Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

Analytical Model of Failure in LTE Networks

Maryam Monemian, Pejman Khadivi, Maziar Palhang


Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Isfahan University of Technology
Isfahan, 84156-83111, IRAN
m.monemian@ec.iut.ac.ir
pkhadivi@ec.iut.ac.ir
palhang@cc.iut.ac.ir

Abstract Recently, Long-Term Evolution or LTE for 3G has
been introduced to improve service provisioning for mobile
network subscribers. This service improvement includes
improvements in setup delay and data rates in different services.
In this paper, one of the existing architectures, proposed for
LTE, is evaluated. Then, probable faults in this architecture and
their impacts on network services are investigated through a
causality graph. This graph is used to calculate service failure
probabilities in mobile networks. Also, the impact of failure of
one of the serving nodes in the LTE architecture is evaluated
through an analytical model. Simulation results support the
arguments of the paper.

Keywords LTE Architecture, Failure, Handoff, Causality
Graph, Repair
I. INTRODUCTION
In modern world, the need for making communication
between people is strongly felt and people need to access
information regardless of their locations. In other words, the
necessity of making communication in each moment or
location is deeply felt. This is the important concept of always
best connected networking. These requirements are met only
with a reliable and efficient wireless networking.
With respect to the increasing number of subscribers for
mobile and wireless networks, enhancement in network
services with suitable costs is an important requirement. For
this reason, 3GPP (Third Generation Partnership Project) has
introduced LTE to decrease delay in setup process and
increase data rates in services [1], [2]. In LTE the above
purposes are provided using different approaches, such as
multi-antenna or OFDM techniques. Generally the LTE goals
include the optimization of frequency spectrum efficiency, the
possibility of providing higher data rates and delay reduction
in setup process [1].
Mobile and wireless networks have unique features which
are not found in the wired systems [3], [4]. For example,
limited channel capacity, limited bandwidth and frequency
spectrum, noise and interference are the most challenging
factors in cellular networks. Also, the failure of different
serving nodes in the network can make disorder in network
performance and causes call blocking and connection failures.
In this paper, different failures in LTE architecture and
their impacts on network services are verified. In other words,
at first the failures of different nodes in LTE architecture are
verified. Then, the impacts of these failures on the network
services are evaluated through a causality graph.
Similar works have been reported about verifying mobile
networks failures and optimizing those networks reliability. In
[5] different kinds of failures in wireless networks and their
impacts on network performance have been evaluated and
Parameters such as MTTR (Mean Time To Repair) and
MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure) are considered for each
node in the network topology. Also, it is reported that having
redundancy for nodes is a method to enhance reliability in
end-to-end connections [5].
In [6] three important metrics have been used to verify the
impact of failures on a network. These metrics are failure
frequency, failure duration and the number of subscribers
which have been affected from the failures.
In [7], it is discussed that main metrics which affect the
performance of wireless cellular systems, are the probability
of an ongoing call being dropped due to a handoff failure and
the probability of a new call being blocked due to the
temporary unavailability of an idle channel. In order to
overcome this problem, cellular networks with failures and
recovery are modeled and a Markov Reward Model is used to
represent such a system with handoffs [7].
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In
section II, the current 3GPP Release 6 architecture and a
suggested architecture for LTE are introduced. In section III
causality graph is defined and is used to show causal
relationships among different network failures and services. In
section IV the impact of failure of one of the serving nodes in
the network architecture on the network performance is
analyzed with a Markov model. In section V the proposed
Markov model is evaluated through simulations. Section VI is
dedicated to concluding remarks.
II. LTE ARCHITECTURE
In this section, architecture for LTE is introduced [1], [2].
The architecture which is considered for 3GPP Release 6 is
shown in Figure 1(a). In this architecture, NodeB acts as a
base station. The RNC (Radio Network Controller) handles
radio resource management, mobility management, transport
network optimization and call control. It also controls several
NodeBs. The SGSN (Serving GPRS Support Node) handles
Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE 9th Malaysia International Conference on Communications
15 -17 December 2009 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia
978-1-4244-5532-4/09/$26.00 2009 IEEE 821
encryption and compression of transmitting data, IP packets
routing and data session management. The GGSN (Gateway
GPRS Support Node) acts as a gateway between the wireless
GPRS network and other networks such as Internet or any
private network.
In order to meet LTE purposes, some changes can be made
in the architecture of Figure 1(a). For example, the SGSN,
GGSN and RNC nodes can be merged into one node to
decrease setup delay and provide services with lower prices.
This new node is called ACGW (Access Core Gateway). The
architecture is shown in Figure 1(b). Hence, the number of
nodes in the path of users' requests is decreased and the
amount of delay and the cost of services is reduced [1].
III. CAUSALITY GRAPH FOR LTE
In the architectures of Figure 1, different failures may occur
and affect the performance of the network. There are different
techniques which can be used for fault localization based on
observed symptoms [8]. One of these techniques is FPM or
Fault Propagation Model Technique, that includes graphs to
show existing failures in the system and appears as
dependability or causality graphs [8]. In this paper, the
causality graph is used to show probable failures in the LTE
architecture and explain causal relationships between them
and network services.
Definition: A causality graph is a directed acyclic graph,
G
C
(E,C), whose nodes E correspond to events and whose
edges C describe cause-effect relationships between events.
An edge (e
i
, e
j
) C shows that event e
i
causes event e
j
and is
denoted with e
i
e
j
[8].
(c
i
, c
]
) C, c
i
-c
] (1)
In what follows, a causality graph is introduced for LTE
architecture. For simplicity, only one cell is considered. The
following notations are used:


Fig. 1 a)Current architecture for 3GPP Release 6. b) A suggested architecture
for LTE.

Fig. 2 Causality graph for LTE architecture.

N: NodeB failure
L: Failure in the link between NodeB and ACGW.
A: Failure in the ACGW node.
M: Failure in the mobile device.
BW: Bandwidth shortage.
In what follows, two user requests, which may be affected
by the above failures, are investigated. Failure in call service
is shown with F
1
, and failure in data service or making
connection with other networks is illustrated by F
2
.
Obviously, if there is a failure in NodeB, or if it can not
work due to any problem, subscribers are not able to use call
or data services. Therefore, the edge between F
1
and N, and
the one between F
2
and N in the causality graph, are marked
with P(F
1
N) and P(F
2
N) , respectively. As it was
mentioned before, the ACGW should perform the GGSN,
SGSN and RNC functions; Hence, the ACGW failure affects
on both call and data services and the edge between F
1
and A,
and the one between F
2
and A, are marked with P(F
1
A) and
P(F
2
A), respectively. Also, the failure of the link between
ACGW and NodeB probably affects on both data and call
services. Therefore, the edge between F
1
and L, and the one
between F
2
and L, are marked with P(F
1
I) and P(F
2
I),
respectively.
Bandwidth shortage in a cell may prevent the NodeB from
assigning channel to users and hence, call and data services
are affected. Then, the edge between F
1
and BW, and the one
between F
2
and BW, are marked with P(F
1
Bw) and
P(F
2
Bw) , respectively. Also mobile device failure may
cause failure in making call or data connection. Therefore, the
edge between F
1
and M, and the one between F
2
and M, are
marked, with P(F
1
H) and P(F
2
H) , respectively.
Considering above cases the causality graph is shown in
Figure 2. The probability of unsuccessfulness in making call
connection, P(F
1
), can be calculated using the causality graph
and is given by (2).
P(F
1
) = P(F
1
A

)P(A

)
(2)
In (2), A
i
s are different failures which affect call service. In
other words A
i
can be one of the BW, M, N, L, or A. Similarly,
the probability of unsuccessfulness in making data connection,
P(F
2
), can be calculated using the causality graph and is given
by (3).
P(F
2
) = P(F
2

)P(A

)
(3)
822

Figure 3. A Markov model showing number of users which receive service
and users in the queue.

In (3), A
i
s are different failures which affect on data service.
In other words A
i
can be one of the BW, M, N, L, or A. If
P(F
1
A

) and P(F
2
A

) and different failure probabilities


have certain values, P(F
1
) and P(F
2
) can easily be calculated.
IV. ANALYTICAL MODEL FOR NODEB FAILURE
In this section, the impact of failure of NodeB on the
networks behavior is modeled with a Markov process. The
aim is to investigate the effects of NodeBs failure on the
network performance and the number of users which lose their
active connections. For simplicity it is assumed that handoff
requests are handled similar to new connection requests.
The Markov model of the system is illustrated in Figure 3.
In this figure, the state (n, m) shows that n users are in waiting
queue to receive service and m users are receiving service. It
is also assumed that NodeB has at most N channels to serve
the requests. If there is a free channel among those N channels,
then NodeB uses that free channel to serve a connection
request and assign it to a subscriber. If all the N channels are
busy to serve the users and a connection request arrives to the
NodeB, this request is assumed to go to the waiting queue.
This case shows the state, which user begins to reconnect to
receive the channel after unsuccessful try and it is assumed as
a kind of being in a queue.
Assume that arrival of connection requests to a cell is a
Poison process with rate . Also, it is assumed that the number
of connection requests in a cell can be unlimited.
In what follows, we assume that the failure of NodeB has
an exponential distribution with rate f. Note that NodeB
failure means that no channel can serve the requests. Also, it
is assumed that after any failure, NodeB is repaired after a
random duration of time with exponential distribution with
rate r and no user in the queue relinquishes from the service.
First, let us define , as in equation (4):
[ = z + -
r
z + r
(4)
where, , is the arrival rate to the cell, f, is the failure rate of
the NodeB, and r, is the corresponding repair rate. Hence, the
probability of having n users with active connection (being
served by NodeB), with no subscriber in waiting queue is
equal to P(0,n):
P(u, n) =
z
[n!
_
[

]
n
P(u,u) n = 1 to N (5)
where, , is the service rate of the NodeB, and N is the
number of total channels in the cell. Note that P(0,0) shows
the probability of the state, that the system is empty (with no
user being served or in the queue). Also, we have:
P(n, u) =

z +r
P(u, n) n = 1 to N (6)
and
P(n, N) =
x
[N!
[
[

N
[
[
N

n
P(u,u) ; n 1 (7)
The probability that n + N users are in the queue, while
NodeB is in the failure is given by (8):
P(n +N, u)
=
z
[(z +r)N!
(
[

)
N
(
[
N
)
n
P(u,u) ; n 1
(8)
The average number of subscribers in the queue, N
Q
, may
be determined based on the above equations:
N

= nP(n, u)
N
n=1
+nP(n, N)
n=1

+(n +N)P(n +N, u)
n=1

(9)
Also, the average of waiting time in the queue, W, is
calculated using equation (9) and the Littles formula [9]:
w =
N

z
(10)
V. NUMERICAL RESULTS
In order to evaluate the proposed model, a simulator has
been developed to solve the Markov chain of Section IV. By
solving this Markov chain, different probabilities of being in
different states could be determined. Based on these
probabilities, one can determine the expected values of
different system parameters. In this section, the numerical
results are described. The duration of simulation is equal to
1,000,000 units of time.
Numerical results are shown in Tables I and II and Figures
4 and 5. In Tables I and II, the average number of subscribers
in the queue is calculated for different failure and repair rates.
As it is expected, the average number of subscribers in the
queue is increased with increasing the value of f. In Table I
the values of , , and r are constant. N
Q
is determined for
different values of f. In Table II the values of , , f are
constant and each time r is multiplied by two. Approximately,
when r is multiplied by 2, the average number of customers in
the queue is halved. Also, with any reduction in r, the number
of users in the queue is increased and consequently the
average waiting time is increased according to (10). Based on
823
the culture and the social behavior of subscribers, people in
different societies may wait for a different period of time for
the network restoration. Hence, there must be a lower bound
for suitable repair (or restoration) rate, r, of the network.
In Figure 4(a), P(0,0) is calculated from the analytical
model for different values of s. This is also compared with
the numerical results generated by the simulator. It is almost
clear that P(0,0) is decreased with increasing of . Also, the
curves are approximately close together. Similar results are
illustrated in Figure 4(b), for P(0,0) versus . Figure 5
demonstrates variation of P(0, 4) for different values of and
. It is clear from this figure that P(0,4) is increased with
increasing of and is decreased with increase in .
VI. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, different failures in the suggested architecture
for LTE were verified and the impact of them on network
services was evaluated through simulation and analytical
models. NodeB failure was modeled with an exponential
distribution with rate f. It was observed that f affects on the
average number of users in the waiting queue. Also,
simulation results show that repair rate (r) should be large
enough, in order to have a suitable average waiting time.
REFERENCES
[1] Hannes Ekstrom, Anders Furuskar, Jonas Karlson, Michael Meyer,
Stefan Parkvall, Johan Torsner, and Mattias Wahlqvist, Ericsson,
Technical Solutions for the 3G Long-Term Evolution, IEEE
Communications Magazine, page(s): 38-45, March 2006.
[2] David Astely, Erik Dahlman, Anders Furuskar, Ylva Jading, Magnus
Lindstrom, and Stefan Parkvall, Ericsson Research, LTE: The
Evolution of Mobile Broadband, IEEE Communications Magazine,
page(s):44-51, April 2009.
[3] Bhagyavati, Taxonomy of Faults in Wireless Networks, Wireless
Telecommunications Symposium, page(s):120-125, 2005.
[4] P. Khadivi, S. Samavi, H. Saidi, T D. Todd , D. Zhao, Dropping Rate
Reduction in Hybrid WLAN/Cellular Systems by Mobile Ad Hoc
Relaying, Wireless Personal Communications, Springer, page(s):515-
542, 2006.

TABLE I
N
Q
CHANGING WITH FAILURE RATES (f).


TABLE II
N
Q
CHANGING WITH REPAIR RATES (r).



(a)

(b)
Fig. 4 a) P(0,0) changing with different values for . b) P(0,0) changing with
different values for .

(a)

(b)
Fig. 5 a) P(0,4) changing with different values for . b) P(0,4) changing with
different values for .
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
0.22
0.24
0.26
lambda
P
(
0
,
0
)
Simulation model
Analytical model
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
mu
P
(
0
,
0
)
Simulation Model
Analytical Model
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
lambda
P
(
0
,
4
)
Simulation Model
Analytical Model
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
mu
P
(
0
,
4
)
Simulation Model
Analytical Model
824
[5] Upkar Varshney, Andrew P. Snow, and Alisha D. Malloy, Designing
Survivable Wireless and Mobile Networks, Department of Computer
Information Systems, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA,
page(s):30-34, 1999.
[6] A. Snow, P. Rastogi, and G. Weckman, Assessing Dependability Of
Wireless Networks Using Neural Networks, Ohio University, Athens,
Military Communications Conference 2005.MILCOM 2005, IEEE
Volume, Issue page(s):2809-2815 Vol.5, 17-20 Oct. 2005.
[7] Yonal Kirsal, Orhan Gemikonakli, "Performability Modelling of
Handoff in Wireless Cellular Networks with Channel Failures and
Recovery", uksim, UKSim 2009: 11th International Conference on
Computer Modelling and Simulation, page(s): 544-547, 2009.
[8] Malgorzata Steinder, Adarshpal S. Sethi, A Survey of Fault
Localization Techniques in Computer Networks, Science of Computer
Programming 53 (2004), page(s):165-194, 2004.
[9] Demetri Bertsekas, Robert Gallager, Data Networks, second edition,
1992.S. M. Metev and V. P. Veiko, Laser Assisted Microtechnology,
2nd ed., R. M. Osgood, Jr., Ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag,
1998.
825