≤ 1, where the
LTE-LAA network installation can lead to a win-win situation,
i.e., the 3GPP fairness is guaranteed and the performance of
both the replaced network and the total network are improved.
A closer look at (15) shows that γ ∗ is determined by the TXOP
value T (L) and the transmission rate R(L) of the LTE nodes,
and the packet payload length P L(W ) and the transmission
rate R(W ) of the WiFi nodes. In practice, the transmission
rates are usually selected based on the channel conditions, and
cannot be arbitrarily adjusted. In the LTE-LAA standard [2],
[3], the TXOP value of LTE-LAA nodes can be adaptively
adjusted with a upper limit of 8 ms when coexist with WiFi.
Therefore, we focus on how to appropriately choose the TXOP
value T (L) of LTE-LAA nodes to obtain a win-win solution.
In particular, we have γ ∗ < 1 when the TXOP value T (L)
of LTE-LAA nodes exceeds a certain threshold as given in
(26), by substituting (2), (3) and (6) into (15). The values of
system parameters in the current IEEE 802.11 standard are
summarized in Table I, based on which we can obtain that
the overhead OH = 60.7 time slots and the holding time in
collision τF =23.8 time slots according to (4)-(3). (26) can then
be obtained as
426P L(W )
T (L) > 1 1


.
R(L) 460 + 0.74P L(W ) R(W ) − R(L)
It implies that as long as the TXOP value of LTE-LAA satisfies
Eq. (27), there always exists a win-win solution for LTE-LAA In this paper, we address an open issue for LTE-LAA and
and WiFi coexistence, where not only the 3GPP fairness can WiFi coexistence: how the maximize the total network sum
be guaranteed, but the total network can achieve a higher sum
rate performance by replacing the WiFi AP as a LTE-LAA
eNB.
IV. S IMULATION R ESULTS
In this section, we will present the simulation results to
verify the analysis presented in Section II and III. All the
simulations are conducted by using an event-based simulator,
and the values of system parameters are summarized in Table
I. For illustration, assume that WiFi nodes transmit with a
packet payload P L(W ) = 215 bits under R(W ) = 54 Mbps,
and LTE-LAA nodes transmit with a TXOP T (L) = 3000 µs
under R(L) = 50 Mbps, respectively. The cutoff phase K is
assumed to be 6.
A. Standard Setting
In the current IEEE 802.11 standard [4] and 3GPP Rel-
14 [2], WiFi and LTE-LAA nodes adopt fixed initial backoff
window size W (L) = W (W ) = 16. Fig. 2a presents the sum
rate performance with the standard setting. We can clearly see
from Fig. 2a that before the replacement, each wifi network 1
and 2 achieves half of the total network sum rate in the WiFi-
WiFi-coexisting network. After replacing AP 1 in network 1
to a LTE-LAA eNB, nevertheless, the network sum rate of
the unreplaced WiFi network 2 is significantly deteriorated,
indicating that the nodes in WiFi network 2 would suffer from
severe degradation in the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network, i.e.,
3GPP fairness cannot be guaranteed.
B. Optimal Setting
To maximize the total network sum rate while maintaining
3GPP fairness in a LTE-WiFi-coexisting network, Theorem 1
in Section IV has shown that the initial backoff window sizes
of WiFi nodes and LTE-LAA UEs should be carefully adjusted.
Fig. 2b presents the sum rate performance with the optimal
setting, with T (L) = 3 ms for illustration. With T (L) = 3 ms,
we have γ ∗ = 0.636, indicating a win-win solution. It can
be clearly observed in Fig. 2b that for the unreplaced WiFi
network 2, it achieves the same network sum rate of 13.3
Mbps in both two cases, indicating that 3GPP fairness can be
maintained. In the meanwhile, for the replaced network 1, the
LTE-LAA network can achieve a maximum network sum rate
of 21.0 Mbps, which is significantly improved compared to the
original WiFi network 1. As a result, the LTE-WiFi-coexisting
network achieves a maximum network sum rate of 34.3 Mbps,
(27) which is 1.29 times higher than the pure WiFi network.
V. C ONCLUSION
 %HIRUHUHSODFHPHQW $IWHUUHSODFHPHQW

        
 

 

 

 

 

'DWDUDWH0ESV
'DWDUDWH0ESV

1HWZRUN 1HWZRUN 7RWDO1HWZRUN

 
$QDO\VLV $QDO\VLV $QDO\VLV
6LPXODWLRQ 6LPXODWLRQ 6LPXODWLRQ
 

1HWZRUN 1HWZRUN 7RWDO1HWZRUN

 
$QDO\VLV $QDO\VLV $QDO\VLV
6LPXODWLRQ 6LPXODWLRQ 6LPXODWLRQ
 
%HIRUHUHSODFHPHQW $IWHUUHSODFHPHQW $IWHUUHSODFHPHQW
%HIRUHUHSODFHPHQW
 
                 

n W  n W 
(a) (b)

Fig. 2. Network sum rate of network 1 (replaced network), network 2 (unreplaced wifi network) and total network versus the number of nodes n(W ) in
 n(L) = n(W ) . P L(W ) = 215 bits. R(W ) = 54 Mbps. T (L) = 3000 µs. R(L) = 50 Mbps. K = 6. (a) Standard setting: W (W ) = 16.
network 2.
(L) (W )
W = 16. (b) Optimal setting: W (W ) = Wm . W (L) = 16.



rate performance of a LTE-WiFi-coexisting network under both fair sharing with WiFi and performance improvement in

'DWDUDWH0ESV

the 3GPP fairness requirement. The analysis shows that the heterogeneous network coexistence.
3GP P
maximum  network sum rate D̂max is closely dependent on
∗ R EFERENCES
γ , which is determined by the packet length P L(W ) and

transmission rate R(W ) of WiFi nodes, the TXOP value T (L) [1] ITU-R M.2083-0, “IMT Vision – Framework and overall objectives of the
1HWZRUN 1HWZRUN 7RWDO1HWZRUN future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond,” Sept. 2015.
and transmission
 rate R(L) of LTE-LAA
$QDO\VLV
nodes. To achieve
$QDO\VLV [2] ETSI, “LTE; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA);
$QDO\VLV
the maximum

sum rate
6LPXODWLRQ under the 3GPP
6LPXODWLRQ fairness constraint,
6LPXODWLRQ Physical layer procedures,” ETSI TS 136 213, V14.2.0, Apr. 2017.
the initial backoff window sizes of LTE-LAA and WiFi nodes
$IWHUUHSODFHPHQW
[3] 3GPP, “Physical layer procedures,” 3GPP TR. 36.213 v15.0.0., Apr. 2018.
%HIRUHUHSODFHPHQW

[4] IEEE Std. 802.11-2012 Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control
should be carefully
 tuned
 according
  to their
 numbers
 of nodes.
 (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications, IEEE, 2012.
Explicit expressions of the maximum   network sum rate and the
optimal initial backoff window sizes are obtained.
A win-win solution is further obtained for LTE-LAA net-
work installation, where not only the 3GPP fairness criteria can
always be guaranteed, the maximum sum rate performance of
the LTE-WiFi-coexisting network and the new-installed LTE-
LAA network can also be improved after replacing a WiFi
AP as a LTE-LAA eNB. Our analysis shows that such a win-
win solution exists as long as the TXOP value T (L) of LTE-
LAA nodes exceeds a certain threshold, which is determined
by the packet length P L(W ) and transmission rate R(W ) of
WiFi nodes as well as the transmission rate R(L) of LTE-
LAA nodes. The analysis sheds important light on the network
design for LTE-LAA and WiFi coexistence.
Our analysis shows that with the current standard setting,
after a WiFi AP is replaced by a LTE-LAA eNB, the sum
rate performance of the unreplaced WiFi network suffers
from significant degradation, indicating that the 3GPP fair-
ness cannot be guaranteed. With our win-win solution and
optimal setting, the maximum sum rate of the unplaced WiFi
network remains the same in both LTE-WiFi-coexisting and
WiFi-WiFi-coexisting networks, implying that LAA does not
impact the WiFi services more than another WiFi network.
In the meanwhile, the new-installed LTE-LAA network and
the whole LTE-WiFi-coexisting can achieve a much higher
maximum network sum rate than the legacy WiFi network.
LTE-LAA is a promising technique for 5G NR Unlicensed for
View publication stats
[5] Study on Licensed-Assisted Access to Unlicensed Spectrum (Release 13),
document 3GPP TR 36.889 v13.0.0, 3rd Generation Partnership Project,
2015.
[6] Nokia Networks, “Nokia LTE for unlicensed spectrum,” Nokia, Espoo,
Finland, White Paper, 2014.
[7] Qualcomm Inc., “Extending the benefits of LTE-A to unlicensed spec-
trum,” Qualcomm, San Diego, CA, USA, White Paper, 2014.
[8] Huawei, “U-LTE: Unlicensed spectrum utilization of LTE,” Huawei,
Shenzhen, China, White Paper, 2014.
[9] A. Babaei, J. Andreoli-Fang, and B. Hamzeh, “On the impact of LTE-U
on WiFi performance,” in Proc. PIMRC, pp. 1621–1625, Sept. 2014.
[10] Y. Jian, C. Shih, B. Krishnaswamy, and R. Sivakumar, “Coexistence of
WiFi and LAA-LTE: Experimental evaluation, analysis and insights,” in
Proc. IEEE ICCW, pp. 2325–2331, June 2015.
[11] C. Cano and D. Leith, “Unlicensed LTE/WiFi coexistence: Is LBT
inherently fairer than CSAT?” in Proc. IEEE ICC, pp. 1–6, May 2016.
[12] H. He, H. Shan, A. Huang, L. Cai, and T. Quek, “Proportional Fairness-
Based Resource Allocation for LTE-U Coexisting With WiFi,” IEEE
Access, vol. 5, pp. 4720–4731, Sept. 2016.
[13] C. Cano, D. Leith, A. Garcia-Saavedra, and P. Serrano, “Fair Coexis-
tence of Scheduled and Random Access Wireless Networks: Unlicensed
LTE/WiFi,” IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 3267–3281,
Dec. 2017.
[14] M. Mehrnoush, S. Roy, V. Sathya, and M. Ghosh, “On the Fairness of
Wi-Fi and LTE-LAA Coexistence,” IEEE Trans. Cognitive Commun. and
Netw., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 735–748, Dec. 2018.
[15] Y. Gao, X. Sun, and L. Dai, “IEEE 802.11e EDCA Networks: Model-
ing, Differentiation and Optimization,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun.,
vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 3863–3879, July 2014.
[16] R. M. Corlessa, G. H. Gonnet, D. E. G. Hare, D. J. Jeffrey, and
D. E. Knuth, “On the Lambert W function,” Adv. Comput. Math., vol. 5,
pp. 329–359, 1996.
[17] Y. Gao, X. Sun, and L. Dai, “Sum Rate Optimization of Multi-Standard
IEEE 802.11 WLANs,” IEEE Trans. Commun., vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 3055–
3068, Apr. 2019.