From protocol stack to technology circle: exploring regulation, efficiency metrics, and the high-dimensional design space of wireless systems

Mähönen, Petri; Petrova, Marina; Vries, Jean Pierre De

doi:10.1109/mcom.2012.6384457

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In [23] the technical and non-technical aspects of wireless technologies were identified and grouped into nine layers forming a technology circle, as shown in Fig. 3.…”

Section: Spectrum Sharing: a System-level Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this survey we adopt the technology circle proposed in [23] as a framework to facilitate our system-level analysis of inter-technology spectrum sharing. In the following we briefly describe each layer of the technology circle and we highlight its impact on the design of spectrum sharing mechanisms in general.…”

Section: Spectrum Sharing: a System-level Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this survey we explore the first question by means of a multi-layer technology circle that incorporates in a systemlevel view all relevant technical and non-technical aspects of a wireless technology. The technology circle, as proposed in [23] and illustrated in Fig. 3, includes the seven layers of the OSI stack and introduces the regulatory framework at Layer 0, and business models and social practices at Layer 8.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Survey of Spectrum Sharing for Inter-Technology Coexistence

Voicu

Simić

Petrova

2019

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing capacity demands in emerging wireless technologies are expected to be met by network densification and spectrum bands open to multiple technologies. These will, in turn, increase the level of interference and also result in more complex inter-technology interactions, which will need to be managed through spectrum sharing mechanisms. Consequently, novel spectrum sharing mechanisms should be designed to allow spectrum access for multiple technologies, while efficiently utilizing the spectrum resources overall. Importantly, it is not trivial to design such efficient mechanisms, not only due to technical aspects, but also due to regulatory and business model constraints. In this survey we address spectrum sharing mechanisms for wireless inter-technology coexistence by means of a technology circle that incorporates in a unified, system-level view the technical and nontechnical aspects. We thus systematically explore the spectrum sharing design space consisting of parameters at different layers. Using this framework, we present a literature review on intertechnology coexistence with a focus on wireless technologies with equal spectrum access rights, i.e. (i) primary/primary, (ii) secondary/secondary, and (iii) technologies operating in a spectrum commons. Moreover, we reflect on our literature review to identify possible spectrum sharing design solutions and performance evaluation approaches useful for future coexistence cases. Finally, we discuss spectrum sharing design challenges and suggest future research directions.

show abstract

“…In [23] the technical and non-technical aspects of wireless technologies were identified and grouped into nine layers forming a technology circle, as shown in Fig. 3.…”

Section: Spectrum Sharing: a System-level Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spectrum Sharing: a System-level Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Survey of Spectrum Sharing for Inter-Technology Coexistence

Voicu

Simić

Petrova

2019

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…possibility of entrant-entrant interference given uncoordinated transmissions in LTE-U fixed and LTE-U adaptive variants). 7 Any other parameters, e.g. transmit power, that influence the extent of mutual interference could arguably also be considered part of a "coexistence mechanism", but their primary function is not to facilitate coexistence.…”

Section: A Entrant Technologies and Coexistence Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the worst-case scenario of forced co-channel operation-or equivalently, locally higher-than-typical network density-LTE is sometimes a better neighbour to Wi-Fi than a Wi-Fi entrant, but sometimes worse. Beyond this LTE/Wi-Fi case study, we argue that such a systematic engineering analysis, exploring a large design parameter space [7] for entrant technologies and scenarios, is a best-practice approach in general for supporting evidence-based rulemaking by the regulator.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

LTE in Unlicensed Bands Is Neither Friend nor Foe to Wi-Fi

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proponents of deploying LTE in the 5 GHz band for providing additional cellular network capacity have claimed that LTE would be a better neighbour to Wi-Fi in the unlicensed band, than Wi-Fi is to itself. On the other side of the debate, the Wi-Fi community has objected that LTE would be highly detrimental to Wi-Fi network performance. However, there is a lack of transparent and systematic engineering evidence supporting the contradicting claims of the two camps, which is essential for ascertaining whether regulatory intervention is in fact required to protect the Wi-Fi incumbent from the new LTE entrant. To this end, we present a comprehensive coexistence study of Wi-Fi and LTE-in-unlicensed, surveying a large parameter space of coexistence mechanisms and a range of representative network densities and deployment scenarios. Our results show that, typically, harmonious coexistence between Wi-Fi and LTE is ensured by the large number of 5 GHz channels. For the worst-case scenario of forced co-channel operation, LTE is sometimes a better neighbour to Wi-Fi-when effective node density is low-but sometimes worse-when density is high. We find that distributed interference coordination is only necessary to prevent a "tragedy of the commons" in regimes where interference is very likely. We also show that in practice it does not make a difference to the incumbent what kind of coexistence mechanism is added to LTE-in-unlicensed, as long as one is in place. We therefore conclude that LTE is neither friend nor foe to Wi-Fi in the unlicensed bands in general. We submit that the systematic engineering analysis exemplified by our case study is a best-practice approach for supporting evidence-based rulemaking by the regulator.

show abstract