by Andrew Mackay, Manager Mobile Solutions, Cisco Systems
In my last post Bringing LTE Indoors, I discussed the compelling need to address LTE coverage indoors to allow service migration off 3G, particularly for Voice. We know there is a variety of options for MNOs to address indoor coverage, either from outside in with more outdoor sites, or from inside with wider use of Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS), repeaters or Smallcells. The “outdoor in” approach would mean even more BTS sites, but site acquisition challenges and build costs generally mean this is no longer an option in urban areas. Addressing coverage from indoors makes sense, but what is the optimal solution?
I’ve heard people talking about a “toolbox” approach to indoor coverage, but which tool is right for which job? There is no point using a 6 inch spanner on a 1/4 inch nut, and it’s the same with providing coverage and capacity you need an optimal cost solution for the size of the indoor hole to fill.
Cisco has worked with many operators on modelling Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for various indoor coverage solutions. The results of one recent study are shown below, comparing Distributed Antenna Systems to Smallcells; either installed by the MNO or by the end-user themselves (DIY).
“5-Year TCO study for various indoor coverage solutions”
Obviously this isn’t an “Apples for Apples” comparison since the capacities are so different. But even if we normalise by the number of design users, Smallcells show clear TCO per user benefit.
“Normalised TCO per user for various indoor coverage solutions”
The other thing I observed in this study was how much the DAS system TCO improved when a larger number of users are required to be served in a location. I therefore extended the study to look at how the DAS vs Smallcell TCO comparison varied for different sized enterprises.
“Comparison of DAS versus Smallcell TCO for various Enterprise sizes”
For small enterprises of <50 people, which represents the majority of businesses, Smallcells are clearly more cost effective. Due to their more modular capacity, re-use of WLAN infrastructure and easier installation Smallcells could be more than 5 times cheaper to own. As the size of the enterprise to cover gets larger, DAS TCO is more comparable, but even for large enterprise (>250 people) Smallcells could still work-out with 50% lower TCO. Such comparisons would vary on a case by case basis, for example often larger enterprise locations are already covered with DAS for 3G which can be reused.
The “toolbox” approach to solving indoor coverage challenges makes sense, but for Small Medium Enterprise locations Smallcells seem to be the right tool for the job.
I am trying to find if there is any Pros or Cons in deploying MPLS with separate customer AS for each site as opposed to one AS. The end goal is to be able to inject default routes from two DCs and be able to make a subset of sites follow one default rout...
So I have attempted the below config: l2vpn
backup disable never
xconnect group Xconns
In one of the discuss, it was initiated to us that there is a specific DB size for example:1 GB and breaching of which will led to crash of Iedge process.I want to replicate the scenario by creating load of user by tool in the lab and track the CDM db uti...
Some 15 years ago we had implemented a PWLAN service by deploying SSG on IOS and Cisco SESM (Subscriber Edge Services Manager) as the web interface (i.e. captive portal). Fast forward, SESM becomes EOL, gets replaced by Broadhop SME. Some years later...
I work in a large enterprise. We run our own MPLS environment for macrosegmentation. See attached diagram.We are converting from EIGRP to OSPFv2 at our remote sites. Remote sites are running their own single-area OSPF instances (no area ...