3G Femto or 802.11g WiFi: Which Is the Best Indoor Data Solution Today?

Abstract

In this paper HSPA Release 6 femto and IEEE 802.11g WiFi indoor data solutions are investigated from an end user perspective. Femto and WiFi access points are deployed at typical locations in an urban environment and end user performance is measured. Three key performance indicators (KPI) were defined -downlink and uplink user data rates, latency and mobile power consumption. These three KPIs are of high importance when choosing an indoor data solution. Our measurements show that the downlink and uplink data rates of the WiFi solution are significantly higher than femto data rates. Similarly, latency results show that WiFi outperforms the femto solution. Especially, the radio resource control (RRC) connection set-up time increases the latency for the femto. In terms of idle power consumption the best results are obtained when the mobile camps on the femto. Whereas, WiFi performs best in all active mode power consumption measurements. Based on our KPIs, the preferred indoor data solution today is WiFi. The deciding factor is the combined latency and power performance of the WiFi, where WiFi outperforms the femto.

An Object Store Service for a Fog/Edge Computing Infrastructure Based on IPFS and a Scale-Out NAS

“…• local wireless link [2], L f og = 10ms, latency between clients and the fog site they belong to; • wide area network link [3], L core = 50ms, latency between each fog site; • and the latency to reach a cloud [15]; L Cloud = 100ms. Inside each Fog site and inside the Cloud, the latency between the servers has been set to L site = 0.5ms.…”

“…Experiments have been performed in the spirit of reproducible research 2 . We measured access times using our own benchmark script and the amount of data exchanged between the sites using iptables.…”

“…Devices located in the Edge contact directly the servers located in the Fog whereas those located in the Extreme Edge have to cross a local network before reaching the Fog. The one-way network latency to reach the Fog (noted L F og ) is comprised between 10 and 100 ms (latency of a local wireless link [2]). The latency between the sites of Fog (noted L Core ) is comprised between 50 and 100 ms (mean latency of a Wide Area Network link [3]).…”

5G – Wireless Communications for 2020

“…Differently, in outdoor small cells, the radio signal is guided along street canyons, due to reflection and scattering on the buildings, and diffraction on the corners [85]. For indoor small cells, propagation is more complicated due to the multiple reflections on the walls, propagation through floors and walls and corridor guiding effects [86].…”

The Performance Comparison of Third Generation (3g) Technologies for Internet Services in Bangkok

“…Examples of these are latency, user data rates, and speed test measurements. (Ranta, 2004) 348.02ms / 362.37ms (Chen, Towsley, Nahum, Gibbens, & Lim, 2012) HSDPA / Release'99 90ms (Tapia, Liu, Karimli, & Feuerstein, 2009) / 100ms (Tarun, 2014) (Person, 2008) -HSPA 50ms (Person, 2008) / 60ms (Fricke et al, 2012) / 70ms (Tapia et al, 2009) 99ms / 112ms (Jørgensen, Rodriguez Larrad, Elling, & Mogensen, 2014) HSPA+ 40ms (Fricke et al, 2012) / 50ms (Person, 2008) 115.32ms (Chen et al, 2012) HSPA Release 8 / Release 9 10 MHz BW 25ms (Real Wireless Ltd, 2012) 42ms (Laner et al, 2012) / 38ms (Mohan, Kapoor, & Mohanty, 2011) LTE 20ms (Fricke et al, 2012) 16ms (Person, 2008) 36ms (Laner et al, 2012) / 32ms (Mohan et al, 2011) / 141.62ms / 65.84ms / 124.64ms 77.31ms (Chen et al, 2012) LTE-Advanced 10ms (Vacirca, Ricciato, & Pilz, 2005) - Haryadi and Andina (2012) studied the QoS measurement of File Transfer Protocol (FTP) services in 3G networks. Almutairi, Al-Jame, and A-Buraikan (2009) evaluated the QoS with Round Trip Time (RTT), FTP, and World Wide Web (WWW).…”