|
|
Register | About Us | Sponsor Channel Service (Korean Market) | Advertise | Contact Us | LinkedIn | Our Korean Site
|
|||
|
HQ: 201, Hanho Building 33, Nonhyeon-ro 64-gil, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06228, Rep. of KOREA Netmanias USA: 5214 36th Ave. NE Seattle, WA 98105 USA Netmanias was founded in year 2002, and provides in-depth analysis and overview of 4G & 5G mobile, IoT, SDN/NFV, Gigabit Internet and video streaming technologies as well as trends in the evolution of Korean operators’ networks and services Copyright ⓒ 2002-2023 NMC Consulting Group. All rights reserved. |
||||
좋은 자료 감사합니다.
I have one question, which is the difference between the X2 Broker and the standard X2-GW defined by 3GPP Rel12?
About your question on the difference between X2 broker and X2-GW, please see "[Contribution] SMEC X2 Broker vs. X2GW" written by the white paper author.
I prefer the standardised X2GW. The Broker version has to be able to decode all X2 messages in order to send them to the target. New messages implies a Broker update while it is transparent for the X2GW. Also when a HeNB is disconnected, all its peers receive a notification via X2GW. The Broker don't have this functionality.
As you mentioned, in technical aspect "standard X2GW feature (Rel.12)" can provide more efficient way to process/transmit X2 messages between macro and home eNB.
But in practical aspect, most of major macro vendors and HeNB vendors do not have clear roadmap of development for X2-C interface (X2GW interworking).
Furthermore, they don't have detailed migration/upgrade plan for existing, already deployed, Rel 9/10/11 macro/HeNBs in commercial networks.
As a practical approach, we would like to suggest mobile operators deploy flexible HeNB GW which supports X2 service broker (for Rel 8~11 MeNB/HeNB) and X2GW (for Rel 12 and above) feature in a single system, to interwork with MeNB/HeNBs from multiple vendors with various release versions.