3rd Generation Partnership Project;

Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network;

Study on Multiple Radio Access Technology (Multi-RAT)
joint
V13.0.0 (2015-06)
coordination
Technical Report
(Release 13)

3GPP TR 37.870

The present document has been developed within the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP TM) and may be further elaborated for the purposes of 3GPP.
The present document has not been subject to any approval process by the 3GPP Organizational Partners and shall not be implemented.
This Report is provided for future development work within 3GPP only. The Organizational Partners accept no liability for any use of this Specification.
Specifications and Reports for implementation of the 3GPP TM system should be obtained via the 3GPP Organizational Partners' Publications Offices.

Release 13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Keywords
<keyword[, keyword]>

3GPP
Postal address
3GPP support office address
650 Route des Lucioles - Sophia Antipolis
Valbonne - FRANCE
Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16

Internet
http://www.3gpp.org

Copyright Notification
No part may be reproduced except as authorized by written permission.
The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.
2015, 3GPP Organizational Partners (ARIB, ATIS, CCSA, ETSI, TSDSI, TTA, TTC).
All rights reserved.
UMTS is a Trade Mark of ETSI registered for the benefit of its members
3GPP is a Trade Mark of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and of the 3GPP Organizational Partners
LTE is a Trade Mark of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and of the 3GPP Organizational Partners
GSM and the GSM logo are registered and owned by the GSM Association

3GPP

Release 13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Contents
Foreword..........................................................................................................................................................
Introduction......................................................................................................................................................
1

Scope......................................................................................................................................................

References..............................................................................................................................................

Definitions, symbols and abbreviations..................................................................................................

3.1
3.2

4
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.2

Definitions...........................................................................................................................................................
Abbreviations.......................................................................................................................................................

General Requirements............................................................................................................................
Requirements.......................................................................................................................................................
Requirements from the SID...........................................................................................................................
Requirements for Study.................................................................................................................................
Interactions..........................................................................................................................................................

Potential Deployment Scenarios and Use Cases...................................................................................

5.1
Coordination involving 3GPP-WLAN..............................................................................................................
5.1.1
Use cases for 3GPP-WLAN Interworking...................................................................................................
5.1.1.1
Estimation of UE throughput in WLAN................................................................................................
5.1.1.2
Improvement of eNB/NB broadcast performance.................................................................................
5.1.2
Solution for parameters exchange................................................................................................................
5.1.2.1
Parameters exchanged from the WLAN to 3GPP nodes........................................................................
5.1.2.2
Considerations on parameters exchanged from the WLAN to 3GPP nodes..........................................
5.1.2.3
RAN-WLAN Interface and Architecture Model 3GPP..........................................................................
5.1.2.4
Correlating UE Identity between eNB/RNC and WT............................................................................
5.2
Use cases for spectrum re-allocation.................................................................................................................
5.2.1
Spectrum Hole in Long Term.......................................................................................................................
5.2.2
Spectrum Hole in Short Term......................................................................................................................
5.2.3
Spectrum Hole in Space...............................................................................................................................
5.2.4
Local vs. Large-Scale Averages...................................................................................................................
5.2.5
Potential solutions for spectrum holes.........................................................................................................
5.2.5.1
Descriptions............................................................................................................................................
5.2.5.2
Solutions.................................................................................................................................................
5.2.5.3
Evaluations.............................................................................................................................................
5.2.5.3.1
Interaction with RAN Mechanisms..................................................................................................
5.2.5.3.2
Different RAT Architectures.............................................................................................................
5.2.5.3.3
Complementing Coverage with Unlicensed Spectrum.....................................................................
5.3
Use cases for Intra 3GPP deployment scenario.................................................................................................
5.3.1
Consideration of user experience consistency.............................................................................................
5.3.2
Impacts due to CN upgrading......................................................................................................................
5.3.3
Potential solution..........................................................................................................................................

6
6.1
6.2
6.3

Conclusions..........................................................................................................................................
Coordination Involving 3GPP\WLAN..............................................................................................................
Spectrum re-allocation.......................................................................................................................................
Intra-3GPP UE/traffic steering..........................................................................................................................

3GPP

Release 13

Annex A:

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Current status of RAN2 and SA2 work.............................................................................

A.1: Summary of WLAN/3GPP radio interworking in RAN2........................................................................

A.2: Summary of other WLAN related topics in SA2.....................................................................................
Annex B:

Regulatory View on Dynamic Spectrum Re-allocation.....................................................

Annex C:

Spectrum Re-allocation Functionality...............................................................................

Annex D:

Interference Analysis on Spectrum Re-allocation.............................................................

Annex E:

Example of parameter exchange from WLAN to 3GPP...................................................

Annex F:

Change history.....................................................................................................................

3GPP

Release 13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Foreword
This Technical Report has been produced by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP).
The contents of the present document are subject to continuing work within the TSG and may change following formal
TSG approval. Should the TSG modify the contents of the present document, it will be re-released by the TSG with an
identifying change of release date and an increase in version number as follows:
Version x.y.z
where:
x the first digit:
1 presented to TSG for information;
2 presented to TSG for approval;
3 or greater indicates TSG approved document under change control.
y the second digit is incremented for all changes of substance, i.e. technical enhancements, corrections,
updates, etc.
z the third digit is incremented when editorial only changes have been incorporated in the document.

Introduction
The coexistence of Multiple RATs introduces many operational coordination problems for network operators. The coexistence of various RATs (i.e. LTE/UMTS/GSM/CDMA/WLAN) is an obvious reality and it will remain relevant in
the future. This raises important issues for operators in terms of coordination across the RATs to achieve better user
experience (QoE), efficient resource usage, higher network capacity and easier maintenance, especially in a multivendor environment. For an operator with multi-RAT networks, frequent updated information from all RATs (radio
resource management, mobility and traffic load) is required in order to enable efficient coordination by the network. It
will be beneficial to consider a general Multi-RATs coordination from RAN perspective.

3GPP

Release 13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Scope

The present document provides descriptions and possible solutions of use cases for the multi-RAT joint operation, and
also provides analysis of these solutions. Considerations with regards to requested functionality in scope of other 3GPP
groups, if any, may be captured in this document as well.

References

The following documents contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of the present
document.
-

References are either specific (identified by date of publication, edition number, version number, etc.) or
non-specific.

For a specific reference, subsequent revisions do not apply.

For a non-specific reference, the latest version applies. In the case of a reference to a 3GPP document (including
a GSM document), a non-specific reference implicitly refers to the latest version of that document in the same
Release as the present document.

[1]

3GPP TR 21.905: "Vocabulary for 3GPP Specifications".

[2]

3GPP TR 23.852: "Study on S2a Mobility based on GPRS Tunnelling Protocol (GTP) and
Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) access to the Enhanced Packet Core (EPC) network
(SaMOG)".

[3]

3GPP TR 23.861: "Network based IP flow mobility"

[4]

3GPP TR 23.865: "Study on Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) network selection for 3GPP
terminals"

[5]

3GPP TR 23.890: "Optimized offloading to Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) in 3GPP Radio
Access Technology (RAT) mobility"

[6]

3GPP TS 24.302: "Access to the 3GPP Evolved Packet Core (EPC) via non-3GPP access
networks"

[7]

3GPP TS 23.402: "Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP accesses".

[8]

3GPP TS 24.312: "Access Network Discovery and Selection Function (ANDSF) Management
Object (MO)"

[9]

3GPP TS 36.304: "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); User Equipment (UE)
procedures in idle mode"

[10]

RP-132086 "New SID: Study on Multi-RAT joint coordination" CMCC, China Unicom, Huawei

[11]

http://techliberation.com/2013/02/11/fcc-incentive-auction-will-the-fcc-pick-a-winner-amongmobile-technologies/

[12]

http://www.telecomstechnews.com/blog-hub/2013/apr/03/arceps-refarming-decision-presentsoperators-with-a-4g-opportunity/

[13]

Carlos M. Gutierrez, SECRETARY, "Improving International Spectrum Management Policies and

Framework", 2008-03

[14]

Tamara Lee, Spectrum Licensing in Australia,

http://acma.gov.au/webwr/_assets/main/lib310474/spect_licensing_in_aust.pdf

[15]

RP-132101 "New Work Item Proposal: WLAN/3GPP Radio Interworking", Intel Cooperation,

[16]

SP-120847 "WID for WLAN Network Selection for 3GPP Terminals", Intel Cooperation

3GPP

Release 13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

[17]

Wi-Fi Alliance Technical Committee, Hotspot 2.0 Technical Task Group Hotspot 2.0 (Release 2)
Technical Specification Version 3.11.

[18]

IEEE Std 802.11TM-2012, IEEE Standard for Information technology-Telecommunications and

information exchange between systems-Local and metropolitan area network.

[19]

3GPP TS 36.331: "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Radio Resource
Control (RRC); Protocol specification"

[20]

3GPP TS 36.300: "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA) and Evolved Universal
Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN); Overall description; "

[21]

3GPP TS 25.304: "User Equipment (UE) procedures in idle mode and procedures for cell
reselection in connected mode"

[22]

3GPP TS 25.331: "Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification"

[23]

3GPP TS 36.423: "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN); X2

Application Protocol (X2AP) "

[24]

EU FP7 project SEMAFOUR (Self-management for unified heterogeneous radio access

networks), http://www.fp7-semafour.eu

[25]

EU FP7 project SEMAFOUR (Self-management for unified heterogeneous radio access

networks), "Deliverable 4.1: SON functions for multi-layer LTE and multi-RAT networks, " 2013

[26]

J. Baumgarten, A. Eisenbltter, T. Jansen, T. Krner, D. M. Rose and U. Trke, SON laboratory:

A multi-technology radio network simulation environment for the SON analysis, in 2nd
International Workshop on Self-Organising Network (IWSON), Paris, 2012

Definitions, symbols and abbreviations

3.1 Definitions
For the purposes of the present document, the terms and definitions given in TR 21.905 [1] and the following apply.
A term defined in the present document takes precedence over the definition of the same term, if any, in TR 21.905 [1].
Spectrum re-allocation:
Assignment of spectrum from one RAT to another, in a reversible manner, for a period of time (temporal) or in an area
(spatial).
It consists of these categories:
Temporal Spectrum re-allocation:
The re-allocation is for a time period that is dynamic, semi-static or static.
Dynamic should be understood in terms of seconds or minutes;
Semi-static should be understood in terms of hours or days and based on planned configurations that
guarantee system stability and improve system throughput in each scenario;
Static (also known as spectrum refarming) should be understood in terms of months or years and based on
planned configurations that guarantee system stability and improve system throughput in each scenario.
Spatial Spectrum re-allocation
The re-allocation is for a particular area, which is smaller than a whole geographic region. Both spatial and
temporal re-allocation may be combined.
Traffic steering between 3GPP and WLAN

3GPP

Release 13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

The traffic offloading of served/camping UEs between one RAT and WLAN at APN level. It is assumed that the UE is
in EMM-REGISTERED mode.
Operator-managed WLAN nodes
WLAN nodes under the control of a cellular operator and its partners (e.g., the operator controls the backhaul QoS
settings and who can access the AP), either directly or through e.g. an agreement.
Spectrum Hole
The spectrum hole is a portion of the spectrum licensed to the operator which for some reasons at some time in some
places is not used.

3.2 Abbreviations
For the purposes of the present document, the abbreviations given in TR 21.905 [1] and the following apply.
An abbreviation defined in the present document takes precedence over the definition of the same abbreviation, if any,
in TR 21.905 [1].
AAA
ANDSF
AC
AP
BBF
BSS load
CN
Eb/No
IEEE
Multi-RAT
PTID
RCPI
RSNI
RSRP
RSRQ
SR
TrSteer
WT
Xw

Authentication Authorization Accounting

Access Network Discovery and Selection Function
Access Controller
Access Point
Broadband Forum
Basic Service Set load
Core Network
Bit Energy over Spectral Noise Density
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
Multiple Radio Access Technologies
Pseudo Terminal ID
Received Channel Power Indicator
Received Signal to Noise Indicator
Reference Signal Received Power
Reference Signal Received Quality
Spectrum reallocation
Traffic Steering
Wireless LAN Termination
Interface between RAN and WLAN nodes

General Requirements

4.1 Requirements
4.1.1 Requirements from the SID
The requirements in the objectives of the SID [10] are shown here numbered for reference:
1. Identify the potential scenarios and use cases where Multi-RAT coordination would be useful; including LTE,
UMTS, GSM, CDMA and WLAN.
a. Identify and evaluate potential benefits and functionalities for joint operation among different RATs,
including:
b. Steering of UEs among different RATs, taking into account service type, user experience, processing
capacity, backhaul constraints and/or traffic load, and consequent mobility enhancement.
2. Efficient multi RAT joint radio resource coordination to improve load balancing and for an operator to enable,
e.g. spectrum re-farming.

3GPP

Release 13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

3. Investigate the potential enhancements of RAN interfaces and procedures to support the joint operation among
different RATs as described above, taking into account the following:
a. Reuse existing RAN interfaces and procedures as much as possible;
b. No impact on UE operation and air interfaces;
c. Possibility to support different architectures/implementations.

4.1.2 Requirements for Study

The requirements to guide the study are shown in Table 4.1.2.1.
Table 4.1.2.1 Requirements
Requirement
Consider these RATs: LTE, UMTS, GSM, CDMA,
WLAN
No architectural changes or internal interface
changes to the CN.

1
2
3
4

No impact on UE operation and air interfaces.

Reuse existing RAN interfaces and where
possible existing procedures

Both dynamic solutions and longer term

solutions (e.g. UE Steering, load balancing after
spectrum re-farm) should be considered.

No adverse impact on legacy systems

performance.

Consider the inter-RAT co-ordination Interactions

scenarios in Tables 4.2.1 and 4.2.2.

Focus on non-integrated 3GPP/WLAN nodes

Focus on operator-managed WLAN nodes

Justification
From SID: 1, these are the
basic RATs mentioned.
This is a RAN SI so
internal changes to CN are
out of scope.
From SID: 3b.
From SID: 3a which says
where possible.

Comment

Reuse existing interfaces

and avoid creating new
interfaces for legacy RATs
that would make upgrade
of existing deployments
difficult.

From SID: 2a and 2b. UE

steering requires some per
call operations, whereas
introduction of new RAT
deployments and spectrum
re-farming may require
some long term changes.
Legacy network
performance should not be
negatively impacted.
Based on information in
the SID and motivational
document
Integrated 3GPP/WLAN
node is a matter of
implementation, and is not
in the scope of this SI.
The operator has control
over e.g. AP access and
backhaul QoS, so this
greatly reduces uncertainty
over possible user
experience.

Non-operator managed
WLAN nodes are not
considered

4.2 Interactions
The study covers multiple RATs and not all interactions between every RAT are either useful or in scope.
Two aspects are considered:
-

Traffic Steering

Spectrum reallocation

3GPP

Release 13

10

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Table 4.2.1 Interaction Scenarios for Traffic/UE steering

From
LTE
UMTS
GSM
CDMA
WLAN

To

LTE
x
TrSteer
TrSteer
TrSteer Note 1
TrSteer Note 2

UMTS
TrSteer
X
TrSteer
TrSteer Note 1
TrSteer Note 2

GSM
TrSteer
TrSteer
X
Out of scope
Out of scope

CDMA
TrSteer Note 1
TrSteer Note 1
Out of Scope
x
Out of scope

WLAN
TrSteer Note 2
TrSteer Note 2
Out of scope
Out of Scope
x

NOTE 1: CDMA is not under 3GPP responsibility.

NOTE 2: RAN2/SA2 progress on WLAN interworking has to be considered.
Table 4.2.2 Interaction Scenarios for Spectrum Reallocation
From
LTE
UMTS
GSM
CDMA
WLAN

To

LTE
x
SR
SR
SR Note 1
Out of scope

UMTS
SR
X
SR
SR Note 1
Out of scope

GSM
SR
SR
x
Out of scope
Out of scope

CDMA
SR Note 1
SR Note 1
Out of Scope
x
Out of scope

WLAN
Out of Scope
Out of Scope
Out of Scope
Out of Scope
x

NOTE 1: CDMA is not under 3GPP responsibility.

Potential Deployment Scenarios and Use Cases

5.1 Coordination involving 3GPP-WLAN

5.1.1 Use cases for 3GPP-WLAN Interworking
5.1.1.1

Estimation of UE throughput in WLAN

The UE may face throughput degradation after accessing the WLAN AP. Currently, there is no information in RAN to
help estimate such degradation (if present). It is beneficial to investigate which information (if any) is helpful to be
exchanged between 3GPP and WLAN in such a scenario.

5.1.1.2

Improvement of eNB/NB broadcast performance

Not all the WLAN identifiers configured in the eNB/NB and broadcasted over the air interface may be active in the
eNB/NB coverage area (e.g., because some WLAN nodes are switched off). If interfaces are established between the
RAN and the WLAN nodes in its coverage area, it is possible for the RAN to autonomously maintain the list of
broadcasted WLAN identifiers. This is likely to have a positive impact on Rel-12 WLAN interworking.

3GPP

Release 13

11

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

5.1.2 Solution for parameters exchange

5.1.2.1

Parameters exchanged from the WLAN to 3GPP nodes

The following list of parameters would be considered for exchange from the WLAN to the eNB/RNC for the purpose of
WLAN-3GPP RAT coordination.
Table 5.1.2.1-1 Potential parameters to be exchanged.
Parameter
BSS Load

UE Average data rate

Description

Usage

Provides information
about current over-theair traffic levels; it may
be typically used for
vendor-specific APselection algorithms. It
has a Channel
Utilization field, which
indicates the amount of
time that the AP senses
the medium as busy. It
is broadcasted by the
AP.
Average data rate (in
uplink / downlink) for a
UE connected to the
AP, calculated by the
AP (not standardized
by IEEE,
implementationspecific).

May be used to get an

indication of expected
data rate for the WiFi
over-the-air connection,
in order to make more
accurate traffic steering
decisions, including
e.g. setting RAN
thresholds for each UE.

WLAN identifiers (e.g.

SSID, BSSID, HESSID)

As defined in [18]

BSS Average Access

Delay / BSS AC Access
Delay

As defined in [18]

WAN Metrics

Provides information
about the
uplink/downlink WAN
(backhaul) speed and
load for the AP. Can be
enquired from the AP
by the UE. Vendorspecific metric defined
in[17].

5.1.2.2

The RAN may compare

the UE average data
rate of each AP with the
throughput obtained in
the serving cell to
determine if the AP is a
candidate for
offloading. Seems to
require UE-associated
signaling.
The eNB/RNC should
know which WLAN APs
are around them in
order to perform traffic
steering and HO,
including filtering the
list which is
broadcasted to UEs.
A long BSS Average
Access Delay/BSS AC
Access Delay indicates
that an incoming UE
might not achieve a
high QoE in that AP.
The eNB/RNC will
know the latest load
status of the WLAN
backhaul and could
make more accurate
traffic steering
decisions, including
e.g. setting RAN
thresholds for each UE.

Availability in the
AP
It is standardized
in MIB in [17] and
configurable in AP
for over-the-air
broadcasting
according to
implementation.

Applicable to
use case
5.1.1.1

May not be
available in the AP
according to
implementation

5.1.1.1

5.1.1.1, 5.1.1.2

It is standardized
in MIB in [17] and
configurable in AP
for over-the-air
broadcasting.

5.1.1.1

It is standardized
in MIB in [17] and
configurable in AP
for over-the-air
broadcasting.

5.1.1.1

Considerations on parameters exchanged from the WLAN to 3GPP nodes

Some considerations apply to the following parameters:

3GPP

Release 13

12

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

1. UE Throughput/Data rate, if available, may be provided to the eNB/RNC, via 3GPP RAN-WLAN interface. This
could bring some advantage at the cost of frequent information exchange. How to calculate the UE throughput is
outside of the scope of this Study Item.
2. Node load information is beneficial to enable efficient offloading decision by the eNB/RNC.
3. It is beneficial to reuse the concept of Composite Available Capacity (CAC) from TS 36.423 [23] and adopt it as
baseline for WLAN load indication. More in detail, the following information would be sent from WLAN to an
eNB/RNC:
a. The Capacity Value, indicating the amount of available resources in the WLAN node with respect to the total
resources on a 0-100 scale;
b. Optionally, the Capacity Class Value, indicating the capacity with respect to other WLAN nodes on a 1-100
scale.
NOTE:

An absolute reference indication (e.g., to be exchanged at interface setup) seems to be needed for
interpretation of the signalled capacity values.

Notice that due to the fact that the WLAN physical layer is TDD, it is not feasible to report separate values for uplink
and downlink.

5.1.2.3

RAN-WLAN Interface and Architecture Model 3GPP

In case an interface between the RAN and the WLAN needs to be deployed, a suitable architecture model needs to be
defined as follows. We will refer to such an interface as Xw.
On the RAN side, Xw is terminated in the eNB/RNC. On the WLAN side, also looking at the parameters in Sec. 5.1.2.1
and 5.1.2.2, it is unclear where in the WLAN this interface may terminate. One possibility might be to consider the
WLAN side of Xw as a reference point, i.e. not terminated in a logical node. In this way, however, the WLAN side
cannot be defined in a 3GPP specification but would rely on 3rd party specifications (e.g. IEEE, BBF, etc.)
An alternative solution is to define a suitable Wireless LAN Termination (WT) as the WLAN termination for Xw.
This can be defined as a logical node in 3GPP terms, and its behavior can be specified by RAN3. WT implementation,
including its placement in the WLAN, is out of 3GPP scope. The resulting architecture for Xw is shown in the figure
below.

Figure 5.1.2.3-1 Terminating Xw between the eNB and the WLAN Termination.
The analysis above is also applicable to UTRAN. In that case, the termination point on the 3GPP side would be in the
RNC. The flexibility of the architecture studied in this TR can address potential specific scalability implications (if any)
with respect to UTRAN case.
The RAN-WLAN information exchange discussed so far seems to justify a CP-only interface. However, from past
experience with X2, it seems wise not to preclude future non-CP functionality (e.g. packet forwarding for seamless
offloading).

5.1.2.4

Correlating UE Identity between eNB/RNC and WT

In case the WT reports UE-associated information to the eNB/RNC, a suitable UE identifier (an Xw UE ID) needs to
be signaled. This is needed in order for the eNB/RNC to correlate the UE-associated information with the UE identity it

3GPP

Release 13

13

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

already knows. We can envisage three possible candidates for such a UE identifier: (1) the UE IMSI, (2) the UE WLAN
MAC address and (3) a new UE identifier.
Using the UE IMSI as Xw UE ID
Adopting the UE IMSI would require the UE to signal its IMSI to the WLAN node over the air interface so that it could
be signaled over Xw (WLAN has currently no knowledge of the IMSI). This has a number of serious implications: it
requires changes in the WLAN air interface (out of 3GPP scope), and furthermore it is not considered good security
practice to signal IMSI over a network interface (in particular involving a non-3GPP node).
Using the UE WLAN MAC Address as Xw UE ID
Adopting the WLAN MAC address, on the other hand, has the added benefit of reusing already available information
from the WLAN, and of not requiring any changes in the WLAN air interface node (it is already signaled by the UE
when it attaches to the WLAN). This may also help to limit WT complexity. In principle the WLAN MAC address
might be used for WLAN authentication and access control, but such usage does not seem relevant for operatordeployed WLAN. In any case, a security analysis should be performed by more appropriate WGs in the normative
phase.
Currently a UE does not signal its WLAN MAC address to the eNB/RNC. Without this information it is not possible for
the eNB/RNC to correlate this identifier with the UE identity it already knows. Sending the WLAN MAC address over
Uu, however, will involve new UE-eNB/RNC signaling, which is under RAN2 responsibility and therefore out of scope
for the current SI.
Using the PTID as Xw UE ID
Adopting a new UE identifier (such as the Pseudo Terminal ID PTID) would require changes in the 3GPP air interface
as well and, similarly to the UE WLAN MAC address based method, it will involve UE-eNB/RNC signalling (which is
out of the scope of the current SI). Notice that the PTID would be sent from the UE to the WLAN by re-using the
existing EAP-Identity Response message, and therefore seems applicable only for a limited set of authentication
mechanisms.
On the WLAN side, besides UE behaviour changes, some AP behaviour changes are also required, since the AP would
need to be able to read such field (currently the EAP message is transparently forwarded to the AAA). In any case, a
more detailed assessment might be needed in the normative phase. The PTID based method would
-

not affect the current security level of 3GPP RAN and WLAN, neither TMSI nor UE MAC address would be
shared out of their original system, and

similarly to the other methods, allow RAN to block unauthorized WLAN access (user manually selecting
WLAN).

This analysis is summarized in the table below.

Table 5.1.2.4-1 Comparison table for potential Xw UE ID candidates.

Impacts Uu (out of RAN3 scope

but in 3GPP scope)
Impacts WLAN air interface (out
of 3GPP scope)
Impacts on AP behavior

UE WLAN MAC
Address as Xw UE ID
Yes

UE IMSI as Xw UE ID

PTID as Xw UE ID

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

5.2 Use cases for spectrum re-allocation

It should be analyzed whether the following uses cases, which produce spectrum holes, require dynamic spectrum
allocation functionality. This scenario can be better understood by looking at the following statistics, if available:
1. expected frequency/relevance of this scenario;
2. expected amount of LTE and 3G users in a certain time frame (e.g. 2016-2020);

3GPP

Release 13

14

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

3. expected amount of GSM-only users in a certain time frame (e.g. 2016-2020);

4. expected number of involved GSM-only users.

5.2.1 Spectrum Hole in Long Term

With the development of 3GPP networks, mobile subscribers transferring from GSM/UMTS to LTE will be a global
phenomenon, and usually the procedure may last about 10 years. However, the transfer progress varies in different
areas. It is impossible to have a uniform prediction of such progress, as different operators have different plans for
spectrum refarming according to their own predictions. The accuracy of such predictions may also vary. Furthermore,
the traditional static approach to spectrum refarming cannot keep up with the reduction in spectrum requirements of
GSM and UMTS, and thus needs to wait a long time (usually 1~2 years) until a specific spectrum portion is empty. In
this period, when the legacy system cannot make sufficient use of the owned spectrum, a spectrum hole occurs as
shown in Fig. 5.2.1-1. Such spectrum hole may limit the network performance.

Figure: 5.2.1-1 Spectrum hole in long term

If the spectrum available for sharing may be allocated in smaller or irregular chunks (e.g. narrow bandwidth
configurations possible for some RATs), this may help to alleviate the spectrum hole, at least locally, provided that the
involved RATs are able to efficiently use it.
For instance, within a 20 MHz GSM band an operator can release as many GSM hopping carriers as needed for the
required LTE carrier, which can be increased step by step. It is noted that minimum spectrum holes of, e.g., 1.4 MHz
when refarming to LTE cannot be avoided neither with legacy nor with dynamic spectrum refarming.
Depending on the characteristics of the involved RATs and on local regulatory policy, it may be possible to refarm
portions of spectrum without waiting for a band to be completely empty. Based on that, the timing of refarming for
spectrum holes mitigation can be defined by operators according to their evolution plans.

5.2.2 Spectrum Hole in Short Term

The load distribution over cells varies all the time due to e.g. work/rest time period in business vs. residential areas or
due to differences in customer usage over time periods and business groups. Spectrum holes may be found in some
periods within the same day, where the legacy system cannot make sufficient use of the owned spectrum yet the more
advanced RAT is in an overload situation. CS and PS traffic could vary significantly as shown in Fig. 5.2.2-1 (data from
a real network). It is assumed that most PS traffic is carried by LTE, and most CS traffic is carried by legacy
GSM/UMTS in the future. This spectrum hole may occur in a short time interval as well.
NOTE:

In case PS traffic peaks overlap with CS traffic peaks, the short term spectrum re-allocation would bring
limited benefit.

3GPP

Release 13

15

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Figure: 5.2.2-1 Spectrum hole in short term

5.2.3 Spectrum Hole in Space

In real networks, the highly loaded cells are only in a small portion of the network; for example, in a commercial
network in 2013 it was found that most cells (>70%) have a load below 30%; the hotspot cells with load above 70% are
only less than 5%. It seems possible for most cells to share out spectrum to LTE. In hotspots, spectrum sharing with
legacy RATs may not be possible due to high load, but this situation can be improved by site densification or by adding
LTE small cells (as shown for the urban area in Fig. 5.2.3-1). On the other hand, most of the suburban area could obtain
enough spectrum by sharing it from GSM/UMTS with much less investment.

Figure: 5.2.3-1 Spectrum hole in space

5.2.4 Local vs. Large-Scale Averages

The spectrum hole effect mentioned above (both in space and in time) needs to be put in perspective with respect to
local averages. For example, the possible gain due to dynamic spectrum reallocation may vary significantly according
to the particular area, due to the various traffic patterns. In particular, with respect to a coverage area, if we consider e.g.
a border region between the coverage areas of different RATs, the possible spectrum pool available for reallocation
may be more limited than if we were to consider a larger multi-RAT coverage area. In the same way, the spectrum
hole may significantly vary according to the particular time frame with respect to the traffic pattern and the available
spectrum resources. This may limit the potential benefit of dynamic spectrum reallocation.

3GPP

Release 13

16

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

5.2.5 Potential solutions for spectrum holes

5.2.5.1

Descriptions

Spectrum reallocation should satisfy capacity and coverage requirements among different RATs. In order to satisfy the
service quality, interference should be taken into account when spectrum reallocation is applied, since if not coordinated
it may also cause resource waste in some or all of the involved RATs.

5.2.5.2

Solutions

The following potential solutions are considered: static spectrum reallocation (i.e., Spectrum Re-farming) and semistatic spectrum re-allocation.
Option 1: Static spectrum reallocation
Static spectrum reallocation, known as spectrum refarming, is used by operators to reallocate a certain amount of
spectrum from a legacy RAT to an advanced RAT permanently in a whole network or in a certain geographical area,
when the difference between them in terms of traffic demand reaches a certain level. It is understood that spectrum
refarming needs a careful network planning including network analysis, parameter audit, neighbour planning, frequency
plan, network optimization and drive test. To avoid interference between refarmed area and unrefarmed area, usually
some buffer zones should be planned.
The refarming granularity is relevant to the type of RAT. For instance, within a 20 MHz GSM band an operator can
release as many GSM hopping carriers as needed for the required LTE carrier, which can be increased step by step. It is
noted that the minimum size of a spectrum hole can be of, e.g., 1.4MHz.
Option 2: Semi-static spectrum re-allocation
Semi-static reallocation requires that some planned radio resource usage schemes are configured in the network, where,
e.g. each plan is used for a particular capacity requirement (in this case, when the capacity requirement changes, the
network would apply a new plan). Each plan defines a particular allocation of spectrum resources to each RAT. In a
particular plan, a spectrum resource (defined in space, frequency and time) is allocated to one RAT only. The shared
area is defined as the area where the spectrum may be allocated to more than one RAT under different plans.
-

Each plan may also include a buffer zone around the geographical RAT boundaries to avoid interference between
different RATs using the shared spectrum. However, such buffer zones in some cases may also result in
inefficient use of spectrum.

If the plan assumes existence of shared areas, it may also coordinate spectrum resource usage schemes (e.g. in
frequency or time domains). One of the RATs (e.g. the legacy RAT) could be given priority according to e.g.
operator policy.

The planned schemes are set in a centralized manner (e.g. by OAM). Triggering of the scheme change could be
initiated in a centralised manner (e.g. by OAM), or in a distributed manner (e.g. as a scheme change notification
exchanged among peer network entities like BSC, RNC and eNB).

5.2.5.3
5.2.5.3.1

Evaluations
Interaction with RAN Mechanisms

If two different RATs are deployed over the same spectrum in a particular area, there are some practical issues which
the operator should consider before deploying spectrum reallocation in that area:
1) The involved RAN nodes cannot be considered independently from the surrounding coverage area. Spectrum
reallocation may impact the coverage in the surroundings, possibly causing areas of suboptimal performance.
This might require additional planning beforehand.
2) We could envisage an open-loop spectrum reallocation and a closed-loop spectrum reallocation. Open-loop
spectrum reallocation could be based on, e.g. a fixed schedule, possibly via OAM coordination. Closed-loop
spectrum reallocation could operate according to information exchanged between the RAN nodes and/or OAM.
Open-loop mode is going to be slower and less responsive to unforeseen variations, while closed-loop mode is
going to be more signaling-intensive and highly dependent on implementations.

3GPP

Release 13

17

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

3) There may be issues in case of an emergency. Considering the requirements for emergency services may result in
additional constraints on spectrum reallocation.
4) Spectrum reallocation will also interact with Mobility Load Balancing (MLB), Inter-Cell Interference
Coordination (ICIC), User Plan Congestion management (UPCON), and other functionality. Convergence across
relevant RAN nodes will not be trivial (and implementation-dependent), especially considering the various time
scales for all these functionalities.

5.2.5.3.2

Different RAT Architectures

Some RATs (i.e. GSM, UMTS) allocate resources from nodes which control many base stations (i.e. the BSC and the
RNC, respectively) while LTE operates in a distributed manner (e.g. ICIC). This can be an issue: resource allocation
mechanisms in different RATs operate according to their respective architectures. Information exchange between
different RATs can take place through e.g. RIM or the respective OAMs. The implications of such interaction are also
unknown.

5.2.5.3.3

Complementing Coverage with Unlicensed Spectrum

Spectrum reallocation applies to licensed spectrum only. However, it may be beneficial to consider using unlicensed
spectrum (e.g. deployment of WLAN) as a complementary solution to spectrum reallocation in extremely dense areas.

5.3 Use cases for Intra 3GPP deployment scenario

5.3.1 Consideration of user experience consistency
Currently, user experience with services based on non-GBR bearers is left up to node implementation. That often means
the user is allocated the best throughput allowed in the given load situation. Therefore at, inter-RAT handover the user
experience may change. Using different implementation based solutions to apply the same treatment to non-GBR
bearers may not always provide an adequate solution.
Inter-RAT mobility parameters are currently set separately in each involved RAT. It may be desirable for an operator to
make parameter determination and configuration more practical and efficient, especially for the case of multi-vendor
deployments.

5.3.2 Impacts due to CN upgrading

Current inter-RAT mobility mechanisms rely on core network functionality. There may be cases, especially where the
core network and the different RAN RATs are from different vendors, where upgrading the core network may not be
feasible according to operator policy, e.g. due to the fact that one minor error may cause significant operational
problems in several parts the network.

5.3.3 Potential solution

A partial solution consists in using GBR bearers, for those services that suffer significantly from user experience change
across RATs and that can be transported using GBR bearers.

Conclusions

6.1 Coordination Involving 3GPP\WLAN

RAN3 has discussed the issue of 3GPP-WLAN interworking enhancements. The solution based on a 3GPP-WLAN
direct interface has been presented in section 5.1.2.3. Such solution would allow an exchange of parameters between
WLAN and 3GPP which are currently not provided by the UE. This can assist the eNB and RNC with information on
WLAN available capacity in order to take better decisions in terms of 3GPP-WLAN traffic steering. Further
specification work for this interface may involve liaising the appropriate Standard Developing Organizations.

3GPP

Release 13

18

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

6.2 Spectrum re-allocation

RAN3 has discussed the scenario and possible solutions for spectrum holes. It was concluded that the planned schemes
for static or semi-static spectrum reallocation can be configured via OAM, as described in section 6.1.2. The inter-RAT
interference should be taken into account when spectrum reallocation is applied especially if no (or a small) buffer zone
is planned. However, RAN3 could not assess the impacts of the inter-RAT interference as they are out of its scope, nor
conclude on possible solutions. Interference aspects could be evaluated in more appropriate RAN WGs.

6.3 Intra-3GPP UE/traffic steering

The SI has investigated the traffic steering in Intra-3GPP multi-RATs deployment scenario. RAN3 has identified some
Intra-3GPP traffic steering issues that may arise. These issues may bring some sub-optimal network deployment and
mobility optimization solutions to operators. However, with current Intra-3GPP multi-RAT architecture, potential
standardized solutions to those issues purely pertinent to this study item could not be identified.

Annex A:
Current status of RAN2 and SA2 work
A.1: Summary of WLAN/3GPP radio interworking in RAN2
Information on RAN2 work can be found in TS 36.304[9], TS 36.331[19], TS 36.300 [20], TS 25.304[21] and TS
25.331[22].

A.2: Summary of other WLAN related topics in SA2

Information on SA2 work can be found in TR 23.852[2], TR 23.861[3], TR 23.865[4], TR 23.890 [5], TS 24.302 [6],
TS 23.402 [7] and TS 24.312[8].

Annex B:
Regulatory View on Dynamic Spectrum Reallocation
Technology neutral spectrum is a global trend, where the licensees are free to deploy different radio technologies in the
licensed spectrum. The initial survey results of some regions are presented below:
-

United States

In United States, the Federal Communications Commissions (FCC) has adopted flexible use mobile policies since
1993 with the Broadband PCS band and continuing through 2007 with the 700 MHz band. Now these flexible usage
policies allow spectrum licensees to decide the services they will provide and the technologies they will use. Switching
between technologies on the licensed spectrum for different RATs is allowed [11].
-

Nordic and Baltic Countries

There has been no limitation on which technology to be allocated to the spectrum since 2007. In other words, also it is
possible to shift licensed spectrum freely between technologies e.g. UTRAN and E-UTRAN. Hence, in Nordic and
Baltics, this kind of spectrum sharing is allowed.
-

France

The French communications regulator, has announced that Bouygues Telecom [12] will be permitted to refarm its
spectrum in the 1800MHz band in order to provide 4G services from October 1, 2013, and all spectrum licenses in the

3GPP

Release 13

19

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

country will become technologically neutral from May 2016. So the switch between technologies on any licensed
spectrum is also allowed from that date.
-

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom does not explicitly support or forbid a policy for the spectrum technology neutrality, but lets the
market determine this. This would allow the market to drive spectrum harmonization, leaving the government to
facilitate rather than plan, therefore, when the market requires the spectrum technology neutrality, the market can do it
[13].
-

Australia

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) announced that the flexible use of the spectrum is
allowed, to choose technologies and type of services by licensee [14].
-

China

Although not all the spectrum bands are technologically neutral, the flexible RAT shift of TD-SCDMA and TD-LTE in
the 1880MHz~1900MHz and 2320MHz~2370MHz bands is allowed.

Annex C:
Spectrum Re-allocation Functionality
Semi-static spectrum re-allocation functionality may be divided into three stages, see in Figure C-1.

Figure C-1: Semi-static spectrum re-allocation functionality

Data collection and Problem detection is defined as the process where the spectrum hole can be detected based on UE
and eNB measurements and performance measurements.
Decision-making is defined as the process where spectrum re-allocation scheme can be defined according to the
problem detection output. This stage may be different in different stages of network deployment. It should be noted that
intra-system and inter-system reconfigurations can be simultaneously performed.
Scheme Scheduling is defined as the process that receives and analyses the spectrum re-allocation decisions and
triggers the corresponding reconfigurations of the involved base stations. Once all reconfigurations are completed, the
updated cell configuration information is acknowledged by the neighbouring cells.

3GPP

Release 13

20

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Annex D:
Interference Analysis on Spectrum Re-allocation
Inter-RAT Interference in GSM/LTE spectrum Reallocation
In order to prevent the spectrum resource waste in the shared spectrum, inter-RAT interference coordination can be used
as depicted in Figure D-1. Each LTE cell in the buffer zone area can make use of the overlapped spectrum in a
coordinated manner with the neighbouring GSM cells within the buffer zone. For those LTE cells close to Cluster B
(e.g. Cell 3) with more GSM cells involved in the coordination area, fewer resources are available. And for those LTE
cells further away from Cluster B (e.g. Cell 2), fewer GSM cells need to be coordinated and more resources are
available for LTE. After a certain distance (usually the buffer zone width), all the overlapped spectrums can be used by
LTE, similarly to LTE cells within Cluster A (e.g. Cell 1).

Figure D-1: Inter-RAT coordination with neighbour cell

According to this coordination manner, inter-RAT information may be exchanged between GSM and LTE. As an
example, each GSM cell within Cluster B is assigned with the fixed Traffic Channel (TCH) configuration and its
assigned resources in the frequency domain or the time domain. With this type of information exchange, LTE eNB can
combine the GSM frequency usage by the involved cells and their planed allocations.
Inter-RAT Interference in UMTS/LTE spectrum Reallocation
The main idea of this option is to extend the uplink inter-cell interference control in UMTS and LTE to the inter-RAT
domain. Since UMTS UEs and LTE UEs do not have a big difference in terms of maximum output power level, the only
new additional action is to require the neighbouring inter-RAT cell to restrict the output power of the UEs causing the
interference. It may be possible to use a new inter-RAT message for this option, which is shown in Figure D.2 (Options
for exchanging the information include using a direct interface or reusing RIM information). When UMTS Received
Total Wideband Power (RTWP) or LTE IoT (Interference over Thermal) reaches the threshold, the interfered RAT may
request the other RAT to decrease the UL transmit power in the neighbouring cell. This solution can easily solve the
inter-RAT interference unbalance problem in UMTS/LTE semi-static spectrum reallocation, while preventing spectrum
waste. The performance is also related to the frequency of the information exchange, i.e., the more frequent the
information exchange, the better performance. The exchanged information may reuse the existing parameters already
used in intra-RAT scenarios, e.g. the RTWP value in UMTS system, and IoT (Interference over Thermal) value in LTE
system.

3GPP

Release 13

21

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Figure D-2: Example of U/L inter-RAT interference coordination

Annex E:
Example of parameter exchange from WLAN to
3GPP
The LTE-WLAN TS SON scheme studied within SEMAFOUR [24] builds upon the Release 12 RAN assisted WLAN
radio interworking. That is, the eNB adjusts the Wi-Fi Received Signal Strength Indication (RSSI) Threshold
(ThreshBeaconRSSIWLAN, High, cf. TS 36.304 [9]) in a dynamic and per cell fashion. At connection setup, the UE selects the
Wi-Fi access if the measured RSSI is above the RSSI Threshold. Otherwise the LTE access is selected. Further details
on the investigated TS schemes are reported in [25].
In the following the performance of the TS scheme is compared when the WLAN load information assumed available at
the eNB is as follows:
a) No WLAN load information available: This case is referred to as LTE-WLAN TS with No WLAN Load. The
threshold adjustment is performed based on the local information available at the eNB only;
b) BSS Load available: This case is referred to as LTE-WLAN TS with BSS Load. The threshold adjustment is
performed based on the local information available at the eNB and on a per-second basis periodic reporting of
BSS Load, i.e. channel utilization. The channel is considered as busy if either the AP or a UE is transmitting;
c) WLAN CAC available: This case is referred to as LTE-WLAN TS with WLAN CAC. The threshold adjustment is
performed based on the local information available at the eNB and on a per-second basis periodic reporting of
WLAN CAC. The definition of the CAC metric per AP assumed in the study is in [25].
An LTE/WLAN system level simulator operating in a realistic environment is used for the analysis. Details of the
simulator implementation can be found in [26]. Figure E.1 shows the realistic Outdoor Hot Zone deployment scenario
and the stationary users whose locations are selected to cover high traffic density areas according to the traffic intensity
map. The deployment includes 28 co-sited outdoor LTE micros and WLAN Access Points (APs) in addition to 4 LTE
macro sites. Omni-directional antennas of the co-sited micro/APs are installed on lampposts at 5 m height. User traffic
is generated by User Datagram Protocol (UDP), i.e., file downloading with a deterministic call size of 5 MB. Poisson
distributed calls arrive with = 8-16 calls/s in the simulated area of 1.2 x 1.2 km2. Note that 8 and 16 calls/s correspond
to low and high offered load scenarios respectively.

3GPP

Release 13

22

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Figure E-1: Outdoor hot zone scenario: network deployment layout and user locations.
The average and 10th percentile user session throughput is illustrated in Figure E.2 for the simulated offered load range.

Figure E-2: Average and 10th percentile session throughput at different user arrival rates with and
without information exchange between LTE and Wi-Fi.
Considerable gains in average and 10th percentile user throughput are observed under any offered load level when
assuming that WLAN load information is available. Compared to the case with no WLAN load information, the average
throughput gain when assuming the reporting of BSS Load is 10% to 20% and the 10th percentile throughput gain is
50% to 150%. Similarly, when assuming the reporting of WLAN CAC the average throughput gain is 15% to 25% and
10th percentile throughput gain is 90% to 170%.
The CAC metric seems superior to the BSS Load metric at lower offered load levels. This is because even in the case
when a single greedy user is being served by an AP, the BSS Load metric will indicate that the channel utilization
reaches the level of 100% and ignore the level of satisfaction which could be achieved by further users connecting to
the same AP. On the contrary, at higher load levels, the defined CAC metric may over-estimate the available resources.
I.e., the per-UE estimated air time fraction does not account for e.g. backoff/collision which occurs in case multiple
users are served simultaneously. Improvements of the CAC definition could be envisioned to overcome this limitation 1.
It can therefore be observed that steering users between 3GPP and WLAN with the knowledge of the WLAN load
information leads to considerable benefits.

3GPP

Release 13

23

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Therefore reporting of WLAN load information metrics should be enhanced via the WLAN - 3GPP RAN interface in
order for the 3GPP RAN to make more efficient offloading decisions. This brings significant user performance
improvements.
NOTE 1: The research leading to these results was carried out as part of the SEMAFOUR project [24] and has received
funding from the European Union, Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n 316384.

3GPP

Release 13

24

3GPP TR 37.870 V13.0.0 (2015-06)

Annex F: Change history

Change history
Date

TSG #

TSG Doc.

2014-04
2014-04
2014-05
2014-05

RAN3#83bis
RAN3#83bis
RAN3#84
RAN3#84

R3-140919
R3-140971
R3-141458
R3-141459

2014-05 RAN3#84
2014-05 RAN3#84
2014-05 RAN3#84

R3-141460
R3-141461
R3-141462

2014-05 RAN3#84

R3-141463

2014-05
2014-08
2014-08
2014-08
2014-08
2014-10
2015-02
2015-02
2015-02

RAN3#84
RAN3#85
RAN3#85
RAN3#85
RAN3#85
RAN3#85bis
RAN3#87
RAN3#87
RAN3#87

R3-141464
R3-141937
R3-142023
R3-142085
R3-142086
R3-142579
R3-142579
R3-150273
R3-150415

2015-02
2015-02
2015-02
2015-02

RAN3#87
RAN3#87
RAN3#87
RAN3#87

R3-150416
R3-150418
R3-150434
R3-150436

2015-02 RAN3#87

R3-150481

2015-02
2015-02
2015-02
2015-04
2015-04
2015-05
2015-05
2015-05
2015-05

RAN3#87
RAN3#87
RAN3#87
RAN3#87bis
RAN3#87bis
RAN3#88
RAN3#88
RAN3#88
RAN3#88

R3-150441
R3-150417
R3-150497
R3-150511
R3-150883
R3-151231
R3-151232
R3-151233
R3-151234

2015-05
2015-05
2015-06
2015-06
2015-06

RAN3#88
RAN3#88
RAN3#88
RAN#68
RAN#68

R3-151235
R3-151236
R3-151320
RP-150808

CR

Rev Subject/Comment

Skeleton TR agreed
Requirements, Interactions and Definitions added
TP for Use cases for 3GPP-WLAN Interworking
TP for Overview of WLAN related topics in RAN2
and SA2
TP to add requirement for 3GPP/WLAN interworking
Traffic steering definition
TP for Regulatory View on Dynamic Spectrum Reallocation
TP for Use cases for Dynamic spectrum reallocation
TR37870_update
Scope of 3GPP-WLAN Coordination
Parameters Exchanged from the WLAN to the eNB
TP for Possible solutions of spectrum hole
TR37870_update
TR 37870_Update
TR 37870_Update
Way forward on Intra-3GPP traffic steering
Amendments to the Spectrum Reallocation use
cases
Proposed Way forward of Spectrum reallocations
TR 37870 Annex update
Conclusions
Use case for improvement of eNB broadcast
performance
Considerations on UE Identifiers between eNB and
WLAN
Updates on 3GPP-WLAN parameters
TR 37870_Update
TR 37870_Update
Correction of text on Spectrum Hole in Long Term
TR 37870_Update
Further considerations on 3G-WLAN interworking
Sharing UE WLAN MAC Address Toward eNB
PTID and impacts on IEEE and IETF standards
Quantifying the benefits of the 3GPP-WLAN
interface
Removal of some FFS for TR37870
TR 37870_Update
TR 37870 editorial check and Update
Submitted to RAN#68 for approvak
Approved, and upgraded to v 13.0.0 (MCC)

3GPP

Old

New

0.0.1
0.0.1 0.1.0
0.1.0 0.2.0
0.1.0 0.2.0
0.1.0 0.2.0
0.1.0 0.2.0
0.1.0 0.2.0
0.1.0 0.2.0
0.1.0
0.2.0
0.2.0
0.2.0
0.2.0
0.3.0
0.3.0
0.4.0
0.4.0

0.2.0
0.3.0
0.3.0
0.3.0
0.3.0
0.4.0
0.4.0
0.5.0
0.5.0

0.4.0
0.4.0
0.4.0
0.4.0

0.5.0
0.5.0
0.5.0
0.5.0

0.4.0 0.5.0
0.4.0
0.4.0
0.5.0
1.0.0
1.0.0
1.2.0
1.2.0
1.2.0
1.2.0

0.5.0
0.5.0
1.0.0
1.2.0
1.2.0
1.3.0
1.3.0
1.3.0
1.3.0

1.2.0
1.2.0
1.3.0
1.4.0
2.0.0

1.3.0
1.3.0
1.4.0
2.0.0
13.0.0