March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
4G Neighborhood Area Networks
Date: 2005-03-11
Authors:
Name
R. R. Miller
Company
AT&T
Address
Florham Park, NJ
Phone
973-236-6920
email
rrm@att.com
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.11. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in
this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.
Release: The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE
Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit
others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.11.
Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures <http:// ieee802.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf>, including the statement
"IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents
essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is
essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair
<stuart.kerry@philips.com> as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being
developed within the IEEE 802.11 Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at <patcom@ieee.org>.
Submission
Slide 1
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Abstract
Completing a practical broadband access network alternative comparable to cable or DSL for residence,
remote/small business, and public service environments requires the realization of multi-tier diffuse-field wireless
networks that functionally-parallel and interwork with their wired multi-tier counterparts. Fortunately, the
sophistication and economy of radio systems have at last progressed to permit consideration of multi-tier approaches
that can augment the established paradigm of wireless links that extend exclusively from a wired network POP
directly to a device. Like wired networks, each component of a multi-tier wireless network must be designed to meet
a specific teledensity demand, Shannon envelope, and capital affordability to establish a complete performance- and
cost-effective broadband access network supporting Ethernet-like user expectations. Current network paradigms,
such as LANs and MANs, already provide means to effectively extend networking toward the backbone from devices,
and toward devices from the backbone, respectively. However, a critical segment is missing from a practical,
complete tiered structure: Neighborhood Area Networks or NANs. NANs are characterized by outdoor diffuse-field
coverage areas smaller than MANs and larger than LANs, hosting fixed or nomadic links from moderate AP heights
such as street utility structures. These ~1000 foot-radius, ~100BaseT-equivalent coverage areas can be designed to
support increased link predictability and higher teledensities compared to MANs due to reduced multipath, improved
propagation predictability, and higher link margins, while encompassing ~100-200 premises for acceptable costscaling. The small-cell characteristics optimally-balance throughput/link and premises-passed costs mimicking node
“reach” and size of cable, VDSL, or fiber neighborhood-serving facilities. Likewise, NANs cannot optimally address
the teledensity, link throughput capabilities, and battery limitations of portable LAN devices, but can connect them to
higher tiers without starving. Since NANs are required to complete multi-tier operation with other established tiers,
networking architecture, airlink properties, and protocols must integrate wired and wireless standards elements into a
single coherent solution. This presentation proposes creation of a study group to formulate a standards framework
for the wireless NAN, with companion air interface, protocol, and spectrum use components. It is believed that this
standard-setting can leverage knowledge bases and expertise from both Ethernet and wireless standards
communities to establish the foundation for new equipment and services while enriching broadband access choices
for consumers, businesses, and municipalities worldwide.
Submission
Slide 2
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Preparing for True Broadband Wireless
Shannon Zone
Submission
Slide 3
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
A View of Carrier Connectivity Options
300,000
185,000
45,000
1,000 100 1
20,000
Typical Houses-Passed
Fiber to the Home
Fiber to the Home
Fiber to the Curb
VDSL
BPL
VDSL
BPL
Fiber to the Neighborhood
SONET
Fiber to the Neighborhood
WMAN
Fiber to the Serving Area
Fiber to the Serving Area
DSL
Fiber to the Serving Area
Street-Level Cable
Fiber to the Serving Area
10
9
8
7
6
Street-Level Cable
5
4
3
2
1
0
ROM User Assignable Peak Throughput
Distance from User to Network POP, Miles
“Transport”
1G
100M
Active Fiber
PON
“Middle Mile”
Active Fiber
PON
“Last Mile”
Active Fiber
PON
Active Fiber
PON
Active Fiber
PON
Cable
Cable
Cable
VDSL
10M
DSL WMAN
1M
Submission
“Sub Connect” “Premises-Net”
Slide 4
BPL
DSL WMAN
Cable
Ethernet VDSL
WLAN
PLC
DSL
WMAN
T/P
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
What is a Neighborhood Area Network?
• New architectural system element for broadband
wireless local distribution applications
• Service area smaller than Metropolitan, larger than
Local Area Networks
–
–
–
–
–
–
“Street Level” Distribution
Similar to VDSL wiring radius, cable branch node breakout size
Usually part a of multi-tier distribution architecture
May interface with radio or wired facilities at both ends
Application in residential, campus, public environments
Consistent with community aesthetics
• Extends the distribution network edge to the
premises gateway
Submission
Slide 5
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
The NAN: Form Follows Function
PANs
Air Interface
Backhaul
Prems passed#
Cell Size
Cell Thruput
Teledensity
Terminal ECR*
Client ECR*
802.11 Wi-Fi
Ethernet
1 premises (2.3 clients)
17000 sq-ft (75’ radius)
6-30 Mbps peak
350-1700 Kb/sq-ft
2.5-13 Mb
2.5-13 Mb
4G Broadband
Fiber, PTMP Microwave
100 premises (230 clients)
315,000 sq-ft (1000’ radius)
120 Mbps peak (4 sectors)
380 Kb/sq-ft
1.2 Mbps
500 Kbps
802.16 Wi-Max/3.5G Cellular
Fiber/PTP Microwave
10,000 premises (23,000 clients)
300,000,000 sq-ft (3 Km radius)
70 Mbps peak (6 sectors, 5 MHz, TDD)
.23 b/sq-ft
7 Kbps
3 Kbps
WANs
“The Missing
Architectural
Element”
User
Rate
Neighborhood Area Network
100-300 terminations
Nanocell LOS/NLOS
ft
Local Area Network
1-100 clients
Picocell LOS/NLOS
•Lowest Base Stations
•Mostly Portable Clients
•Little Client Directivity
•Very High Throughput
•Very Limited User Group
•Pedestrian Mobility
•
•
•
•
•
•
PTMP Fixed/Nomadic
Part of Multi-Tier Network
Low Base Stations
Some Directivity at Terminal
High Throughput
Limited User Group
kft
10,000-30,000 terminations
Macro/Microcell LOS/NLOS
•
•
•
•
•
PTMP Fixed and Mobile
Highest Base Stations
Sophisticated Directivity at Terminal
High Point Throughput
Large User Group
Effective
Link
Reach
km/mi
#
Assumes 30,000 sq-ft lot size, 2.3
active users/premises
* ECR – Equivalent Circuit Rate with all
clients active simultaneously
+ Derived from Reference 2
Submission
Metropolitan Area Network
Slide 6
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Why the Time is Right for NANs: Multi-Tier Networking
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Radio No Longer Confined to Wired POP-to-Client Link
More Throughput, Higher Quality,, QoS
Parallels to Hierarchy of Wired Networks
Each Layer Demultiplexes Throughput from Layer Above
“Network of Networks” Approach, Like Internet
“Mix and Match” Architectural Elements
TCP/IP Convergence Layer, Software Defined Interfaces
Core Fiber
Backbone
Transport
Metropolitan
Distribution
Local
Distribution
Drop/Inside
Wire
Device
Connect
Submission
Backbone
802.16+, mmWave, FSOC
Metro Fiber
H/S Facilities (Coax, Fiber)
802.16+ PTMP
Local PTMP
L/S Facilities (PON, xDSL, 100BT)
802.11 WLAN
Metallic (T/R, 10BT, 100BT)
Cord (RJ-11.RJ-45)
802.15
Slide 7
LOS H/S
Systems
NLOS Wireless
Metropolitan Area
Networks (MANs)
Wireless
Neighborhood Area
Networks (NANs)
Wireless Local
Area Networks
(LANs)
Wireless Personal
Area Networks
PANs)
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Why Formalize the NAN?
• Different solution space vis-à-vis existing access
MAN/LAN frameworks:
–
–
–
–
–
•
•
•
•
New small cell outdoor propagation environment, physical plant
New wireless distribution network economic paradigm
New spectrum and resource assignment options
Mix of MAN, LAN, and Ethernet-like network management
LAN-like RF power levels, consistent with small cells, high rates
Key to new local broadband distribution opportunities
New performance bar: Wireless as good as wired
Next level of access network cell size reduction
Next-generation Ethernet synergies
Submission
Slide 8
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Moving Toward a 4G Broadband Common Air Interface
First-Generation Wireless LANs








F1
F1
F1
Peer/Peer and Client/Server
Small User Population
Isolated "Cells" and User Groups
Non-Contiguous Coverage
Indoor Operation
Limited Mobility
Mostly Asynchronous Traffic
Slower than Ethernet
Fourth-Generation BB Wireless
Communications (LAN/NAN/MAN)









LAN and NAN Architectural Elements
100BT Ethernet Speeds
Seamless Mobility
Contiguous Coverage in Dense Areas
Organic Growth Model
Data, Voice, Multimedia
Higher System Utilization/Reuse
Enhanced Security
Automatic Radio Resource Management
F1
F1
Second-Generation Wireless LANs
F1
F1



Data-Centric Internet/Intranet
10BT Ethernet-Compatible Speeds
RF Channel Interference Control
F4
F1
F3
F3
F2
F3
F3
F1
F1
F4
Third-Generation Wireless LANs/MANs
F1
F2
F3
Submission
F1
F4 F2 F1
F3



Quality of Service
Cellular-Like Radio Resource Reuse
Handoffs
Slide 9
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Cell-Based Coverage Area Trends
•
•
•
•
•
Maritime
Mobile
HF Radio
Service
(~300 mi)
Increased Bandwidth Demand/User
Battery/Dissipation Device Constraints
Moore’s Law Radios
Increased Edge Intelligence
Distributed Control Techniques
1,000,000
100 Watts
1G
Macrocellular
Systems
(~8 mi)
10,000 mi2
100,000
700 mi2
Cell 10,000
Radius
(Feet)
MJ-MK
Mobile
Telephone
(~60 mi)
Metroliner
Train
Telephone
(~15 mi)
The 3G/Wi-Max
“Sweet Spot”
The 2G
“Sweet Spot”
2.5G
Microcells
(~2 mi)
1,000
.01 mi2
30 mW
WNAN/LAN
Nanocells
(~.06 -.2mi)
100
1960
1970
1980
1 Watt
Mobile/
Portable
Maximum
Power
Output
100 mW
PCS
Microcells
(~0.5 -2 mi)
1950
10 Watts
2G Cellular
Expanded
Service
(~4 mi)
1990
2000
The 4G
“Sweet
Spot”
2010
Year
Submission
Slide 10
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
Peak
Data
Rate
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
The Right Tool for the Right Job
(in the Shannon Zone)
Higher Rate,
Less Mobility
Megabits per Second/User
100
4G H/S Wireless LAN
UWB
2.4 & 5 GHz Unlicensed
10
4G Wireless NAN
2.4 & 5 GHz
1
Bluetooth
3G/MAN Fixed or Pedestrian
3G/802.16 Wireless
Various Bands
Zigbee
.1
PANs
Wider Area,
More Mobility
3G/MAN Mobile
2.4GHz and UWB
2.5G Mobile/Pedestrian
Zigbee (US)
2/2,5G Wireless
800 MHz, 2 GHz
Zigbee (Europe)
Range
10 feet
Submission
100 feet
1 mile
Slide 11
10 miles
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
A Glimpse at the NAN Propagation Environment
40
Slope transition breakpoint
moves in as base height is
reduced. (~500’ for 5m pole,
3200’ for 80’ tower)
60
Path Loss, dB
80
Operation beyond transition point
requires disproportionately higher
power to overcome loss and to
sustain sufficient fade margin (QoS)
100
120
140
Typical Suburban
Environment
160
hb = 5m Base Height
hb = 25m Base Height
Median path loss, 5m
Median path loss, 25m
Client Antenna Height: 1.8m
Two-slope model
180
0.01
0.1
1
Distance from Base, Km
10
Low antenna height makes 1000’ cells a “sweet spot” for coverage,
transmit power, and link predictability/availability.
Submission
Slide 12
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Modeling the “Burbs”
– The model is extended from work documented in Reference 1
– The model consists of two attenuation slopes and a break point for regeneration
of propagation data.
– The path gain at the break point is given by:
 2 
4hb hm
PGRb  20 log10 
with
R


b
8

h
h


b m 
– The path loss model:
 PG0  20 log10 ( d d 0 )
PG  
 PGRb  10  40 log10 ( d Rb )
PG0  Path gain at reference distance
for d  Rb
for d  Rb
d 0  Reference point in meters
PGRb  Path gain at the break point
Submission
Slide 13
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Typical Measurement Environments Used for Model
Submission
Slide 14
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
How Well Do Small Cell Models Work?
40
60
Path Loss, dB
80
Data set representing
measurements taken in
particular neighborhood
shown in overlay
100
120
140
160
180
0.01
0.1
1
Distance from Base, Km
10
Small cells can be modeled with more accuracy, and link predictability
can be further enhanced by actual topographic/aerial information.
Submission
Slide 15
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Broadband 4G for The Campus and “The Burbs”: A Vision
Submission
Slide 16
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
What Constitutes a NAN?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Primarily outdoor operation
“Nanocells” (~1000’ radius)
Low base antenna height (~18’)
Mostly nomadic or fixed terminations
Small Termination Group (100-300 typ.)
High per-termination capacity (e.g. 10BT)
Strong QoS, Throughput Grooming/Controls
“Access + Distribution” Mentality
New Layout Paradigms
–
–
–
–
–
Submission
Fusion of statistical and ray-traced coverage models
Mix of stereoscopic photography, GPS-aided base placements
Automated network formation
Automated spectrum use
Wired-like Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
Slide 17
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
A View of Small Cell vs. Large Cell Wireless Capital
R = 3 km
r = 1000’ (308 m),
~20% overlap by area
There are ~125 NAN cells per 3 km MAN cell
Cost of MAN Equipment, Antennas, Site Access
Rights, Backhaul Allocation ($100,000*) + Install
($50,000*) + Spectrum (42 MHz (FDD, 6 sector)
23,000 pops in 3km cell with 30,000 sq-ft lots and
2.3 pops/house x $0.10/MHz / POP ($100,000+) =
Total estimated installed cost of 3km cell ($250,000)
* Reference 3
+ Estimated from FCC spectrum auctions 2000-2003 & Reference 4
$250,000 / 125 is equivalent to $2000 per small cell
base station, installed. Based on wireless LAN AP
costs with fiber backhaul allocation and unlicensed
spectrum, small cell approach vis-a-vis MAN
microcell coverage appears economically viable.
Inexpensive computing and integrated radios have enabled massively paralleled base
stations yielding acceptable cost with network resiliency and higher-quality links.
Submission
Slide 18
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Tackling the Backhaul Issue: A PON + NAN Hybrid Architecture
R = 3 km
300’
Typical Suburban Block/Street Layout
300’
Point of Presence
Local Concentration Point
Network Aggregation Point
r = 1000’(308 m),
~20% overlap by area
Submission
Wireless Aggregation Point
Future FTTH Connection
Slide 19
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Why Isn’t a NAN a Small MAN?
• “Tuned” for rate, not reach, in more predictable
nanocell environment
• Extreme hardware cost sensitivity
• Large-cell capabilities not required:
–
–
–
–
Mobility, fast handoffs, rate adaptation robs CAI efficiency
Sophisticated ranging not required (short propagation time)
Slotted operation not required (less multiplexing)
Fewer simultaneous sessions
• Less “statistical”, more “5-9’s” diffuse-field
coverage aim
• Cognitive radio, zero-touch self-organization built-in
• “Ethernet-extension” rather than “backhaul” view
Submission
Slide 20
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Why Isn’t a NAN a Large LAN?
• Primarily outdoor operation, nanocell propagation
• Mostly fixed links, directive clients
• Multi-tier (a link in a chain of links), not direct from wired POP to
client
–
–
–
–
•
•
•
•
•
Treat penetration loss with separate in-prem LAN
Transparency for Q-Ethernet / wireless-wireless bridging
Supports all-wireless LAN/NAN/MAN multi-tier architecture
Use MANs for backhaul (more efficient use for large cells)
Mostly point-coordinated with more sophisticated
Carrier-class performance controls
Requires CAI-like system-level (management frame) security
Multimedia service-provider mentality from inception
Scaleability Critical
Submission
Slide 21
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Suggested Scope of a NAN Standard
• Spectrum and Management (including new
spectrum opportunities)
• PHY (May adopt elements of existing standards)
• MAC (May adopt elements of existing standards)
• Gateway Interface Transparency and Awareness
Requirements (e.g MAN, LAN, Q-Ethernet)
• Automatic Network Organization (e.g. 802.11k,v)
• Access Control
• QoS/SLA Administration
• Security/Encryption
• Emergency Provisions (e.g. priority access)
Submission
Slide 22
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Bottom Line
A NAN standard can open new architectural options
while leveraging the best of both LAN and MAN
technologies --- a solution based on small cells,
Moore’s Law radios, and user value. It doesn’t seek
to re-invent the wheel, just build a better car for
going around the block.
Submission
Slide 23
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Who Might Participate?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Operators/Carriers
Regulation/Spectrum Rulemakers
Local Governments Contemplating Broadband
Infrastructure Equipment Vendors
CPE Gateway Vendors
VLSI Makers
LAN Standards Contributors
MAN Standards Contributors
Enhanced Ethernet Standards Contributors
Submission
Slide 24
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Suggested Next Steps
•
•
•
•
Identification of interest group
Formation of Study Group
Discussion and Project Planning
Scope Definition
To join the community of interest, please contact:
R. R. Miller
AT&T Labs – Research
Florham Park, NJ
rrm@att.com
or
H. R. Worstell
AT&T Labs – Research
Florham Park, NJ
hworstell@att.com
Submission
Slide 25
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
Acronym / Terminology List
BPL
Client ECR
DSL
FSOC
GPS
HCCA
H/S Facilities
LAN
LOS
LOS H/S
L/S Facilities
MAN
Moore’s Law
NAN
NLOS
PAN
PLC
PON
POP
Premises Passed
PTMP
PTP Microwave
Q-Ethernet
QoS
Shannon
SLA
SONET
T/P
UWB
VDSL
VLSI
WAN
Submission
Broadband Power Line
Equivalent Circuit Rate with all clients active simultaneously
Digital Subscriber Line
Free Space Optic Communication
Global Positioning System
Hybrid Contention-Controlled Access
High Speed Facilities
Local Area Networks
Line-of-Sight
Line-of-Sight High Speed
Low Speed Facilities
Metropolitan Area Networks
The observation made in 1965 by Gordon Moore, co-founder of Intel, that the number of transistors
per square inch on integrated circuits had doubled every year since the integrated circuit was
invented. Moore predicted that this trend would continue for the foreseeable future.
Neighborhood Area Network
Non-Line of Sight
Personal Area Networks
Power Line Carrier
Passive Optical Network
Point of Presence or Population (used for spectrum evaluation only)
Premises in service area awaiting subscriber connection
Point-to-Multipoint Microwave
Point-to-Point Microwave
Quality-of-Service [Enabled] Ethernet
Quality of Service
A Mathematical Theory of Communication by Claude E. Shannon
Subscriber Line Agreement
Synchronous Optical Network
Twisted Pair
Ultra Wide-Band
Very-high-rate Digital Subscriber Line
Very Large Scale Integration
Wide Area Network
Slide 26
R. R. Miller, AT&T
March 2005
doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/0173r0
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
“Urban and Suburban Out-of-Sight Propagation Modeling”, V. Erceg, D.L. Schilling, S. S.
Ghassemzadeh, D. Li, M. Taylor, IEEE Communication Magazine, 1992.
Broadband Wireless Access with WiMAX/802.16: Current Performance Benchmarks and
Future Potential, IEEE Communications Magazine, February 2005
“Business Case Models for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access based on WiMAX
Technology and the 802.16 Standard, WiMAX Forum, October 10, 2004
“Evolution of Spectrum Valuation for Mobile Services Other Countries”, Lemay-Yates
Associates Inc., Canada, March 2003
WWISE, IEEE 802.11n Document 04/1505r0
WWISE, IEEE 802.11n Proposal-Nov Document 05/0080r0
WWISE, IEEE 802.11n Downselect Document 051591r3
TGnSync IEEE 802.11n Proposal Document 04/1506
TGnSync IEEE 802.11n Complete Proposal (Overview) Document 04/888r8
TGnSync IEEE 802.11n Complete Proposal Jan 05
IEEE Standard 802.16
IEEE 802.16e Document P80216e_D6delta.zip
IEEE 802.16 Document P80216d
Submission
Slide 27
R. R. Miller, AT&T