3G & LTEに向けたモバイルネットワークの機能分散戦略

Mobile Network Feature Distribution Strategies for 3G & LTE

発行 Heavy Reading 商品コード 214229
出版日 ページ情報 英文 40 Pages
納期: 即日から翌営業日
本日の銀行送金レート: 1USD=101.32円で換算しております。
Back to Top
3G & LTEに向けたモバイルネットワークの機能分散戦略 Mobile Network Feature Distribution Strategies for 3G & LTE
出版日: 2011年09月20日 ページ情報: 英文 40 Pages


第1章 イントロダクション・主要調査結果

第2章 分散型ブロードバンドネットワークへの移行

  • NGNの定義
  • キャリアネットワークにおける機能の分散:市場機会とリスク
  • ワイヤラインブロードバンドネットワークにおける実際の分散モデル

第3章 機能分散:モバイルオペレーターの展望

  • 機能分散の6つの柱
  • 機能分散:ほとんどのオペレーターは長期的取り組みと考える
  • 全体的設計原理の維持の課題
  • 組織的課題
  • LTEの展開
  • トラフィック量
  • トラフィックタイプ
  • トランスポートコスト
  • 市場地理学
  • CDMA & W-CDMAレガシー
  • 利用可能なネットワーク機器
  • スモールセルの展開

第4章 特定機能の展望

  • IPピアリングポイント
  • GGSN(Gateway GPRS Support Node)
  • SGSN(Serving GPRS Support Node)
  • オフロードゲートウェイ
  • MME(Mobility Management Entity)
  • S-GW(サービングゲートウェイ)
  • P-GW(パケットゲートウェイ)
  • コンテンツキャッシング
  • ビデオの最適化
  • DPI(Deep Packet Inspection)
  • 各種セキュリティ機能

第5章 ベンダーにとっての課題

第6章 ベンダープロファイル

  • Alcatel-Lucent
  • Aviat Networks
  • Bridgewater Systems
  • Ceragon Networks
  • Cisco Systems
  • Dragonwave
  • Ericsson
  • Huawei
  • Intracom Telecom
  • Juniper Networks
  • Nokia Siemens Networks
  • Openet
  • Saguna Networks
  • Sycamore Networks
  • Tekelec
  • Tellabs
  • Volubill




Mobile broadband represents a “kill or cure” solution to the profitability outlook of mobile operators throughout the world. New revenues promise to lift the trend in revenue and ARPU, while new volumes of data traffic threaten to increase costs as quickly as revenues increase - or even faster. Even where some of the world' s leading mobile networks are delivering very encouraging financial performance with their mobile broadband service offerings, the pressure on the CFOs in these companies to maintain tight control of capex and opex while maintaining or enhancing network availability and performance remains intense.

The so-called “flat“ IP network is heralded as a critical next stage in the evolution of the mobile broadband business model. Superseding the multi-layered, hierarchical topology that has served mobile operators relatively well until now, the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has designed networks based on HSPA Evolution, and especially LTE, to provide a much lower cost, much more flexible network for mobile broadband, delivering superior performance.

The evolution of the logical architecture is clear: Beginning with LTE, the RNC layer is done away with altogether, and the separate voice and data cores converge into a single Evolved Packet Core (EPC). This report looks beyond this high-level architectural flattening to examine the case for taking both 3GPP-defined and non-3GPP-defined elements and capabilities that have traditionally resided in the center of the mobile network, and distributing those capabilities out closer toward the user at the edge of the network, in the pursuit of lower cost and better performance.

This report sets out to provide a better understanding of what the opportunities and risks of distribution really are. It discusses the gains that can be made; the ability of operators' organizations to execute on the strategy; and additional costs that are liable to be incurred as the plan is implemented. It sheds light on the business case for distributing each potential network feature and the impact of distributing any one feature on its own, as well as in conjunction with others.

The wider architectural decisions, having little or nothing to do with issues of feature distribution - such as the rollout of new packet synchronization standards, new security solutions such as IPsec and new interfaces such as the direct X2 interface between eNodeBs in LTE - are also key. Holistic design principles are relatively straightforward in a TDM-based architecture. They become much more challenging in any all-IP environment; still more challenging when you add in the cell-handover requirements of a mobile network; and potentially even more challenging when you start distributing features from the center of the network to the edge in this environment.

The opportunity and risk associated with feature distribution is also a key issue for equipment vendors that are targeting the mobile packet core and mobile transport spaces. Platforms and future roadmaps need to be designed with specific features and timelines for those features in mind. Depending on the pattern of demand for distribution from each vendor' s lead customer prospects, that may vary significantly from one vendor to the next.

Care also needs to be taken not just with respect to determining which present-day features need to be supported, but also which future requirements need to be supported, which interfaces to third-party elements are liable to required and what might be required from a network management perspective in a highly distributed mobile network environment.

Mobile Network Feature Distribution Strategies for 3G & LTE explores the opportunities and risks of feature distribution for mobile network operators, analyzes the prospects for distribution of the primary network elements that are deployed centrally in mobile networks today, and examines the various factors that could accelerate or impede this trend. The report also makes specific recommendations for how equipment vendors can best position themselves to capitalize on the move toward distribution.

Recent Heavy Reading research shows a lot of hesitation on the part of mobile operators to distribute specific types of network functionality. As shown in the excerpt below, from Heavy Reading' s June 2010 LTE Strategies Survey, 46 percent of mobile operators respondents in this survey were clear that at least some level of distribution of network elements will be required where the EPC is concerned, although around half gave non-committal responses.

Distributed or Centralized EPC ?

Source: Heavy Reading' s 2010 LTE Strategies Survey; n=102

Table of Contents


  • 1.1. Key Findings
  • 1.2. Report Scope & Structure


  • 2.1. Definition of the NGN
  • 2.2. Distributed Functionality in Carrier Networks: Opportunity & Risk
  • 2.3. Real-World Distribution Models In Wireline Broadband Networks


  • 3.1. The Six Pillars of Feature Distribution
  • 3.2. Most Operators See Distribution as a Long-Term Play
  • 3.3. The Challenge of Maintaining Holistic Design Principles
  • 3.4. Organizational Issues
  • 3.5. LTE Rollout
  • 3.6. Traffic Volumes
  • 3.7. Traffic Types
  • 3.8. The Cost of Transport
  • 3.9. Market Geography
  • 3.10. CDMA & W-CDMA Legacies
  • 3.11. Available Network Equipment
  • 3.12. Small Cell Deployment


  • 4.1. IP Peering Points
  • 4.2. Gateway GPRS Support Node (GGSN)
  • 4.3. Serving GPRS Support Node (SGSN)
  • 4.4. Offload Gateways
  • 4.5. Mobility Management Entity (MME)
  • 4.6. Serving Gateway (S-GW)
  • 4.7. Packet Gateway (P-GW)
  • 4.8. Content Caching
  • 4.9. Video Optimization
  • 4.10. Deep Packet Inspection (DPI)
  • 4.11. Security Features



  • 6.1. Alcatel-Lucent
  • 6.2. Aviat Networks
  • 6.3. Bridgewater Systems
  • 6.4. Ceragon Networks
  • 6.5. Cisco Systems
  • 6.6. Dragonwave
  • 6.7. Ericsson
  • 6.8. Huawei
  • 6.9. Intracom Telecom
  • 6.10. Juniper Networks
  • 6.11. Nokia Siemens Networks
  • 6.12. Openet
  • 6.13. Saguna Networks
  • 6.14. Sycamore Networks
  • 6.15. Tekelec
  • 6.16. Tellabs
  • 6.17. Volubill




  • Figure 2.1: Characteristics of Legacy & Next-Generation Networks
  • Figure 2.2: The Velocix-Enabled ISP
  • Figure 3.1: Heavy Reading' s Six Pillars of Mobile Network Feature Distribution
  • Figure 3.2: Distributed or Centralized EPC?
  • Figure 3.3: Live LTE Networks as of May 2011
  • Figure 3.4: Fixed & Mobile Traffic of an Incumbent European Carrier
  • Figure 3.5: Heavy Reading' s Global Cell Site Forecast
  • Figure 4.1 Offload Gateway Architectures
  • Figure 4.2: Video & Other Data Traffic in the Mobile Network
  • Figure 4.3: Important Technologies for Mobile Video Management
  • Figure 4.4: Most Important Technology for Mobile Video Management
  • Figure 4.5: Global DPI Market Forecast
  • Figure 4.6: The Case for DPI & Caching Distribution
  • Figure 5.1: Vendor Positioning Across the Pillars of Distribution
Back to Top