Wimax was the same with with service flows.
I'm guessing it's coming from a perspective where you don't limit speed
and you bill for usage. The more you throughput you give them, the more
GB you can bill for. If anybody wants one overall limit and several
priority levels within that limit, then I think they'll need to use an
external system for that.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Nathan Anderson" <[email protected]>
To: "'Adam Moffett'" <[email protected]>; "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Sent: 2/6/2017 5:06:29 PM
Subject: RE: [Telrad] Uplink throughput again
Something that I learned that I should point out:
A dedicated bearer with a higher priority should take precedence over
default bearer traffic, yes. But from what I can tell, LTE spec. does
not have a way of putting a total speed cap on the entire UE across any
and all bearers. The UE AMBRs only restrict all non-GBR bearers
(default or not, even across multiple APNs) but does NOT take into
account GBR bearers, and QCI 1 is GBR.
What this means is that, for example, if you have a default bearer with
QCI 6, and dedicated bearer with QCI 1, and the UE DL and UL AMBRs are
set to 10 and 1 Mbit/s respectively, and your dedicated bearer's MBRs
are set to 5 and 0.5 (half of the UE AMBRs, for the sake of this
example), you haven't actually set up things such that up to half of
the subscriber's AMBRs are given priority on the dedicated bearer,
leaving that user half of his total bandwidth if you end up filling the
dedicated bearer up to its MBR in both directions. No, instead because
the GBR QCIs are not accounted for within the AMBR, the user can move
up to 5x0.5 on the dedicated bearer and *simultaneously* also move up
to 10x1 (assuming there is enough sector capacity at the time) on the
default bearer.
Maybe in some cases, this is desireable. If you use QCI 1 for VoIP,
for example, then you are effectively providing the customer with a
separate channel for their voice calls that does not dip into their
configured speed package, but is instead additive. But it is something
to keep in mind as you are planning and building your network as well
as running tests.
-- Nathan
From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 1:48 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [Telrad] Uplink throughput again
The EPC and most of the eNB are running the latest general release
available on Zendesk.
A couple of eNB are running some kind of maintenance release that
support wanted us to try.
I'm making sure to run iPerf on the dedicated bearer to eliminate other
user traffic from weaker UE as a factor. At QCI 1 it should take
precedence over the default bearer traffic.
I would definitely take the time to set one up, not necessarily for
this purpose, but rather to ensure you always have access to your UE.
If the default bearer is hosed with a torrent and you don't have a
dedicated bearer for management access then you can be completely
locked out of the unit. Monitoring, management access, and firmware
updates all work more reliably with the dedicated bearer and I'd
strongly recommend it. There's a knowledge base article in Zendesk
about it. Use DSCP 6 because that's tagged by default in the UE.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Jeremy Austin" <[email protected]>
To: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Sent: 2/6/2017 4:30:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Telrad] Uplink throughput again
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Adam Moffett
<[email protected]> wrote:
Can somebody tell me if they're getting expected uplink throughput?
What ENB and EPC revisions are you at, Adam?
We're investigating this same issue ourselves, although we haven't
tried a dedicated bearer.
--
Jeremy Austin
(907) 895-2311
(907) 803-5422
[email protected]
Heritage NetWorks
Whitestone Power & Communications
Vertical Broadband, LLC
Schedule a meeting: http://doodle.com/jermudgeon
_______________________________________________
Telrad mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/telrad
