Network Analysis Siemens

Network Analysis

Objectives
The participant is able to

explain the meaning of busy hour traffic and traffic matrix

name the requirements for the trunk network planning

Contents
1 Traffic Demand 3
1.1 Mean Traffic 4
1.2 Busy Hour Traffic 6
1.3 The Traffic Matrix at Network Busy Hour 8
2 Existing Network 9
3 Grade of Service Requirements 11
3.1 Generalities 12
3.2 Normal and High Load Concept 12
3.3 Pre-selection Delay 16
3.4 Post-selection Delay 16
3.5 End-to-End Blocking 18

SN1862E7A01
1
 Siemens Network Analysis

2 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

1 Traffic Demand

Traffic Evolution

Fig. 1

SN1862E7A01
3
 Siemens Network Analysis

1.1 Mean Traffic

An economic planning of a trunk network must take advantage of two fundamental
facts:

Not every subscriber calls at the same time

Subscribers make calls in different directions

A given interconnection between two exchanges, therefore consists of a number of

trunks which carry calls originated by many different subscribers and which may
have reached that point from any different places. Trunks within a group, all equally
capable of carrying out the same service, are chosen by the switching system. Thus
one such circuit may be seized, remain occupied during the time of conversation ,
then released, and remain free for some time before the switching system makes
use of it again. The main aim of traffic engineering is to determine the number of
trunks required in a group considering the calls likely to be offered and setting some
low probability for rejection of a call because all trunks are busy.
To find the number of calls likely to be offered to a given trunk group, a so called
traffic intensity is defined. Traffic intensity is based on an average number of
occupied trunks during a certain period and it is assumed that the maximum value
can be deduced from the average with reasonable certainty. The advantage of this
method is that the maximal occur infrequently and need long measurement times to
establish their values whereas the average is easily and accurately measured in
shorter times. Furthermore, when traffic from several sources is combined, the
averages are additive, whereas the maximal are not.
There are a large set of mathematical models that describe the relation between
maximum and average number of simultaneously seized trunks. The best known is
the Poisson arrival distribution or random traffic model where, in a short interval of
time, there is a fixed probability (proportional to the length of the interval) of
observing a new trunk seizure.
Average values themselves vary appreciably over long periods and an empirical
approach is needed to measure and define the periods when traffic is a maximum
and its intensity at those times. Real measurements show a consistent pattern of
traffic intensity during most weekdays. In the early morning before most people start
work there is little traffic. This rises during the morning working period and reaches a
rather stable peak till lunch break. During lunch, peak traffic falls and then rises again
during the consecutive afternoon work period. After working hours traffic intensity
decreases, but may be recovering in the evening, especially when there are reduced
tariffs. The traffic pattern is different on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays and the
peaks are much lower in intensity and happen at different times.

4 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

Poisson Distribution

4,00%

3,50%

3,00%

2,50%
Probability p

2,00%

1,50%

1,00%

0,50%

0,00%
1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141 151 161 171 0
Number of seized trunks

Fig. 2 Poisson distribution showing the probability of simultaneous seizures of trunks, N=120.

SN1862E7A01
5
 Siemens Network Analysis

1.2 Busy Hour Traffic

It is usual to take one hour as the standard observation period for the determination
of mean traffic. The maximum value of a day's one-hour-mean observations is called
the busy hour (BH) traffic for that day and the time at which it occurs is called the
busy hour. The period does not have to start at an exact hour of the day and may be,
for instance, from 10:15 to 11:15 AM. The busy hour is then defined as the period
having a maximum traffic over four consecutive quarter-hour periods.

The actual busy hour is variable. It depends on:

the day of the week

the season of the year

unpredictable peaks caused by accidents, weather, sporting events or competitor
behavior

growth of the network.

Within the busy hour, traffic is considered to be stationary and thus the recorded
intensity is the mean value during the busy hour.

The recommended standard method of calculating the daily average requires

continuously measuring all quarter hours for all days concerned and selecting the
busiest hour in the average profile for all days. This method is called the Time-
Consistent Busy Hour (TCBH, see ITU-T rec. E.500). It is most valuable in situations
of stable traffic profiles. The daily continuous measurements provide the data
necessary for confirming profile stability.

Another method of arriving at the representative average busy hour also involves
continuously measuring all quarter hours, but only the busiest hour of each day is
retained for averaging. This method is called the Average Daily Peak Hour (ADPH,
see ITU-T rec. E.500). ADPH can be applied on traffic intensities measured
continuously over a day in quarter hour periods (ADPQH) and in full-hour periods
(ADPFH). The comparative measurements have shown that the traffic intensity
values measured by the ADPFH-method are very consistent with the values
measured by the TCBH-method, whereas ADPQH-method yields slightly (a few
percent) higher values. ADPH has an advantage over TCBH when traffic profiles are
unstable.

6 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

15 Minutes traffic measurement

100

80
%Traffic

60

40

20

0
0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96
BH is between intervalls 49 to 52, means 12:30 to13:30 *15min

Fig. 3 One day traffic measurement

SN1862E7A01
7
 Siemens Network Analysis

1.3 The Traffic Matrix at Network Busy Hour

When designing or dimensioning a trunk network, a matrix is prepared showing the
traffic between each originating exchange and each destination exchange during the
busy hour. The busy hour in question is the system busy hour, that is, the busiest
hour for the totality of traffic originated by all exchanges. In certain cases it may
happen that traffic between given pairs of exchanges has a peak outside the system
busy hour, and due allowance should be made for this if a direct trunk group is
proposed for this relation.

8 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

2 Existing Network

SN1862E7A01
9
 Siemens Network Analysis

When a network design must take into account an existing network the following
data about the existing configuration must be recorded:

Switch types (analogue/digital, SW version)

Subscriber and trunk ports installed at the switches

Subscribers connected per switch

Signaling capabilities (SS7, MFC, decadic)

Routing capabilities (direct, automatic alternative routing, dynamic routing)

Numbering principles

Topology (trunk groups)

10 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

3 Grade of Service Requirements

Fig. 4

SN1862E7A01
11
 Siemens Network Analysis

3.1 Generalities
Grade of Service or performance requirements are an essential point in trunk
network design and dimensioning. The grade of fulfilling these requirements decides
about the amount of equipment to be installed and the pertinent subscriber
satisfaction, i.e. on the long run about the economic success of the network
operator. Over provisioning surely fulfills the performance requirements, but
increases the investment costs and is unlikely to be appreciated and paid by the
customer. Under provisioning may save investment costs, but may lead to call
abandonment and create subsequent customer dissatisfaction which opens the field
for competitive encroachment. That’s why a correct and quick provisioning in
accordance with reasonable performance requirements is significant. This task is
becoming even more difficult as demand exhibits statistical fluctuations.
Dimensioning according to the maximum value is not economic, however, according
to the average value will mean a lot of lost calls and a poor service perception.
Appropriately averaged values - referred to as normal and high load - may help to fix
economically interesting demand references.
The following traffic GOS parameters are recommended according to ITU-T E.721:

Pre-selection delay

Post-selection delay

Answer signal delay

Call release delay

Probability of end-to-end blocking
The parameters can be partitioned into two categories. Parameters like pre-selection
delay and call release delay are essentially determined by the local exchange
performance, i.e. they are not network parameters, although they contribute to the
end-to-end performance of the connections. On the other hand post-selection delay,
answer signal delay and probability of end-to-end blocking are network parameters
indeed and depend or may have impact on the network architecture.

3.2 Normal and High Load Concept

Of course, traffic performance always depends on the corresponding traffic demand
imposed. Traffic demand is not a single fixed value, but changes during the day, the
week, the season etc., i.e. can be described by some distribution function. In order
to simplify traffic performance definition ITU-T has replaced the distribution function
by two reference values or load levels which cover a certain range (quantile) of the
distribution:

12 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

Input Data:
A mean [Erl] = 100
Diviation + / - = 15%
Perc. Weekend = 100%
Groth Factor = 2,0%

Day Traffic [Erl] Upper Limit Lower Limit Average Sorted

1 108,3 282 98 0,0 281,9
2 105,1 282 98 0,0 264,1
3 108,7 282 98 0,0 249,3
4 101,4 282 98 0,0 246,8
5 103,8 282 98 0,0 246,7
6 121,9 282 98 0,0 242,8
7 98,1 282 98 0,0 232,5
8 126,3 282 98 0,0 224,7
9 130,8 282 98 0,0 224,6
10 129,5 282 98 0,0 223,4
11 107,4 282 98 0,0 223,0
12 123,6 282 98 0,0 220,2
13 143,4 282 98 0,0 218,8
14 143,4 282 98 0,0 206,8
15 129,5 282 98 0,0 204,3
16 156,3 282 98 0,0 203,0
17 155,6 282 98 0,0 199,8
18 123,8 282 98 0,0 198,6
19 165,3 282 98 0,0 197,4
20 142,5 282 98 0,0 187,3
21 152,7 282 98 0,0 181,8
22 167,0 282 98 0,0 177,0

Fig. 5 Excel calculation of the Normal and High load conditions acc. to ITU-T

SN1862E7A01
13
 Siemens Network Analysis

Normal load

High load
Normal traffic load can be considered the typical operating condition of a network for
which subscribers' service expectations should be met. Therefore normal load must
embrace up to a 90 to 95 percent of all load situations. High traffic load can be
considered a less frequently encountered operating condition of a network for which
normal subscriber expectations would not be met but for which a reduced level of
performance should be achieved to prevent excessive repeat calling and spread of
network congestion. High load summarizes the load situations above the
aforementioned value, thus representing exceptional cases happening only during a
5 to 10 percent of all considered traffic periods. However, high load is not the
highest value measured during the whole period, but rather an average of the
highest values.

The daily peak traffic intensity measurement is the basis for determining normal and
high loads. Normal and high load are defined over a monthly time interval. A set of
days is chosen out of the month which are approximately statistically homogeneous.
This set of days is typically the group of working days.

The normal load for a traffic systems is determined by the following steps (ITU-T
E.500):

Order the chosen days from lowest to highest daily peak traffic intensity
measurement.

Select the day having the fourth highest daily peak traffic intensity
measurement. This traffic intensity is defined as the normal load for the month
being considered.

The high load for the traffic system is determined by following step 1 above and then

selecting the day having the second highest daily peak traffic intensity measurement.

14 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SN1862E7A01
15
 Siemens Network Analysis

3.3 Pre-selection Delay

Pre-selection delay, also referred to as dial tone delay, describes the delay the
customer may notice between going off-hook at his telephone set and reception of
the dial tone which allows to start with the dialing procedure. The dial tone is
produced by some tone generator (perhaps out of a common pool) in the local
exchange or by the digital telephone set itself after receiving a pertinent indication on
the signaling channel (D-channel). So dial tone delay depends exclusively on the
internal organization as well as on the dimensioning of the involved components and
communication channels of the exchange. As a switch-dependent matter the trunk
network design cannot influence the delay. Nevertheless the dial tone delay may
have impact on the quality perception and satisfaction of the customer. Accordingly
ITU-T recommendation Q.543 has stated target values for dial tone delay to be
fulfilled by switch vendors. Typical values are

Values of table1 are slightly enhanced for digital subscriber lines using en-bloc
sending. Reference load B defines a traffic increase over reference load A of +25%
in Erlangs, with +35% in BHCA

3.4 Post-selection Delay

Post-selection delay, also referred to as post-dialing delay (PDD), is defined as the
time interval from the instant the first bit of the information message containing the
last selection digit is passed by the calling terminal to the access signaling system
until the last bit of the first message indicating call disposition is received by the
calling terminal (ALERTING message in case of successful call).

Consequently post-selection delay as well as answer signal delay depend on the

number of trunks involved in the connection, the current trunk congestion status and
the delay for transferring signaling messages on the signaling links (signaling network
architecture).

16 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

Maximum dial tone delay Reference Load A Reference Load B

Mean value = 400 ms = 800 ms
95% quantile of not exceeding 600 ms 1000 ms

Table 1: Target values for dial tone delay (acc. to ITU-T Q.543)

Local call National(toll) call International call

Typical number of 1-4 5-7 8-10

nodes involved in call
setup
Max. number of links 3 6 9
involved in a call setup
Mean post-selection 3.0 5.0 8.0
delay in seconds

Table 2: Target values for post dialing delay (acc. to ITU-T E.721)

Fig. 6 Pre-selection and post selection delay target values acc. to ITU-T recommendations.

SN1862E7A01
17
 Siemens Network Analysis

There are several programs underway that are changing the average post-selection
delay. The most important one is the introduction of SS7 signaling that reduces
signaling time per trunk from a nominal of 3-4 seconds to approximately 0.5 seconds.
Furthermore the flattening of network architectures (less hierarchical levels) together
with switch consolidation (using remote switching units to replace nodes of older
technology), made possible by large capacity digital switches, contribute to a
reduction of the average number of interoffice links per call.

Fig. 7 End to End Blocking (EEB) target values acc. to ITU-Tshows the recommended
maximum values of links and nodes involved in different call types and the
international performance standards (ITU-T E.721) for a mean post-selection delay in
a full SS7/ISDN network. Assuming the above-mentioned value of signaling time per
trunk the PDD performance requirements can be easily fulfilled.

3.5 End-to-End Blocking

A call between an originating and a terminating exchange is established via a path
which may be a direct link or a sequence of several links (trunk groups) in tandem.
Usually there exist several possible paths, for a certain pair of originating exchange
and terminating exchange, from which one path is finally selected to transport the
call. A path is blocked when one link within is fully occupied. When at least one link
in all paths is blocked the call is rejected. This end-to-end blocking (EEB) of call is
perceived by the subscriber as a performance measure of the through-connection
capacity of the network. From the network point of view EEB is the result of the
current traffic demand pattern, the applied routing schemes and the dimensioning of
the trunk groups in the network.

End-to-end blocking is preferred as performance metric to formerly used link

blocking on last choice routes (trunk groups) for several reasons. End-to-end blocking
accounts properly for the whole set of routes available to a call which is especially
important in times with a rise of nonhierarchical and dynamic routing. Furthermore it
provides an exact measure for dimensioning individually each traffic relation whereas
link blocking is only related to the worst traffic relation affected by link. Consequently
uneven dimensioning with over-and under provisioning is a frequent result of link
related blocking criteria.

Standard target values of end-to-end call blocking probabilities are provided in the
ITU-T recommendation E.721 for local, national(toll) and international connections.
These values guarantee that under normal load virtually all calls are connected
through in the first call attempt. Under high load conditions the end-to-end target
values offer a sufficient grade of service so that all calls may be connected through in
a second or third call attempt.

18 SN1862E7A01
Network Analysis Siemens

End-to-end blocking target Normal load

value
Local connection 2%
National connection 3%
International connection 5%

Table 3: End-to-end blocking target values for different connection types under normal load conditions (acc. to ITU-
T E.721)

Fig. 7 End to End Blocking (EEB) target values acc. to ITU-T

SN1862E7A01
19
 Siemens Network Analysis

20 SN1862E7A01