shaping mobile networks for the iot - roberto verdone direction bi-directional mainly uplink ... •...

Slide subtitle

Massimo CondoluciResearch Associate

Department of InformaticsCentre for Telecommunications Research

King’s College London

Shaping mobile networks for the IoT


Massimo Condoluci ([email protected]) – Bologna, 3 November 20172

CTR @KCL



CTR @KCL



• Introduction to IoT and LPWA technologies

• Introduction to mobile networks

• Cellular IoT

• The IoT in the mobile core network

Outline

Slide subtitle





Introduction to IoT andLow Power Wide Area

(LPWA) Networks



Internet of Things



Internet of Things

https://www.ericsson.com/en/networks/topics/iot-connectivity/iot-use-cases-and-requirements-on-technology

Orange and Ericsson, “Traffic Model for legacy GPRS MTC; document GP 160060.” 3GPP GERAN meeting #69, Feb 2016.



Machine-type communications




Internet of Things

ZonePop. Density per

SqKm

Pop. Density per

Household

Household

density per sqKm

Cell Radius

Km

Household per

cell

MTC Devices

Per Household

Central 1E4 1.58 6329 0.54968

(4114)40

Urban 7.5E3 2.64 2840 235670

(29508)40

ZoneMTC Devices Per

Cell

Smartphones

per Cell

Central198720

(164560)6500

Urban1426800

(1180320)77925

Zone

MTC

Devices Per

Cell

(no Mob.)

Device Triggered Network Triggered

Reporting Time T

(Sync – Unif. Over T)

(Async – Beta Over T)

Packet Size

(UL)

Reporting Time T

(Sync – Unif. Over T)

(Async – Beta Over T)

Packet Size

(DL/UL)

Central 164560 1m, 5m, 1h, 12h, 24h 1000, 10000 1m, 5m, 1h, 12h, 24h 1000,10000/400

Urban 1180320 1m, 5m, 1h, 12h, 24h 1000, 10000 1m, 5m, 1h, 12h, 24h 1000,10000/400

3GPP TR 37.868 Annex B and TR 45.820 Annex E



Internet of Things


Orange and Ericsson, “Traffic Model for legacy GPRS MTC; document GP 160060.” 3GPP GERAN meeting #69, Feb 2016.

• Total density: 32600 device/sqkm

• Total traffic: ~35000 device/hour = ~10 pkts/s



Machine-type communications

Human-type traffic Machine-type traffic

Traffic direction Bi-directional Mainly uplink

Message size Large/Very Large Small

Traffic duration From 10s of seconds to minutes Very short (one transmission)

Delay Variable Usually delay-tolerant

Transmission periodicity No period, frequent sessions From 10s of minutes to hours

Mobility From static to high-mobility Static, very low

Information priority Usually low From low to high

Amount of devices 100s per cell 1000s per cell (target ~35000)

Battery lifetimeRe-charge whenever a socket is

available!In the order of years



• Objectives

• Battery duration ~10 years

• Optimized for the transmission of brief messages

• Low module cost (<5$)

• Coverage in the order of 10s of km for a cell

• Outdoor, indoor, deep-indoor, underground coverage

• High link budget with narrowband modulation

• “Short” time-to-market

• Support very huge number of devices (massive MTC - mMTC)

• End-to-end secure connectivity (application authentication)

Low Power Wide Area (LPWA)



LPWA vs Other Techonologies

https://ioncomm.blogspot.com/2016/10/lpwa-low-power-wide-area-core-of-iot.html



Low Power Wide Area (LPWA)

LPWA

Technologies

ISM Band Licensed spectrum

3GPP LTE Cat.0

3GPP: Rel. 12

LTE-M

NB-IOT

LoRa

SigFox

RPMA

IngenuWeightless

EC-GSM-IoT



LPWA vs other technologies

http://www.theiet.org/sectors/information-communications/topics/ubiquitous-computing/articles/lpwan.cfm

Billion global connection covered by different wireless networks 2015-2025 (Machina Research, May 2015)



• Ultra Narrowband Modulation (200 kHz)

• Each message is 100 Hz, and transferred at

100/600 bps

• UL message

• Up to 12-bytes payload and takes an average

2s

• For a 12-byte data payload, a Sigfox frame will

use 26 bytes in total

• Max 140 msg/day per device

• DL message

• The payload allowance in downlink messages is

8 bytes

• Max 4 msg/day per device

• Star network architecture

• The broadcasted message is received by any

base station in the range, (3 on average)

SigFox



• Based on Chirp Spreading Spectrum (CSS)

• Exploitation of multiple gateway

• The network replies through the best gateway

• Three classes of devices

• Class A

• The device has two DL windows after a UL transmission

• Class B

• The device gets extra DL windows in addition to those of class A

• Class C

• The device can always receive in DL

LoRA



• The idea is to provide connectivity to IoT devices via cellular networks

• Ad-hoc radio interfaces tailored for IoT requirements

• Exploitation of the same physical layer technique as current cellular

technologies, to guarantee a deployment via a software update of currently

deployed base stations

• Re-utilization of the core network

• Take advantage of the already available cellular coverage

• EC-GSM-IoT

• Enhancement of EGPRS

• LTE-M

• Enhancement of LTE with extended power saving modes

• NB-IoT

• New radio added tailored for low-end market

Cellular IoT



LPWA scenario



LPWA comparison

U. Raza, P. Kulkarni and M. Sooriyabandara, "Low Power Wide Area Networks: An Overview," in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol.

19, no. 2, pp. 855-873, Secondquarter 2017.

H. Wang and A. O. Fapojuwo, "A Survey of Enabling Technologies of Low Power and Long Range Machine-to-Machine Communications," in IEEE

Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1-1.



LPWA comparison

https://www.slideshare.net/RobertVivancoSalcedo/understand-lpwa-tetchnologies-sigfox-and-lora



LPWA comparison



H. Wang and A. O. Fapojuwo, "A Survey of Enabling Technologies of Low Power and Long Range Machine-to-Machine Communications," in IEEE

Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. PP, no. 99, pp. 1-1.



LPWA comparison





• Cost of cellular IoT

• LTE-M and NB-IoT are software-updates of existing LTE cells

• “In theory” the cost should be low(er than LoRA)

• In practice, the cost of deploying cellular IoT is not clear yet

• Cost of the SLA

• SLA means somehow radio/core networks reservation/guarantee

• Currently, business models are mainly based on amount or speed

• Pay-as-you-go, periodic allowance, up to 20Mbps, etc.

• Amount/speed charging might mean high cost for cellular IoT

• Huge number of devices generating very small data traffic means many resources

(control-plane traffic) to be used to control such devices

• Control-plane traffic does not generate revenue for the operator

Change of business model (?)



• The IoT is becoming… real!

• The IoT has a wide set of use cases

• Precise information about density of devices, location of devices (indoor, deep

indoor, underground), traffic models, etc. still not available

• The IoT has unique features in terms of traffic and device requirements, thus

requiring ad-hoc technologies

• As well as it is not efficient to support human-type and machine-type traffic

types with the same technology, it is not efficient to support different use cases

of the IoT with the same technology

• Supporting the IoT via mobile networks is definitely interesting for operators, it

may be interesting for customers depending to the business models adopted by

the operators

• Cellular IoT technologies are more flexible compared to others, and their

integration within 3GPP standards means efforts in guaranteeing future

backward-compatible evolutions

Remarks

Slide subtitle





Introduction to mobile networks



IoT via cellular networks

E-UTRAN

Evolved Packet

Core (EPC)

MTC Server

Evolved Packet

System (EPS)

User

Equipments

(UEs)

BS/eNB



• The Radio Access Network (RAN) has the role of:

• Connecting the UE to the CN

• Offering wireless resources to the UE to transfer/receive UP traffic

• Managing the spectrum

• Providing the UE with network information (e.g., broadcast information) to allow a UE

to trigger a connection request

Radio Access Network (RAN)

• Connection means:

• The UE is authenticated and authorized

• The UE will have “resources” for its data transfer

eNB

System Information

CNUE

Attachment: Authentication & Authorization

Connection request

Connection establishment

Data transfer

~200 ms

in case of

auth.

~35ms

without

auth.



States

https://https://www.slideshare.net/HussienMahmoud2/lte-epc-technology-essentials

• (EMM) EPS Mobility Management

• (ECM) EPS Connection Management

• (TRAU) Tracking Area Update



• Based on OFDM

• OFDMA for downlink and SC-FDMA for uplink

• Flexible bandwidth from 1.4 to 20 MHz (i.e., from 6 to 100 resource blocks -

RBs)

• High efficiency in terms of spectrum management

Long Term Evolution



• (PRACH) Physical Random Access Channel

• (PUSCH) Physical Uplink Shared Channel

• (PUCCH) Physical Uplink Control Channel

UL channels in LTE



• (PUSCH) Physical Uplink Shared Channel

• Carry UP data

• RBs of the PUSCH are assigned by the BS to the UE

• The UE performs a scheduling request procedure transmitting the buffet state

report (BSR)

• The BS allocates the RBs (UL grant)

• Support power control

• (PRACH) Physical Random Access Channel

• Composed of 6RBs

• Preambles (pseudo-orthogonal resources) are sent on the PRACH

• PRACH is a periodic channel (PRACH periodicity can be varied, usually 5ms)

• Used to perform the random access (RA) procedure

• Performed by a UE if it is in idle state to switch in connected mode

• MTC devices are usually in idle, thus need to switch to connected mode

before transmitting

• The RA is the key procedure in the RAN for MTC traffic

UL channels in LTE



Random access (RA) procedure

4-way handshake procedure

1. Preamble transmission. Synchronization

acquisition to inform the base station (BS)

on the incoming request.

2. Random Access Response (RAR). The BS

sends the uplink (UL) grant for the

connection request.

3. Connection Request. The UE sends the

effective connection request.

4. Connection resolution. The BS informs the

UE about the accomplishment of the

connection establishment




An eye into the RA:

• 64 preambles are defined by the network

• 54 preambles are reserved for contention-based RA

• When UEs wake up (i.e., the MTC application generates a packet to be transmitted),

they wait for the first available RA opportunity to send a randomly chosen preamble

• If two or more UEs select the same preamble, a collision may occur

• Collision means that the colliding UEs have to perform a new RA attempt

• 54 preambles every 5ms means that the maximum PRACH has 10800 preamble/s

• In a ideal scenario without collisions, the PRACH can support 10800 UE/s

• Practically, collisions limit the capacity of PRACH

• A collision occurs if two or more devices select the same preamble in the same RA

opportunity




Idle Transmission Reception




• A collision occurs if two or more devices select the same preamble in the same

RA opportunity

• 1000 UEs transmitting in 1s brings to 5 device per RA opportunity (RA

periodicity 5ms) with a collision probability lower than 10%

• Capacity is an issue for the RA procedure only when considering scenarios

with event-correlated transmissions

• A fire alarm has been reported and 1000s of devices perform the RA

simultaneously (or in a very short period of time)



• Pros

• High data rates (reaching 100s Mbps with LTE-Advanced)

• “Low” latency (8ms to complete a HARQ process)

• Somehow future-proof (“easy” process to switch from LTE to LTE-A)

• “Enough capacity” on the PRACH to support most (but not all!) of MTC use cases

• Cons

• High data rates does not necessarily mean high capacity (in terms of UEs

simultaneously active)

• An LTE cell supporting 10 Mbps as a channel data rate might mean:

• YES: one device downloading a file with ~10Mbps throughput

• NO: 1000s UE simultaneously transmitting at 10 kbps!

• High energy consumption

• Cost

LTE: pros and cons



LTE vs LPWA

https://www.slideshare.net/DavidBe1/future-wireless-for-iot-by-david-lake-architect-cisco



• The physical layer of LTE has some interesting characteristics

• OFDM is very flexible, as it allows a variable “composition” of symbols and sub-

carriers

• Symbol duration and sub-carrier spacing can be adapted

• LTE has some built-in mechanisms to reduce energy consumption

• UEs switch to idle mode to reduce the energy consumption

• The energy consumption in idle mode is still high for IoT devices

• The integration of IoT within LTE/EPC networks allows to re-utilize the high-level

procedures already defined

• Authentication, authorization, security

• Reachability of devices

• Mapping to QoS (please note, this doesn’t necessarily mean that IoT traffic has strict

QoS, it means that the operator will know the amount of traffic in the network and will

be then able to perform adequate reservation of resources)

Remarks

Slide subtitle





Cellular IoT



• What do we need?

• Lower cost of modules and installation

• This will allow the economy to scale

• Re-using available spectrum and “technologies”

• Simplified transmission/reception hardware

• “Reducing” UE capabilities (e.g., no need for 16/64-QAM)

• Extended coverage

• IoT devices can be deployed outdoor, indoor, deep indoor, underground

• Reducing the sub-carrier spacing (operating with smaller bandwidth

increases robustness of the signal)

• Repetitions

• Lower energy consumption

• Difficulties (i.e., high-cost) in replacing the battery of 1000s of devices, especially

for those in challenging location

• Please note, a duration of 10 years means that.. Once deployed, the technology

needs to be available (without any change!) for.. at least 10 years!

• Introducing new classes of UEs with lower transmission power

• Allowing devices to sleep by improving the idle/connected management

From LTE to.. Cellular IoT



LTE-M

https://partner.orange.com/open-iot-lab/



Narrowband-IoT (NB-IoT)

https://www.u-blox.com/en/blog/iot-and-four-reasons-why-licensed-spectrum-technologies-have-been-worth-wait



Lower cost

https://www.u-blox.com/en/blog/iot-and-four-reasons-why-licensed-spectrum-technologies-have-been-worth-wait

• LTE-M has a

bandwidth of 1.4 MHz

(6 RBs)

• NB-IoT has a

bandwidth of 200 kHz

(1 RB)

LTE

LTE LTE

6 RBs or 1 RB

GSM (200 kHz each)

200 kHz

200 kHz

LTE has a bandwidth from 6 to 100

RBs (typically, 5 MHZ, i.e., 25 RBs)



Deployment scenarios

http://www.newelectronics.co.uk/electronics-technology/lte-for-the-iot-not-one-standard-but-many/146360/



Extended coverage

• Lower bandwidth

• Repetitions

Noise FloorWide Band Na

rro

wB

an

d

Same

Power

Better SNR

0 1 2 3

http://www.vodafone.com/content/index/what/technology-blog/nbiot-commercial-launch-spain.html



Extended coverage

https://ofinno.com/technology/iot/



Lower energy consumption

• What does it happen during the idle period?

http://www.rfwireless-world.com/Tutorials/LTE-paging-procedure.html




• What does it happen during the idle period?




https://www.slideshare.net/qualcommwirelessevolution/paving-the-path-to-narrowband-5g-with-lte-iot




http://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/17/9/2008/htm




http://wireless.electronicspecifier.com/iot-1/making-4g-networks-iot-ready



LTE-M vs NB-IoT

Coverage measure as Maximum Coupling Loss

Dino Flore, “3GPP standards for Internet of Things,” Feb. 2016



• Repetitions in NB-IoT are introduced to have different coverage classes

• Variable number of repetitions: 1, 2, 4, 8, ….

• Up to 128 (UL) and 2048 (DL)

• NB-IoT defines three coverage classes

• Normal (outdoor, MCL 144db), Robust (outdoor, MCL 154db), Extreme (deep

indoor/underground, MCL 164db)

• Each channel is repeated a number of times equal to the number of repetitions of the

coverage class the channel is associated to

• Transmission parameters

• MTU Size: 1500B

• Maximum Transport Block Size: 680 DL, 1000 UL (Rel. 13)

• New narrowband channels (limited set compared to LTE)

• NPBCH, NPDCCH, NPDSCH, NPUSCH, NPRACH

• 48 sub-carries reserved for the NPRACH

• Each coverage class has its sub-carrier set and each NPRACH periodicity

Into NB-IoT



Into NB-IoT

L. Feltrin, A. Marri, M. Paffetti, R. Verdone, “Preliminary evaluation of Nb-IoT technology and its capacity” - Dependable Wireless Communications

and Localization for the IoT, Graz, Austria, Sep. 2017



• 3GPP has been actively working to meet the requirements of the IoT over

mobile networks

• New features have been added to improve energy efficiency and to guarantee

higher degrees of freedom in terms of reconfiguration

• New features have been added to improve the coverage

• Performance achieved by NB-IoT strongly depends on the deployment scenario

and configuration parameters

• The higher the number of repetitions, the more reliable the communication but the

lower the spectral efficiency

• Optimization between thresholds for the different coverage classes, number of

repetitions, number of assigned sub-carriers and NPRACH periodicity is needed

Remarks

Slide subtitle





The IoT in the mobile core network



The core network in 4G

• The CN has the role of:

• Providing connectivity from/to the UE to/from external

Packet Data Networks (PDNs)

• Allocation of IP addresses

• Managing the traffic of the UE according to the

subscription policies

• Authentication and authorization of the UEs

• UE reachability

• Mobility management

Radio Access

Network (RAN)

Core Network

(CN)

MTC Server




Control plane (CP)

User plane (UP)




• Serving/Packet Gateway (S-GW/P-

GW)

• User plane entities, i.e., transport data

packets

• The S-GW is the local anchor point

• The P-GW interconnects to external

networks

• Mobility Management Entity (MME)

• key control plane element

• Security functions (authentication,

authorization, and NAS signaling)

• Device mode (idle, active)

management

• Connection/bearer management

• Handover

• Selection of the S-GW/P-GW



An eye into the 4G stack

http://hyderabad.locanto.net/ID_1336935306/Wireless-Protocol-Stack-Development-Training.html




• Medium Access Control (MAC)

• Multiplexing/Demultiplexing of MAC SDUs from one or different logical channels onto

transport blocks (TBs)

• Scheduling, LTE channel management

• HARQ

• Radio Link Control (RLC)

• Transparent Mode (TM), Unacknowledged Mode (UM), and Acknowledged Mode (AM)

• Packet Data Convergence Control (PDCP)

• IP header compression/decompression

• In-sequence delivery

• Cipherying, integrity protection/verification

• Radio Resource Control (RRC)

• Manage the CP between the UE and the RAN (broadcast system information, paging,

security, management of radio bearer)

• Non-access stratum (NAS)

• Manage the CP between the RAN and the CN

• Mobility management, session management, CN bearer management




https://www.tutorialspoint.com/lte/lte_radio_protocol_architecture.htm



Bearers in 4G

http://www.sharetechnote.com/html/Handbook_LTE_EPS_Bearer.html



(Simplified) bearerestablishment procedure in 4G

UE1 UE2 UE3 eNB MME S/PGW

Connection Request

Msg1: Preamble

Msg2: RAR

Msg3: Connection

Request

Bearer establishment (UE1)Bearer timer

for UE1Connection Request Request Forward

Bearer establishment (UE2)

Connection Request Request Forward


Bearer re-setup (UE1)

Request Forward

Request Ack

Request Ack

Request Ack

Request Ack Bearer establishment (UE3)


Bearer re-setup (UE2)Request Ack

Assumption: there is a UP packet sent by the UE after the Request Ack



(real!) bearerestablishment procedure in 4G

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264167953_Distributed_Mobility_Management_Scheme_in_LTESAE_Networks/figures?lo=1



4G connectivity modelapplied to the IoT

• The 4G connectivity model is an always-ON paradigm tailored for MBB

• The UP connectivity is needed to be always “active”

• UP traffic lasts from seconds to minutes (to hours in a boring day/seminar..)

• The long duration of UP traffic reduces the impact of CP signalling

• Example

• Let’s assume there are 7 CP messages among the entities in the CN for the

procedure of connection establishment

• On average, a HTC/MBB session has at least 10s of packets

• MTC has only two packets for each report

• One report from the UE towards the MTC server

• One feedback sent from the server towards the UE after the reception of the

repot (optional)

• We need to take into account the difference between the two scenarios in

the CN as we did in the radio access



5G use cases

Huawei, “5G Network Architecture – A high-level perspective,” 2016



Network slicing in 5G

Huawei, “5G Network Architecture – A high-level perspective,” 2016




User plane (UP)

Control plane (CP)

(Radio) Access

Network




• Access and Mobility Function (AMF)

• Termination of RAN CP interface (N2), NAS (N1), NAS ciphering and integrity

protection

• Registration, connection. reachability, mobility management

• Support of authentication, N2, NAS signalling and mobility management for non-

3GPP access

• Session Management Function (SMF)

• Session Management e.g. Session establishment, modify and release, including

tunnel maintain between UPF and AN node

• Selection and control of UP function

• Configures traffic steering at UPF to route traffic to proper destination

• Control part of policy enforcement and QoS

• User Plan Function (UPF)

• External PDU session point of interconnect to Data Network

• Packet routing & forwarding, packet inspection and UP part of Policy rule enforcement

• Traffic usage reporting

• QoS handling for user plane, e.g. packet filtering, gating, UL/DL rate enforcement




• Policy and Charge Function (PCF)

• Supports unified policy framework to govern network behaviour

• Provides policy rules to Control Plane function(s) to enforce them

• Implements a Front End to access subscription information relevant for policy

decisions in a User Data Repository (UDR)

• Unified Data Management (UDM)

• User Data Repository (UDR) - User subscription data, subscription identifiers, etc.

• Front End (FE) - Acess subscription information stored in a UDR

• Application Function (AF)

• Interact with the 3GPP Core Network in order to provide services, e.g.

• Application influence on traffic routing

• Accessing Network Capability Exposure

• Authentication Server Function (AUSF)

• Store/provide authentication information of the UE



Access independent core

• Non-3GPP InterWorking Function (N3IWF)

• Support of IPsec tunnel establishment with the UE

• Termination of the IKEv2/IPsec protocols with the UE

• Termination and relying of N2 and N3 interfaces to 5G CN for CP and UP, respectively

• Relaying uplink/downlink control-plane NAS (N1) signalling between the UE and AMF

Untrusted Non-

3GPP AccessUE

N3IWF

3GPP

Access

Data Network

HPLMN

Non-3GPP

Networks

UPF

N3 N6

Y1

Y2

AMF SMF

N2

N2N4

N3

NWu

N11

N1

N1



Access independent core

• N3IWF could allow LoRA, SigFox, etc. to be integrated within the 5G CN

• An operator can manage multiple radio access technologies (RATs)

• Operators could offer the “IoT service” via different RATs

• The chosen RAT can depend on:

• Coverage/planning (NB-IoT is urban areas, LoRA in sub-urban), use case, price/SLA

• The integration of multi-RAT increases the load in the core

• All traffic from all RATs will be managed by the same core

• Load issues, especially for the CP due to the procedures for connection

establishment

NB-IoT

LTE-M

LoRA

SigFoxFixed

5G CN



URLLC and mMTC slices

George Mayer, 3GPP CT Chairman, “5G Infrastructure Work in 3GPP,” ETSI Summit on 5G Network Infrastructure



Design drivers for mMTC slice

• Features of IoT traffic to be considered/exploited

• Infrequent transmissions of small packets

• Need for a low CP signalling to improve efficiency in the network

• Very high device density

• Need for a reduction in the UP establishment/management to avoid

congestion issues (a UP node can manage a few milions of bearers

simultaneously)

• This aspect is exhacerbated when considering multi-RAT scenarios

• Static/low mobility

• Some procedures in the CN can be relaxed (e.g., mobility)

• Features of IoT use cases

• Devices belonging to the same use case (e.g., gas metering) have similar traffic

features (e.g., report period, message size)

• Generally speaking, devices can be split into groups, each one gathering

devices requiring the same traffic treatment



Grouping UEs to reduce the CP signalling

eNB

UE1

UE2

UE3

UE4

UE5

PGW

Bearer UE1

Bearer UE2

Bearer UE3

Bearer UE4

Bearer UE5

4G connectivity

model

AN

UE1

UE2

UE3

UE4

UE5

UPF

Bearer G1

Bearer G2

Bearer G3

5G connectivity

model

G1

G2

G3



• The mobile core network needs some re-design to efficiently support IoT

• 5G comes in handy allowing flexibility in the core

• A proper management of IoT traffic in the core can have multiple benefits

• Improving efficiency of UP resources

• Reducing CP signalling

• Supporting SLA

• The CN already provides support for “enhanced” services (e.g., multicasting)

which may become of interest for the future of the IoT

• LoRA + NB-IoT + LTE-M + 5G CN = future-proof IoT?

Remarks



Final remarks

• The IoT is evolving, with new use cases being enabled by the availability of

IoT-oriented technologies

• The IoT requires operators to develop new business models/strategies

• (SigFox) LoRA, NB-IoT, LTE-M, etc are complementary technologies tailored

for different markets

• NB-IoT looks to be more flexible and tunable compared to LoRA

• The IoT needs to be properly integrated in the CN, with ad-hoc solutions to

avoid congestion

• What we know: We are currently designing the 5G mMTC slice taking into

consideration the requirements of past/current IoT use cases

• Question: IoT in 2025 - Disruptively different or just «enhanced»?

Slide subtitle




Thanks!

shaping mobile networks for the iot - roberto verdone direction bi-directional mainly uplink ... •...

Documents