2. Wireless Telecommunication Networks for Critical Infrastructures and Emergencies
The primary advantages of a private telecommunication network are high reliability and security while maintaining high speed and lower latency. The well-designed private network addresses issues that are difficult to handle for public infrastructures or Wi-Fi networks installed by businesses. Private networks, which will also be 5G-based in the future, will hold a powerful position in such solutions [
4]. Below we present some private-based communication systems and experimental platforms using either SD-WAN technology or VoIP services. We also include some emergency voice communication networks.
Pedersen et al. [
5], trying to replace the traditional public switched telephone network (PSTN) with a more modern solution, created a private network by implementing the concept of a walkie-talkie using voice over IP (VoIP) services and existing telephony infrastructure that supports the service. This project aimed at utilizing VoIP between mobile phones and a simple router. From the central router of a house, IP packets were forwarded through the voice channel on the Internet, allowing data exchange to occur through interconnected mobile devices within the private network of the house. The flexibility of this project lay in the fact that there was no need for new device purchasing, as a simple Wi-Fi connection to the router could serve the implementation need.
Yao Nan Lien et al. [
6] designed a system consisting of multiple communication nodes, like a walkie-talkie, using the P2Pnet platform and portable electronic devices. During the critical early hours of a natural disaster, these nodes can communicate wirelessly with each other until they approach the area where rescue operations are accessible. During the system’s design, it is mentioned that each IP packet, along with headers and frames, can be sent as a UDP packet without significant issues. The system is fully capable of receiving and converting all incoming and outgoing packets from the same node without filtering. Additionally, the use of PCM encoding was studied to address the scenario where more than two nodes communicate simultaneously, providing a solution to the aforementioned problem. PCM encoding reproduces data at a regular and relatively low rate, contributing to the system’s functionality.
Through Radcliffe et al.’s [
7] SD-WAN solution, businesses can enhance the quality of voice services for VoIP calls. They support this option in their research, as the activation of SD-WAN on a device via the Internet allows many employees to work exclusively from their homes. This implementation ensures better resource management for each user adopting this idea, while the central SD-WAN management eliminates traditional issues related to configurations, changes, and scalability. During their research, they conducted various test scenarios. One scenario involved a single communication line where two computers were connected through a simulated broadband connection without SD-WAN functionalities. Additionally, the IP telephony was controlled by a remote PABX (private automatic branch exchange) system. This asynchronous broadband network was used as the connection for the two computers. Subsequently, they conducted tests using a dual link for SD-WAN, focusing on the primary and secondary routes created within the WAN between Router A and Router B. The primary route was separated by a WAN simulator, to meet WAN connection needs, while a 4G-LTE connection simulator was used for the broadband connection requirements.
Another valuable reference on VoIP via the SD-WAN platform is presented in [
8]. They propose a connection implementation between two central SD-WAN systems. This approach can lead to improved quality of service and increased bandwidth. They demonstrate that this solution can deliver better network traffic on VoIP calls while enabling more efficient management of network resources, resulting in the desired quality. The architecture of this implementation of the two interconnected central data systems was supervised by the software-defined data center (SDDC) software, i.e., Asterisk V16.1, which defines area networks with the ultimate goal of eliminating interconnection issues between these systems. To conduct their test scenarios, they used a server with the Asterisk operating system, which could record the calls made. For each scenario, they conducted 150 and 300 calls, respectively. The call quality with a bit rate of 80 Mbps was stabilized by applying a policy of traffic prioritization for IP calls. However, during high demand for calls, where there was a greater increase in call volume, the bitrate for the 150 calls scenario dropped to 52.12 Mbps, while for the 300 calls scenario, it was maintained at an average of 44.80 Mbps.
Moreover, we should not overlook the possibility of making VoIP calls through 4G technology. Specifically, calls in 4G technology are made using mobile phones. These calls are known as VoLTE calls. To ensure good quality in VoLTE calls, further performance analysis is needed. Kassim et al. [
9] performed such measurements, analyzing and comparing the performance in 4G networks. They presented results on bandwidth availability, jitter performance, and voice delay during VoIP calls. Through comprehensive analysis, they concluded that both jitter and delay values met the QoS requirements for implementing a VoIP calling system over a 4G-LTE network.
In 2018, Sevilla et al. [
10] introduced CoLTE, an open-source implementation for private networks based on OAI, which is compatible with Debian 9 and Ubuntu 18.04 LTS. CoLTE is a lightweight LTE core network designed for small-scale community LTE networking, featuring on-site Evolved Packet Core (EPC) deployment with minimal cellular radio stations (eNodeBs). Its primary function is establishing a prepaid network management system that enables usage-based billing or IP traffic rate charging. By collocating the EPC in the field, CoLTE provides high-bandwidth local connectivity, supporting custom SIM cards for user coverage and LTE security. The implementation successfully served over 40 active users, offering cost-effective solutions, and ensuring economic sustainability by covering both operational and capital expenses.
In mid-2020, Thota et al. [
11] established a private network supporting closed-loop control and video applications. The network consisted of three main components: a radio access network (RAN), a core network (CN), and a slicing gateway. They examined three applications: closed-loop control, involving a robotic arm receiving activation commands; event-driven control, where a human operator controlled a robotic arm; and video streaming using a commercial handset. The implementation used a USRP Ettus X310, Ubuntu 16.04, and the OpenAirInterface Public License V2.1. software, and Open Cells SIM cards. The demonstration showcased the successful coexistence of diverse applications with software-defined radio slicing.
Girmay et al. [
12] introduced a coexistence scheme for private LTE networks in unlicensed spectrum alongside co-located Wi-Fi networks. Through utilizing LTE configurations and the Wi-Fi spectrum, the paper demonstrates that private LTE can successfully adapt to the presence of Wi-Fi, catering to both upload and download scenarios. Thus, the flexibility of LTE in adjusting to Wi-Fi requirements is emphasized in this implementation.
In summary, the reviewed studies exhibit both commonalities and distinctions in their approaches to communication network enhancement. Among the similarities, multiple investigations prioritize the utilization of modern technologies such as VoIP, SD-WAN, LTE, and Wi-Fi to elevate communication efficiency, quality, and reliability, especially in demanding scenarios like natural disasters or remote work environments. Additionally, there is a prevalent emphasis on ensuring QoS delivers satisfactory user experiences for voice and video communication. However, differences emerge in the specific technologies employed, ranging from private network configurations to SD-WAN solutions and LTE-based infrastructures. Moreover, each study targets distinct applications, encompassing disaster communication, business VoIP, community networking, and closed-loop control systems, indicative of diverse use cases. Lastly, while some studies prioritize performance analysis and optimization, others concentrate on practical implementations and demonstrations of proposed solutions. Despite these variations, collectively, these studies contribute significantly to advancing communication technologies and addressing multifaceted challenges across various contexts.
Considering the above implementations and the history of private mobile communications, we identified the need to develop a non-commercial experimental communication platform, with the following characteristics:
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, V.C., S.P., N.P. and A.T.; methodology, V.C. and S.P.; software, V.C. and A.T.; validation, V.C., S.P., N.P. and A.T.; formal analysis, V.C., S.P., N.P. and A.T.; investigation, V.C. and S.P.; resources, V.C. and S.P.; data curation, V.C. and S.P.; writing—original draft preparation, V.C. and S.P.; writing—review and editing, V.C., S.P., N.P. and A.T.; visualization, V.C., P.P., D.D.P. and R.A.M.; supervision, V.C., P.P., D.D.P. and R.A.M.; project administration, V.C., P.P., D.D.P. and R.A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement
Any data presented in this study are available within the article.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Nikaein, N.; Knopp, R.; Kaltenberger, F.; Gauthier, L.; Bonnet, C.; Nussbaum, D.; Ghaddab, R. OpenAirInterface 4G: An open LTE network in a PC. In Proceedings of the MobiCom 1’4: Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, Maui, HI, USA, 7–11 September 2014; pp. 305–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheimaras, V.; Peladarinos, N.; Monios, N.; Daousis, S.; Papagiakoumos, S.; Papageorgas, P.; Piromalis, D. Emergency Communication System Based on Wireless LPWAN and SD-WAN Technologies: A Hybrid Approach. Signals 2023, 4, 315–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Li, W.; Yu, Z.; Abbasi, Q.; Imran, M.; Ansari, S.; Sambo, Y.; Wu, L.; Li, Q.; Zhu, T. An Overview of Emergency Communication Networks. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 1595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shostko, I.; Tevyashev, A.; Zemlyaniy, O.; Kulia, Y. Introduction of Private LTE Networks to Provide Specific Communication Tasks in Various Spheres of Society and the State. In Proceedings of the IEEE 8th International Conference on Problems of Infocommunications, Science and Technology (PIC S&T), Kharkiv, Ukraine, 5–7 October 2021; pp. 583–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pedersen, M.V.; Fitzek, F. Mobile Phone Programming: The Walkie Talkie Application. In Mobile Phone Programming; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 275–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lien, Y.N.; Chi, L.C.; Shaw, Y.S. A walkie-talkie-like emergency communication system for catastrophic natural disasters. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Pervasive Systems, Algorithms, and Networks, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 14–16 December 2009; pp. 309–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radcliffe, D.; Furey, E.; Blue, J. An SD-WAN solution assuring business quality VoIP communication for home based employees. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Smart Applications, Communications and Networking (SmartNets), Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, 17–19 December 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mora-Huiracocha, R.E.; Gallegos-Segovia, P.L.; Vintimilla-Tapia, P.E.; Bravo-Torres, J.F.; Cedillo-Elias, E.J.; Larios-Rosillo, V.M. Implementation of a SD-WAN for the interconnection of two software defined data centers. In Proceedings of the IEEE Colombian Conference on Communications and Computing (COLCOM), Barranquilla, Colombia, 5–7 June 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kassim, M.; Rahman, R.A.; Aziz, M.A.A.; Idris, A.; Yusof, M.I. Performance analysis of VoIP over 3G and 4G LTE network. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Electrical, Electronics and System Engineering (ICEESE), Kanazawa, Japan, 9–10 November 2017; pp. 37–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sevilla, S.; Johnson, M.; Kosakanchit, P.; Liang, J.; Heimerl, K. Experiences: Design, implementation, and deployment of CoLTE, a community LTE solution. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, Los Cabos, Mexico, 21–25 October 2019; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thota, J.; Aijaz, A. Slicing-enabled private 4G/5G network for industrial wireless applications. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, London, UK, 21–25 September 2020; pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Girmay, M.; Maglogiannis, V.; Naudts, D.; Fontaine, J.; Shahid, A.; De Poorter, E.; Moerman, I. Adaptive cnn-based private lte solution for fair coexistence with wifi in unlicensed spectrum. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM 2020-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops, Toronto, ON, Canada, 6–9 July 2020; pp. 346–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amézaga, A.; López-Martínez, C.; Jové, R. A Multi-Frequency SDR-Based GBSAR: System Overview and First Results. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Virdis, A.; Nardini, G.; Stea, G. Cellular-Networks Simulation Using SimuLTE. In Recent Advances in Network Simulation; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 183–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Virdis, A.; Stea, G.; Nardini, G. SimuLTE—A modular system-level simulator for LTE/LTE-a networks based on OMNeT++. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications, Vienna, Austria, 28–30 August 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varga, A. A practical introduction to the OMNeT++ simulation framework. In Recent Advances in Network Simulation; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 3–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Labyad, Y.; Moughit, M.; Marzouk, A.; Haqiq, A. Performance Evaluation for Voice over LTE by using G.711 as a Codec. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. IJERT 2014, 3, 758–763. [Google Scholar]
- Toral-Cruz, H.; Torres-Roman, D. Traffic Analysis for IP Telephon. In Proceedings of the 2005 2nd International Conference on Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Mexico City, Mexico, 7–9 September 2005; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azevedo, J.A.; Santos, F.E. An empirical propagation model for forest environments at tree trunk level. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2011, 59, 2357–2367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ganev, Z. Log-normal shadowing model for outdoor propagation between Sensor Nodes. In Proceedings of the 20th International Symposium on Electrical Apparatus and Technologies (SIELA), Bourgas, Bulgaria, 3–6 June 2018; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popescu, A.M.; Tudorache, G.I.; Kemp, A.H. Performance study of node placement for geographic routing in WSNs. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Swedish Communication Technologies Workshop (Swe-CTW), Stockholm, Sweden, 19–21 October 2011; pp. 13–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vizzarri, A. Quality of experience estimation for VoLTE services. In Proceedings of the 2016 2nd International Conference on Frontiers of Signal Processing (ICFSP), Warsaw, Poland, 15–17 October 2016; pp. 131–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aslam, M.; Bantan, A.R.R.; Khan, N. Design of tests for mean and variance under complexity-an application to rock measurement data. Measurement 2021, 177, 109312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bacioccola, A.; Cicconetti, C.; Stea, G. User-level performance evaluation of VoIP using ns-2. NSTOOLS ICST 2010, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.H.; Kim, J.H. Adaptation for the retransmission in VoIP applications. J. Commun. Netw. 2017, 19, 298–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vizzarri, A.; Davide, F. Simulation of VoLTE Services for QoE Estimation. In Proceedings of the 9th EUROSIM Congress on Modelling and Simulation, EUROSIM, Oulu, Finland, 12–16 September 2016; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vaser, M.; Maggiore, G. Improved VoLTE QoE Estimation Procedure using Network Performance Metrics. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN), Zagreb, Croatia, 2–5 July 2019; pp. 361–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saha, R.K. Coexistence of Cellular and IEEE 802.11 Technologies in Unlicensed Spectrum Bands—A Survey. IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc. 2021, 2, 1996–2028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cichonski, J.; Franklin, J.; Bartock, M. Guide to LTE security, (No. NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-187). In National Institute of Standards and Technology; U.S. Department of Commerce: Washington, DC, USA, 2016; pp. 6–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OAI/Openairinterface5G, GitLab. Available online: https://gitlab.eurecom.fr/oai/openairinterface5g (accessed on 25 March 2024).
- All in One OpenAirInterface—4G and 5G Reference Software. Available online: https://open-cells.com/index.php/2019/09/22/all-in-one-openairinterface/ (accessed on 25 March 2024).
- UICC/SIM Programing—4G and 5G Reference Software. Available online: https://open-cells.com/index.php/uiccsim-programing/ (accessed on 25 March 2024).
- Molla, D.M.; Badis, H.; George, L.; Berbineau, M. Coverage Extension of Software Defined Radio Platforms for 3GPP 4G/5G Radio Access Networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 13th IFIP Wireless and Mobile Networking Conference (WMNC), Montreal, QC, Canada, 20–22 October 2021; pp. 55–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peladarinos, N.; Cheimaras, V.; Piromalis, D.; Arvanitis, K.G.; Papageorgas, P.; Monios, N.; Dogas, I.; Stojmenovic, M.; Tsaramirsis, G. Early Warning Systems for COVID-19 Infections Based on Low-Cost Indoor Air-Quality Sensors and LPWANs. Sensors 2021, 21, 6183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cheimaras, V.; Trigkas, A.; Papageorgas, P.; Piromalis, D.; Sofianopoulos, E. A Low-Cost Open-Source Architecture for a Digital Signage Emergency Evacuation System for Cruise Ships, Based on IoT and LTE/4G Technologies. Future Internet 2022, 14, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1.
Available options to implement a private mobile base station.
Figure 2.
Single eNB simulation scenario.
Figure 3.
Dual eNB simulation scenario.
Figure 4.
UEs’ simulated frame delay (single eNB).
Figure 5.
UEs’ simulated frame delay (dual eNB).
Figure 6.
UEs’ simulated frame loss (single eNB).
Figure 7.
UEs’ simulated frame loss (Dual eNB).
Figure 8.
UEs’ simulated jitter delay (single eNB).
Figure 9.
UEs’ simulated jitter delay (dual eNB).
Figure 10.
UEs’ simulated MOS (single eNB).
Figure 11.
UEs′ simulated MOS (dual eNB).
Figure 12.
The proposed private network architecture.
Figure 13.
Public Internet provider diagram.
Table 1.
Simulation and experimental scenario parameters.
Parameter | Simulation Scenarios | Experimental Scenario |
---|
LTE Base Stations | 1 - 2 | 1 |
Base Station TX Power | +16 dBm | +16 dBm (max) |
Mobile Devices | 10 | 2 |
Mobile Device TX Power | +24 dBm | +24 dBm (max) |
Voice Codec | G.711 | G.711 |
Coverage Area | 2 km2 | 100 m2 |
Tested Services | VoLTE | VoLTE, data transmission |
Table 2.
Acceptable SDR device characteristics.
Characteristic | B200 | B210 | N321 |
---|
DC Input | 6 V | 6 V | 12 V |
Connection | USB 3.0 | USB 3.0 | Ethernet (gigabit) |
MiMo | 1 × 1 | 2 × 2 | 4 × 4 |
Bandwidth | 56 MHz | 56 MHz (1 × 1) 30.72 MHz (2 × 2) | 100 MHz per channel |
RF Coverage | 70 MHz–6 GHz | 70 MHz–6 GHz | 10 MHz–6 GHz |
TX Power (max) | +16 dBm | +16 dBm | +20 dBm |
Full Duplex | Yes (half or full) | Yes (half or full) | Yes |
Sample Rate | 61.44 MS/s | 61.44 MS/s | 122.88, 125, 153.6 MS/s |
ADC | 12 bits | 12 bits | 16 bits |
DAC | 12 bits | 12 bits | 14 bits |
FPGA Version | Xilinx Spartan 6 XC6SLX75 | Xilinx Spartan 6 XC6SLX150 | Xilinx Zynq 7100-Dual-core ARM Cortex-A9 800 MHz |
RFNoC | No | No | Yes |
Εxtra Νotes | GPS (Optional) | GPS (Optional) | GPS |
Open-Source | FPGA/Driver | FPGA/Driver | FPGA/Driver |
Cost | EUR 1200.00 (approximately) | EUR 1200.00 (approximately) | EUR 10,000.00 (approximately) |
Dimensions | 97 × 155 × 15 mm | 97 × 155 × 15 mm | 357.1 × 211.1 × 43.7 mm |
Weight | 350 g | 350 g | 3.13 kg |
Table 3.
VoLTE simulation RF parameters.
Parameter | Single eNB | Dual eNB |
---|
Center Frequency/LTE Band | 2.69 GHz | 2.69 GHz, 2.71 GHz |
Channel Bandwidth | 20 MHz | 20 MHz |
Number of Channels | 1 | 1 for each eNB |
Antennas | Omnidirectional | Omnidirectional |
UE Transmit Power | +24 dBm | +24 dBm |
eNB Transmit Power | +16 dBm | +16 dBm |
Path Loss Model | Log Shadow | Log Shadow |
Codec | G.711 | G.711 |
Call Duration/Simulation Time | 60 s | 60 s |
Mean Distance (UE–eNB) | 1200–1500 m | 800–1100 m |
Table 4.
VoIP QoS parameters.
Parameter | Good | Acceptable | Poor |
---|
Frame Delay (ms) | 0–150 | 150–300 | >300 |
FLR (%) | 0–0.5 | 0.5–1 | >1 |
Jitter (ms) | 0–50 | 50–144 | >144 |
Table 5.
VoIP QoE parameters.
MOS | Quality |
---|
5 | Excellent |
4–5 | Good |
3–4 | Fair |
2–3 | Poor |
1–2 | Bad |
Table 6.
Single eNB frame delay values.
Frame Delay (ms)/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean Value | 6.97 | 25.29 | 351.69 | 13.20 | 70.49 | 10.48 | 6.89 | 9.22 | 5.88 | 454.31 |
Standard Deviation | 3.29 | 84.45 | 200.84 | 26.85 | 4.14 | 12.47 | 5.67 | 15.22 | 2.61 | 243.18 |
Table 7.
Dual eNB frame delay values.
Frame Delay (ms)/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean Value | 6.09 | 4.65 | 4.82 | 4.88 | 4.75 | 6.34 | 11.80 | 5.41 | 5.67 | 4.93 |
Standard Deviation | 3.02 | 1.18 | 1.43 | 1.46 | 1.26 | 5.52 | 33.59 | 2.11 | 2.60 | 1.47 |
Table 8.
Single eNB frame loss values.
Frame Loss (Ratio)/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean Value | 0.00 | 0.09 | 0.16 | <0.01 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.00 | <0.01 | 0.00 | 0.09 |
Standard Deviation | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.21 | 0.03 | 0.23 | 0.06 | 0.00 | <0.01 | 0.00 | 0.19 |
Table 9.
Dual eNB frame loss values.
Frame Loss (Ratio)/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean Value | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | <0.01 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Standard Deviation | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.14 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Table 10.
Single eNB jitter delay values.
Jitter Delay (ms)/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean Value | 4.29 | 491.32 | 1345.00 | 21.39 | 655.26 | 6.09 | 6.68 | 12.78 | 3.04 | 1317.00 |
Standard Deviation | 3.24 | 662.67 | 1311.00 | 57.01 | 1044.00 | 11.16 | 8.22 | 26.03 | 2.54 | 1419.00 |
Table 11.
Dual eNB jitter delay values.
Jitter Delay (ms)/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean Value | 5.28 | 6.00 | 6.00 | 6.00 | 6.00 | 5.94 | 9.71 | 12.77 | 6.34 | 5.98 |
Standard Deviation | 2.28 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.94 | 16.00 | 48.31 | 1.72 | 1.62 |
Table 12.
Single eNB MOS values.
MOS/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean | 3.33 | 1.96 | 1.21 | 3.13 | 1.83 | 3.02 | 3.38 | 3.60 | 3.85 | 1.27 |
Standard Deviation | 1.32 | 1.31 | 0.79 | 1.32 | 1.35 | 1.39 | 1.27 | 1.13 | 1.02 | 0.79 |
Table 13.
Dual eNB MOS values.
MOS/UE | UE[0] | UE[1] | UE[2] | UE[3] | UE[4] | UE[5] | UE[6] | UE[7] | UE[8] | UE[9] |
---|
Mean | 3.72 | 4.00 | 4.28 | 3.94 | 4.08 | 3.73 | 3.10 | 3.85 | 4.01 | 4.13 |
Standard Deviation | 1.03 | 0.78 | 0.40 | 0.86 | 0.75 | 1.02 | 1.44 | 1.05 | 0.81 | 0.63 |
Table 14.
SpeedTest results.
Device | Ping | Download | Upload | Jitter |
---|
UE[1] | 51 ms | 17.74 Mbps | 4.72 Mbps | 9 ms |
UE[2] | 58 ms | 18.32 Mbps | 5.34 Mbps | 13 ms |
| Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).