1). No Native Voice and SMS in LTE
2). Options for Voice over LTE:
1) Data Only (No Voice over LTE) - Choice of initial deployment for LTE without voice
Voice Based on Legacy MSC
2) CS Fallback (CSFB)
3) Voice over LTE using Generic Access (
Voice Based on New Infrastructure
4) IMS
5). Over-The-Top (like Skype)
3). 3GPP has so far adopted two different approaches:
§ 1). Fallback to
§ 2). IMS As a Potential Solution For the Mid and Long Term
4-1). CS Fallback:
Pros:
§ Proven technology
§ Supports migration from CDMA as well as GSM/UMTS
Cons:
§ Call setup time delay - Minimum 30% increase* in call setup times (requires a ‘blind fallback’ to achieve 30%, delay is higher if handset must do network scan before fallback)
§ Requires MSC upgrade - Dependent on MSC vendors to implement (home and visited networks)
§ Impact on coverage and handoff for
§ Standard is ‘barely adequate’
§ No support for simultaneous voice/data over LTE - No LTE during voice call (Dropped data connections)
§ CSFB Device for LTE voice (Poor fit with Multi-tasking devices)
§ CSFB fits very poorly with LTE femtocells - “Falling back” to GSM network negates value of LTE femtocell
§ No support for combinational IMS/RCS + voice over LTE
§ No validating LTE network QoS capabilities
§ No verification of IMS telephony plumbing features
4-2). IMS “One Voice” Profile
§ A solution envisaged for the mid and long term is to introduce network operator based voice services in LTE with the IMS.
§ TAS from IMS Centralized Services (ICS) - Service anchor in IMS to improve service consistency
§ Single Radio Voice Call Continuity (SR-VCC) - Swap between IMS and CS without preserving services
§ IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) Emergency Sessions is supported via E-CSCF. The Emergency solution should be able to provide continuity of location support the SR VCC of emergency calls.
§ The One Voice Initiative aims to achieve an industry agreement on a harmonized way to implement voice and SMS over LTE based on existing standards -“Voice over IMS Profile” specification
Pros:
§ Most feature rich
§ Enables Real time Rich Media - fully IP based platform for rich media communication
§ Doesn’t require MSC support
§ Handing-over ongoing IMS based voice calls to circuit switched networks via SRVCC (between IMS over PS access and CS access for calls is anchored in IMS)
§ Convergence via ICS – IMS based on the popular SIP is widely used in fixed line IP based networks for Voice over IP
Cons:
§ IMS is a costly and complex solution.
§ Complexity - significant complexity of the system, and it will still take several years before large scale commercial IMS deployments, and features to handle wireless specific issues such as unreliable radio connections, application servers for external application development, international roaming, scalability, security, etc.
§ IMS Market timing
§ SRVCC provides the ability to transition a voice call from the VoIP/IMS packet domain to the legacy circuit domain, but the ability to transition from the circuit domain to the packet domain is not addressed in the current generation (R8) of LTE standards
§ Limited LTE Coverage if only hotspots at the initial phase
§ SRVCC-capable mobile initiated in a voice call determines that it is moving away from LTE coverage
§ ICS-capable UE if ICS is utilized
4-3). Voice over LTE using Generic Access (
§ A technological approach for delivering voice and SMS services over LTE access networks
§ Leverages a mobile operator’s existing core voice network
§
§
§
§ The VoLGA Access Network Controller (VANC) , as a GAN gateway between LTE and CS domain, securely connects a subscriber to the infrastructure of a network operator and voice calls and other circuit switched services such as SMS are then securely transported between the mobile device and the Gateway.
§
Pros:
§ Voice and Data over LTE
§ Call setup times as good as
§ Preserves CS core investments
§ External controller (VANC) minimizes impact to core network - No MSC upgrades
§ Supports simultaneous voice/ data over LTE
§
§ Delivering voice over LTE validates LTE QoS capabilities
§ Voice services delivered natively through LTE femtocell
§ The VoLGA forum decided to use the SRVCC as the means to handover
§ No VoLGA specific features required in the MSC or SGSN for VoLGA is a great plus for deployment in a running network.
Cons:
§ Not 3GPP standardized yet -
§ Not fully standardized yet as the stage 3 specification has not yet been finalized
§ Limited operator support
§ GAN-based dual-mode mobile phones is required
§ SRVCC-capable mobile is required
§ Only T-Mobile strongly enthusiastic right now
§ Scaling and Roaming
§ Limited LTE Coverage if only hotspots at the initial phase
§ It also requires changes to handsets, as well as a mechanism for allowing the network to trigger LTE-to
4-4). Over-The-Top (like Skype)
§ Some network operators might also decide to go an entirely different way and offer voice services (like Skype) over LTE with external partners.
§
Pros
§ Not limited by legacy continuity
§ No “IMS complexity tax”
§ Integration with presence and productivity apps
§ Non-traditional voice apps (Voice Twitter?)
Cons
§ Business case unproven
§ QoS - service providers have no control over quality of service
§ Relationship politics
§ What happens outside LTE footprint - no Handover (or Mobility) that calls can't be handed over to a circuit switched
§ Regulation
GSM Gateway with VoIP Gsm Gateway solutions like SMBs and SOHOs. With a friendly GUI and strange modular design, users may lightly set up their customized Gateway.
回覆刪除VoIP Gsm Gateway