Mobile WiMAX Speed Record

Notice anything fishy about the speeds Telkom is offering relative to what the technology can do? Maybe they are using the wrong version of the standard, or the wrong supplier, or they're just trying to fool us.
 
Once again: Real world vs. Sustainable business

ads said:
Notice anything fishy about the speeds Telkom is offering relative to what the technology can do? Maybe they are using the wrong version of the standard, or the wrong supplier, or they're just trying to fool us.
Click to expand...

Please read my previous emails regarding the difference between ultimate achievable speed per sector and the reasonable distributed provisioned offering.

In brief: The 33 Mbps is achieved in a 10 MHz channel, most operators will use 5 Mhz channels per sector due to the scarcity of spectrum. (Telkom uses 802.16-2004, which sees them using even smaller channels namely 3.5MHz)
2) The 33Mbps is achieved with the highest modulation scheme called 64QAM. However this is only achievable in unobstructed line of site conditions within about 800m from the base station in the case of in-building coverage is about 3km for and outside antenna
3) There is no "wrong" standard or "right" standard. Telkom uses properly certified Alvarion 802.16-2004 equipment.
4) They are not trying to fool anyone. Of course they can sell you the full 33Mbps if you are willing to pay the full R50000 for the capital cost of the BTS sector, as well as the full backhaul opex, seeing that you want the full bandwidth:-)

Really guys, how many times do we need to say this? Telkom is not messing around with WiMAX, neither is Neotel...and no, I am not working for any of these two. But I am in fact working for a system integrator that built and operates 4 commerical WiMAX networks in Africa. Take the effort to read and understand what WiMAX is about, what the difference between a "ideal condition technology showcase demo" and a "commercially sustainable business model" is...
 
Hannes said:
However this is only achievable in unobstructed line of site conditions within about 800m from the base station in the case of in-building coverage is about 3km for and outside antenna.
Click to expand...
Not quite.

I'm posting this from a 802.16e CPE 5.77km from the BS sitting indoors (granted next to a window facing the BS), just barely out of LOS and I often connect at QAM64 3/4.

Hannes said:
But I am in fact working for a system integrator that built and operates 4 commerical WiMAX networks in Africa.
Click to expand...
Yes and how many of them are using the latest avaliable 802.16e kit?

The WiMAX world is rapidly advancing forward from where 802.16d is, and many, like myself, already believe its past its sell by date.
 
Roman4604 said:
Not quite.

I'm posting this from a 802.16e CPE 5.77km from the BS sitting indoors (granted next to a window facing the BS), just barely out of LOS and I often connect at QAM64 3/4.

Yes and how many of them are using the latest avaliable 802.16e kit?

The WiMAX world is rapidly advancing forward from where 802.16d is, and many, like myself, already believe its past its sell by date.
Click to expand...

We are not using 802.16d because, and I have said MANY times. THERE IS NO 16e certified kit. As in any large corporate such as Telkom , you will have a hard time getting capex committed for building a network with kit that does not have the all important WiMAX Forum certification. Don't get me wrong - I am a technologist myself and constantly battle the burocracy on this issue.

You "indoor scenario" cannot really be seen as indoor e.g. the 18dB loss I normal provision for if you are behind a window. Furthermore, what is the power output of your BTS? Just yesterday I worked with Samsung's network sizing tool for Wibro and they are sitting on a 44dBm Tx on the BTS - WAY beyond legal limits... So I guess my question should be - what mod scheme are you running on your uplink;)

Eventually I think 802.16e will be the logical choice to go for, but for now the economies of scales are still favouring d. The problem with e is that the capex requirement is much higher than for d EVEN if you are using it to deliver a exclusively outdoor fixed solution. The ASN and other core infrastructure adds a considerable amount on top of your would-be-"d" capex. And even if you do not want to make use of the soft handover capability built into e, there is no price discount. I will wager a roger up the nought that you will NOT see a 802.16e network in South Africa that offers full mobility inside and outside (mirroring 3G coverage patterns) for at least the next three years. There is no business model in this for firstly mobile operators (the only ones that have enough highsites/premises to build such a network) because it duplicates what they are achieving over 3G/HSPA (there is still substantial amounts of spectrum available for LTE). For non mobile operators the situation is equally bleak because there is exactly 0.00% chance of any from them securing 1000 sites (what you will require to cover CT, BFN, PE, DBN, JHB, PTA,NLSPRT as per Motorola, Samsung and Intel's design tools), passing EIA's, doing civils, erecting towers, installing equipment and antennas and provide backhaul. This needs to be done in under 18 months because remember the rest of the world is not going to stop selling 3G and fixed WiMAX so that you can catch up...

Have a look and you will see that it is ONLY those vendors who were caught asleep with d, such as Motorola, Alcatel, Huawei, ZTE who are now trying to "squeeze" the market ripe for 802.16e. This while Alvarion, Airspan, Aperto and Redline are coining it BIG on d...
 
Hannes said:
We are not using 802.16d because, and I have said MANY times. THERE IS NO 16e certified kit.
Click to expand...
I was not disputing your descisions, rather enquiring on your practical experience with 16e equipment.

Hannes said:
So I guess my question should be - what mod scheme are you running on your uplink
Click to expand...
Sorry dont have access to the BS/NMS, can only tell you how my CPE behaves.

Hannes said:
but for now the economies of scales are still favouring d. The problem with e is that the capex requirement is much higher than for d EVEN if you are using it to deliver a exclusively outdoor fixed solution. The ASN and other core infrastructure adds a considerable amount on top of your would-be-"d" capex.
Click to expand...
Short term effect by virtue of the newness of 16e solutions. Once more networks are deployed, production ramps up & more competing designs come to market, prices will fall ... way past current 16d levels. Every far-east vendor I've spoken to has prototypes in the lab and I can tell you they're not 16d.

Hannes said:
And even if you do not want to make use of the soft handover capability built into e, there is no price discount. I will wager a roger up the nought that you will NOT see a 802.16e network in South Africa that offers full mobility inside and outside (mirroring 3G coverage patterns) for at least the next three years. There is no business model in this for firstly mobile operators (the only ones that have enough highsites/premises to build such a network) because it duplicates what they are achieving over 3G/HSPA (there is still substantial amounts of spectrum available for LTE).
Click to expand...
No ones disputing this (for your nought's sake):p. The initial target will be fixed and nomadic users, not fully mobile (with handover).

Hannes said:
because remember the rest of the world is not going to stop selling 3G and fixed WiMAX so that you can catch up...
Click to expand...
Tell that to the CTO of Sprint Nextel.

Hannes said:
Have a look and you will see that it is ONLY those vendors who were caught asleep with d, such as Motorola, Alcatel, Huawei, ZTE who are now trying to "squeeze" the market ripe for 802.16e. This while Alvarion, Airspan, Aperto and Redline are coining it BIG on d...
Click to expand...
Chump change in the greater scheme of things.

What I see is all the r&d, focus, money, not to mention backward compatibility of future specs, going in to 16e. What you have now from 16d is all there will ever be (technology/pricepoints etc.). From my perspective, the vendors & operators who's still investing heavily into 16d are the ones truely asleep from a strategic perspective.
 
The days of our lives and other d vs e adventures...

Yes, we are yanking around with stuff that keep even the big guns busy in boardrooms till late in the evenings
:D
Roman4604 said:
I

Tell that to the CTO of Sprint Nextel.

.
Click to expand...

The Sprint Nextel deal is quite interesting. And by the way I also see that they are looking for partners to help them deploy the network with the option to buy capacity on it at wholesale tarriffs... The way I see it is that 16e is basically their "3G". Their EV-DO (even with Rev A) approach is not nearly as future proof as 3GPP drive towards HSPA/LTE. They have to go to 16e. But their deployment strategy is very much the same as how mobile operators approach a 2.5G to 3G c-located/site upgrade methos of deployment. This way the logistical shock of building a $3b network is somehow absorbed in the "natural network evolution" mode of doing things...



Roman4604 said:
What I see is all the r&d, focus, money, not to mention backward compatibility of future specs, going in to 16e. What you have now from 16d is all there will ever be (technology/pricepoints etc.). From my perspective, the vendors & operators who's still investing heavily into 16d are the ones truely asleep from a strategic perspective.
Click to expand...

Interesting view...and again I have to say given my roots you are preaching to the converted - I love squeezing a hertz till it hurts:cool: But one only has to look at the way that cellular grew in Africa to at least have some appreciation for the enduring value that d might offer - after all, it is "old generation" 2G/2.5G voice networks (not HSPA), $20 Motorola C123's (not Nokia N95's) that deliver voice at $0.03c per minute to billions of subscribers, yet returning 50-55% EBIDTA's for operators...
 
BPSK1/2 on uplink only..

Hi Roman. Signal looks strong on downlink but I see it is suffering a bit on the uplink. Something I picked up on: big difference in planing networks for d vs e is that on e, you can just about forget about the downlink, concentrating just on the uplink, as that is the dictating factor. I cannot think that a network operator will want to allow a commercial service where any of the CPE's are camping on BPSK. I see from some of the vendors' management interfaces that they have the option to block anything lower than QPSK, because it becomes too radio resource intensive.

True it begs the question, what is going to be a fully mobile WiMAX vendor's value proposition? If it is more or less the same as for 3G (content, streaming, file downloads) then I suppose making your cells so big that having 60% of your customers on a bad uplink modscheme is fine...But if you want to offer symmetrical connectivity (required for VPN, and offices that send big emails) your uplink modscheme is as important is the downlink.

Lets hope wave 2 cert with proper MIMO on the uplink will make matters better...
 
Hannes said:
Hi Roman. Signal looks strong on downlink but I see it is suffering a bit on the uplink.
Click to expand...
Ya, the uplink is a bit dodge at times. Probably due to a) thick steel burglar bars on the window & b) reported interference in Sandton area. Put the unit outside the bars and it improves a bit (have seen 16QAM 1/2 at times) ...

http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/7511/wimaxsignal2vv7.jpg

Hannes said:
True it begs the question, what is going to be a fully mobile WiMAX vendor's value proposition? If it is more or less the same as for 3G (content, streaming, file downloads) then I suppose making your cells so big that having 60% of your customers on a bad uplink modscheme is fine...But if you want to offer symmetrical connectivity (required for VPN, and offices that send big emails) your uplink modscheme is as important is the downlink.
Click to expand...
Well that will be up to the provider to align with their target audience. 16e is TDD so you can tune your UL/DL to whatever you want (65:35 is generally a good compromise). Your only limitation is that UL does not support 64QAM for now, so 16QAM is your max UL modulation.

Hannes said:
Lets hope wave 2 cert with proper MIMO on the uplink will make matters better...
Click to expand...
No doubt 16e equip has much room for optimisation & evolution, but I think the foundation is quite solid.
 
@Hannes: Can you give us any details about Altech's WiBro trial? Will we be seeing this technology in SA in the near future? The trial was supposed to take place in July from what I remember. Any other observations?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X