Re: [16NG] distributed (decentralised) ASN for voip over wimax

["Jai-Jin Lim" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Frits,

As mentioned below, WiMAX Forum is dedicated to discuss such things. For
your information, WiMAX has defined two ASN models, known as Profile B and
Profile C. The Profile B architecture meets your needs since supporting
Profile B means the base station router. However, there are pros and cons
for Profile B or Profile C. If you look at another competing technology
called LTE, its architecture is similar to Profile C. I think there are good
reasons and old practices why Profile C architecture is preferred especially
for the mobile wireless network.

--Jai-Jin

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 5:36 PM, Basavaraj Patil
<[e-mail]>wrote:

>
> Hi Frits,
>
> Don't know if this discussion on the 16NG list even makes sense. Anyway,
> your question is about network planning and the topology of your network.
> You could deploy a network that does not require all traffic to be
> backhauled to a centralized CSN HA/core router.
>
> You would likely get more feedback to your question about network
> architecture and support for VoIP in the WiMAX forum's Network Working
> group.
>
> -Raj
>
>
> On 7/29/08 2:07 AM, "ext Frits Haas" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> > I hope someone can answer a question I have that some of the top vendors
> > such as Motorola, Huawei and Nokia Siemens are battling to give me a
> > straight answer to.
> >
> > We are in the process of rolling out a 2.5 wimax network, designed purely
> > around offering VOIP.
> >
> > With the current ASN/AAA architecture, all traffic is aggregated at the
> CORE
> > ASN, which means everything needs to be backhauled to the central ASN.
> This
> > poses an extremely difficult scenario for us, as transmission costs are
> very
> > high in the countries that we would like to launch our network (mostly
> > Africa).
> >
> > One solution would be a kind of distributed ASN architecture, to minimise
> > backhaul traffic.
> > Better yet, each BTS is able to route or switch voip packets to its
> > destination, alleviating the need to backhaul the entire voice stream.
> > Granted, you still need the AAA to authenticate, and the billing system
> > needs to be aware of the call, but that traffic is minimal.
> >
> > The question is, is anyone (vendor or otherwise) looking into designing
> or
> > creating such a model with their equipment, and if so, what would the
> > different solutions entail?
> > My theory is that a simple router at each BTS (Base station) would be
> able
> > to solve the problem.
> >
> > Your questions and comments most welcome.
> >
> > kind regards,
> > :) Frits
> > Frits Haas
> > Senior Manager: Core IP Network Architecture
> > Mobile: [phone] or [phone]
> > Fax: [phone]
> > Email and MSN : [e-mail]
> > Disclaimer  http://www.smilecoms.com/disclaimer
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 16NG mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng
>
> _______________________________________________
> 16NG mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng
>

_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng