All,

We recently implemented iPCRF on our EPC to great effect.  We added a QCI 1 
profile that we apply to our dedicated bearer, and are prioritizing our VoIP 
service using that.  So that we can easily see and verify the effectiveness of 
this, we also started sending ICMP over the same dedicated bearer.  Average 
latency and jitter to CPEs dropped like a rock right after we did that, so it 
is clearly working.

When our ENBs start to become moderately busy, we still notice that RTT for 
traffic on the default bearer can become both exceptionally latent and jittery. 
 This is easy to see if we run a constant ping to a CPE and then stop 
prioritizing ICMP to that CPE in the middle of the ping test.  Ping jitter goes 
up significantly almost immediately.  When we prioritize ICMP, all we end up 
doing is masking that problem.

Unfortunately, release 6.6 only allows for one dedicated bearer, so we can't 
classify different types of traffic across multiple QCI levels in order to try 
to help deal with this better.  But after looking at the various QCI levels 
that are defined in the LTE spec 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QoS_Class_Identifier), I am wondering if there 
isn't a short-term answer to this problem while we wait for multiple dedicated 
bearer support.  Specifically, I see that each level also has a defined "packet 
delay budget".  QCI 6, the default pick for the default bearer, has a PDB of 
300ms.  What would happen if we were to, say, switch to using QCI 7, which has 
a PDB of 100ms, for our default bearer?  Would we actually see an overall 
improvement in RTT?  And if so, would it be at the expense of anything/what 
would be the downside(s)?  (For example, would overall throughput end up taking 
a hit because it is trying to service UEs less efficiently so that it can make 
good on the latency budget?)

I'm curious to know if anyone has tried this.

Thanks,

-- 
Nathan Anderson
First Step Internet, LLC
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
Telrad mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad

Reply via email to