Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Bukti Publikasi Jurnal

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 10

J3EIT (Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology)

Vol. XX, No. XX, Month XX, pp. 1~1x


ISSN: XXXX-XXXX, DOI: 1

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology


Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network (MOCN)
Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro1, Neilcy Tjahjamooniarsih 2, Jannus Marpaung2
1
Electrical Engineering Study Program, University of Tanjungpura, Pontianak, Indonesia
2
Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Tanjungpura, Pontianak, Indonesia

Article Info ABSTRACT


The reliable spread of BTS networks with high system capacity poses
Received August 10, 2023 a challenge for operators in delivering services. An alternative strategy
Revised August 23, 2023 is network sharing, one of which is MOCN (Multi Operator Core
Accepted August 31, 2023 Network). MOCN BTS is configured to share RF module and antenna
resources by combining frequencies between operators while
maintaining each operator's core. On the other hand, BTS not-pair is
Keywords: the conventional operator configuration where RF modules and
antennas are installed independently without any connection to other
KPI Network operators. In this final project, a KPI data analysis is conducted for
MOCN Technology both BTS configuration to assess their reliability. Four BTS samples
Not Pair Technology
from two operators (IM3 and 3ID) are taken for this analysis. The
Base Tranceiver Station
analyzed KPI categories include Accessibility KPI, Retainability KPI,
Network Sharing
and Service Integrity KPI during busy hours. KPI data is obtained
from field results and assisted by the technical team from Indosat
Ooredoo Hutchison Pontianak. The analysis results indicate that in
terms of Service Integrity KPI, BTS MOCN outperforms BTS not-
pair, with a difference of 2.590175 Mbps for downlink and 0.286065
Mbps for uplink. Regarding Accessibility KPI and Retainability KPI,
BTS managed by 3ID demonstrates better performance compared to
those managed by IM3.

1. INTRODUCTION
Distribution of reliable BTS networks with high system capacity, especially in new areas, pose challenges
for Mobile Network Operator (MNO) in procuring devices and installations for upgrading or establishing new
towers [1][5]. To overcome this, some MNOs need to prepare strategy, one of which is network sharing. Network
sharing model between MNOs becomes an alternative to developing telecommunications companies in various
countries because it allows sharing of spectrum and BTS in the same working scheme. Network sharing can be a
solution to expedite network deployment, especially in rural or remote areas [2]. One of the five network sharing
models is Multiple Operator Core Network (MOCN). MOCN is a collaborative telecommunications network
architecture proposed by multiple MNOs to integrate or utilize network resources together. MOCN is vital in the
mobile telecommunications industry, especially in the context of network virtualization and technology. It can
help MNOs reduce investment costs in network infrastructure while maintaining high-quality services. The basic
idea behind MOCN arrangement is that one Radio Access Network (eNodeB) will provide network access to
multiple MNOs, where each MNO maintains its core network. MNOs can also combine their frequencies to
increase capacity. The integration of MOCN will extend network coverage and enhance capacity, resulting in
better network quality for users [3][6]. In line of this, the author seizes the opportunity of this MOCN as the
research topic for the final project. The author focuses on the analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) for
the BTS MOCN network (pair colocation) and the standalone BTS network (not- pair), comparing their KPI
performances to determine whether using the BTS MOCN network or BTS not-pair network yields better results.
The objective of this study is to obtain technical findings regarding the reliability of BTS MOCN compared to
BTS not-pair networks.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The network sharing model is where operators or MNOs (Mobile Network Operators), as service providers,
share the utilization of telecommunications network infrastructure, encompassing passive infrastructure (passive
sharing) and active infrastructure (active sharing), both on the radio access network side and on the core network
side[9][14][15].
Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology (J3EIT) 2

2.1. MOCN and Not Pair


MOCN is a configuration that shares RF module and antenna resources by combining the frequencies of two
MNOs while maintaining each MNO's core network. MOCN can be applied to two or more MNOs, with one of
them acting as the Master Operator (MOP). On the other hand, a not pair BTS is a configuration done by an
operator, where the RF module and antenna are installed separately without any connection to other
operators[4][7][8]. To compare performance of both configurations, network KPIs are needed to identify network
outputs in accordance with the quality boundaries. In 4G LTE, network KPIs are classified into 5 categories,
including Accessibility, Retainability, and Service Integrity[10][11][12].

(a) (b)

Figure 1. Base Tranceiver Station Configuration (a) Not Pair Technology


(b) MOCN Technology

2.2. Accessability KPI


Accessability KPI refers to the measurement of how much the network services are available or accessible
to users. The Accessability KPI in 4G LTE consists of several important parameter that assess the network's ability
to provide services to users. Some of the key components of the Accessability KPI in 4G LTE include: S1 Signaling
Success Rate, Radio Resource Controller Setup Success Rate, ERAB Setup Success Rate, Call Setup Success Rate,
and Circuit Switch Fall Back Success Rate.
2.3. Retainability KPI
Retainability KPI used in mobile networks to measure and monitor the network's ability to maintain
established connections or services with users over a specific period without interruptions or disruptions. The
Retainability KPI in 4G LTE include Drop Call Rate.
2.4. Service Integrity KPI
Service Integrity KPI used in a mobile network to measure and monitor the integrity or quality of services
provided to users during a specific period of time. The key components of the Service Integrity KPI in 4G LTE
include: Downlink Throughput and Uplink Throughput.

3. METHOD
3.1. Equipment
In this research, in general, the following tools are needed:
Table 1. List of Equipment
No Equipment Amount
1 Laptop 1 pcs
2 LAN cable 1 pcs
3 Site 4 site
Sample
3.2. Research Samples
The research was conducted by collecting network KPI data from 4 (four) sample sites according to the
research scenario. These sites include LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL located on Danau Sentarum Street with
MOCN configuration where IM3 serves as the Master Operator, LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL situated on
Wonobaru 1 alley with MOCN configuration where 3ID acts as the Master Operator, IM3
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP on Diponegoro Street with a non-pair configuration, and 3ID

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)
Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology (J3EIT) 3
LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL on Putri Candramidi Street with a non-pair configuration. These four sites are used
as scenarios for collecting KPI (Key Performance Indicator) data in this research, as depicted in Figure 2.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 2. Site Samples (a) LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL (b) LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP


(c) LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL (d) LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

3.3. Research Methods


The research method used in this study is described in a flowchart as outlined in Figure 3 as follows:

Figure 3. Research Flowchart


a. Expert Consultation
Discussions were held by the author with the Head of Technical Officer at Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison
Pontianak in person, and the Regional Kalimantan Network Planning Team in Balikpapan via Teams. These
discussions aimed to gather data related to current telecommunications issues, existing BTS (Base

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)
Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology (J3EIT) 4

Transceiver Station) data, theories, regulations, and the development of Multi-Operator Core Network
implementation at PT. Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison.
b. Study Literature
Study literature was conducted to find supporting theories about Multi-Operator Core Network and to study
secondary data about the existing BTS of PT. Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison in the Pontianak area, as well as
4G network KPI parameters.
c. Selection of Sites According to Research Scenarios
This research selected 4 (four) sample sites in Pontianak city according to the research scenarios. These sites
include sites with MOCN configuration where IM3 serves as the Master Operator, sites with MOCN
configuration where 3ID serves as the Master Operator, IM3 sites with non-pair configuration, and 3ID sites
with non-pair configuration. The selection of these four sites for KPI Network data collection in this study
was based on the master operation of the BTS and the similarity of technology used on the BTS
(L900/L1800/L2100).
d. Data Collection
In this stage, the author conducted direct data collection at the Base Station Controller (BSC) owned by PT.
Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison Pontianak. During data collection, the researcher obtained Primary data in the
form of KPI Network data from the four sample sites according to the research scenarios in the Pontianak
city area, with BTS MOCN and BTS not pair configurations. KPI network measurement data was recorded
every 60 minutes (1 hour) on the EPC (Evolved Packet Core) server but only stored for 14 days, so multiple
data collection efforts were needed to obtain data for a total of 28 days.

Figure 4. Data Collect Flowchart


The observed KPI data includes, among others: S1 Signaling Success Rate (S1 Signaling SR), Radio
Resource Control Setup Success Rate (RRC-SSR), ERAB Setup Success Rate (ERAB-SSR), Call Setup
Success Rate Packet Switched (CSSR-PS), Circuit Switched Fall Back Success Rate (CSFB-SR), Drop Call
Ratio Packet Switched (DCR-PS), Downlink Throughput, Uplink Throughput.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


In this final project research, KPI 4G network data was collected on July 4th and July 18th 2023 from the
Evolved Packet Core (EPC) server at the Base Station Controller (BSC) owned by PT. Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison
Pontianak. The data was collected 4 sample sites according to the research scenarios, namely the LTE_DANAU_
SENTARUM_PL site with IM3 as the Master Operator in MOCN configuration, the
LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL site with 3ID as the Master Operator in MOCN configuration, the IM3
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP site with a not pair configuration, and the 3ID LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL
site with a not pair configuration.

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)
Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology (J3EIT) 5

4.1. Analysis and Comparison of S1 Signaling Success Rate


All four research sample sites exhibited good performance in S1 Signaling Success Rate during busy hours,
meeting KPI standards above 99%. The highest average S1 Signaling Success Rate was observed in the BTS
MOCN 3ID configuration at 99.9966%, followed by BTS not pair 3ID at 99.9944%, BTS not pair IM3 at
99.9808%, and BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.9181%. This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the
IM3-managed BTS in terms of S1 Signaling Success Rate.
S1 Signaling Success Rate
100,00

99,90

99,80

99,70

99,60
10.00 13.00 14.00 17.00 19.00 21.00 22.00

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 5. Average Graphic of S1 Signaling Success Rate


4.2. Analysis and Comparison of RRC Setup Success Rate
All four research sample sites demonstrated good performance in RRC Setup Success Rate during busy hours,
meeting KPI standards above 99%. The highest average RCC Setup Success Rate was recorded in the BTS MOCN
3ID configuration at 99.9829%, followed by BTS not pair 3ID at 99.9326%, BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.9172%, and
BTS not pair IM3 at 99.7843%. This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS
in terms of RRC Setup Success Rate.

RRC Setup Success Rate


100,00
99,95
99,90
99,85
99,80
99,75
99,70
99,65
99,60
10:00 13:00 14:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 22:00
RRC Setup Success Rate

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 6. Average Graphic of RRC Setup Success Rate


4.3. Analysis and Comparison of ERAB Setup Success Rate
All four research sample sites exhibited good performance in ERAB Setup Success Rate during busy hours,
meeting KPI standards above 99%. The highest average ERAB Setup Success Rate was observed in the BTS not
pair 3ID configuration at 99.8949%, followed by BTS not pair IM3 at 99.8826%, BTS MOCN 3ID at 99.8344%,
and BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.8146%. This indicates that the not pair BTS configuration is superior to the MOCN
BTS configuration in terms of ERAB Setup Success Rate.

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)
Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology (J3EIT) 6

ERAB Setup Success Rate


100,00
99,80
99,60
10:00 13:00 14:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 22:00
ERAB Setup Success Rate

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 7. Average Graphic of ERAB Setup Success Rate


4.4. Analysis and Comparison of Call Setup Success Rate
All four research sample sites showed good performance in Call Setup Success Rate during busy hours,
meeting KPI standards above 98%. The highest average Call Setup Success Rate was observed in the BTS not pair
3ID configuration at 99.9642%, followed by BTS MOCN 3ID at 99.9576%, BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.6506%, and
BTS not pair IM3 at 99.6485%. This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS
in terms of Call Setup Success Rate.

Call Setup Success Rate


100,0000
99,5000
99,0000
10:00 13:00 14:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 22:00
Call Setup Success Rate

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 8. Average Graphic of Call Setup Success Rate


4.5. Analysis and Comparison of CSFB Success Rate
All four research sample sites demonstrated good performance in CSFB Success Rate during busy hours,
meeting KPI standards above 98%. The highest average CSFB Success Rate was recorded in the BTS MOCN IM3
configuration at 99.9922%, followed by BTS MOCN 3ID at 99.9900%, BTS not pair IM3 at 99.9631%, and BTS
not pair 3ID at 99.9612%. This indicates that the MOCN BTS configuration is superior to the not pair BTS
configuration in terms of CSFB Success Rate.

CSFB Success Rate


100,00
99,90
99,80
10:00 13:00 14:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 22:00
CSFB Success Rate

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 9. Average Graphic of CSFB Success Rate


4.6. Analysis and Comparison of Drop Call Rate
All four research sample sites exhibited good performance in Drop Call Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI
standards below 2%. The best average Drop Call Rate was observed in the BTS MOCN 3ID configuration at

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)
Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology (J3EIT) 7
0.0002%, BTS not pair 3ID at 0.0004%, BTS MOCN IM3 at 0.0017%, and BTS not pair IM3 at 0.0020%. This
indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS in terms of Drop Call Rate.

Drop Call Rate


0,003000
0,002000
0,001000
0,000000
10:00 13:00 14:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 22:00
Drop Call Rate

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 10. Average Graphic of Drop Call Rate


4.7. Analysis and Comparison of Call Setup Success Rate
BTS MOCN IM3 and 3ID, as well as BTS not pair 3ID, demonstrated good Downlink Throughput
performance during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 10 Mbps. However, BTS not pair IM3 showed a
decrease in performance during busy hours, failing to meet the KPI standard of 10 Mbps. The best average
Downlink Throughput was recorded in the BTS MOCN 3ID configuration at 15.75 Mbps, followed by BTS
MOCN IM3 at 15.18 Mbps, BTS not pair 3ID at 13.16 Mbps, and BTS not pair IM3 at 10.82 Mbps. This indicates
that the MOCN BTS configuration is superior to the not pair BTS configuration in terms of Downlink Throughput.

Downlink Throughput
20000000
10000000
0
10:00 13:00 14:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 22:00
Downlink Throughput

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 11. Average Graphic of Downlink Throughput


4.8. Analysis and Comparison of Call Setup Success Rate
BTS MOCN IM3 and 3ID, as well as BTS not pair 3ID, demonstrated good Uplink Throughput performance
during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 2 Mbps. However, BTS not pair IM3 showed a decrease in
performance during busy hours, failing to meet the KPI standard of 2 Mbps. The best average Uplink Throughput
was observed in the BTS MOCN IM3 configuration at 2.54 Mbps, followed by BTS MOCN 3ID at 2.26 Mbps,
BTS not pair 3ID at 2.25 Mbps, and BTS not pair IM3 at 1.27 Mbps. This indicates that the MOCN BTS
configuration is superior to the not pair BTS configuration in terms of Uplink Throughput.

Uplink Throughput
4000000
2000000
0
10:00 13:00 14:00 17:00 19:00 21:00 22:00
Uplink Throughput

LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL
LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL

Figure 12. Average Graphic of Uplink Throughput

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)
Journal of Electrical Engineering, Energy, and Information Technology (J3EIT) 8

5. CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis results of the network KPIs that have been carried out, the following conclusions are
obtained 1) BTS MOCN is better than BTS not-pair in terms of Service Integrity KPI (Downlink and Uplink
Throughput). In terms of Accessability KPI and Retainability KPI, BTS managed by 3ID is still better than BTS
managed by IM3. 2) The success of network KPIs in 4G LTE is not only based on Accessibility KPIs (S1 Signaling,
RRC Setup, ERAB Setup, CSSR, CSFB), Retainability KPI (DCR), and Service Integrity KPI (Downlink and
Uplink Throughput), but also includes Availability KPI (4G Coverage) and Mobility KPI (Handover).3) The
values of these network KPI parameters are heavily influenced by the user traffic and busy hour based on the
highest Data Traffic and Physical Resource Blocks. The more users accessing the eNodeB, the signal reception
and data service quality (downlink and uplink) may also decrease network KPI parameters due to the concept of
shared spectrum allocation. The values of these network KPI parameters can also be affected by factors such as
inadequate infrastructure configuration settings and environmental factors like bad weather or surrounding
building structures.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author thanked the chairman and academic civitas of the Faculty of Engineering University of
Tanjungpura and all the parties involved in the preparation of this journal. May the results of this research be of
benefit to both the author and the reader.

REFERENCES
[1] Ericsson. 2020. Dedicated Networks for Industrial Connectivity. Stockholm: Ericsson Mobility Report.
[2] Tim Peneliti Pustlitbang SDPPI. 2018. Analisis Industri Telekomunikasi Indonesia Untuk Mendukung
Efisiensi. Naskah Publikasi. Jakarta: Puslitbang SDPPI Kemkominfo.
[3] GSMA. 2019, June 18. Infrastructure Sharing: An Overview. May 15, 2023.
https://www.gsma.com/futurenetworks/wiki/infrastructure-sharing-an-overview/
[4] 3GPP. 2014, December. 3GPP TS 32.130 V12.0.0 (2014-12) Technical Specification. Release 121T.
Valbonne: 3GPP Organizational Partners.
[5] APJII. 2023. Survei Penetrasi & Perilaku Internet 2023. https://survei.apjii.or.id/survei/2023
[6] C, Mawardi. 2019. Analisa Regulasi Network Sharing Berbasis Multi Operator Core Network (MOCN).
InComTech: Jurnal Telekomunikasi dan Komputer, Vol 9 (3), 141-150.
[7] Cox, Christopher. 2014. An Introduction To LTE. Second Edition. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
[8] GSMA. 2012, September. Mobile Infrastructure Sharing. May 16, 2023.
https://www.gsma.com/publicpolicy/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Mobile-Infrastrusture-sharing.pdf
[9] Imansyah, Fitri. 2019. Buku Ajar Mata Kuliah Teknologi GSM (Global System for Mobile). Pontianak:
Penerbit Pustaka Rumah Aloy.
[10] Johari, J., Imansyah, F., & F. Trias P. W. (2018). Analisis Komparatif Konfigurasi 4g Menggunakan Metode
Radio Frekuensi Sharing Dan Stand Alone. Jurnal Teknik Elektro Universitas Tanjungpura. Jurnal Teknik
Elektro Universitas Tanjungpura, 1(1)
[11] Khotimah, K., Imansyah, F., & F. Trias P. W. (2017). Analisis Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Jaringan
Telekomunikasi Gsm Pada PT. Hutchison 3 Indonesia (H3I) Pontianak.
[12] Y. Türk & E. Zeydan. 2021. On Performance Analysis of Multioperator RAN Sharing for Mobile Network
Operators. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences 29(2):816-830
[13] Yanto. (2013). QoS (Quality Of Service) Analysis on Internet Networks (Case Study: Faculty of
Engineering, University of Tanjungpura). Pontianak Untan Electrical Engineering Journal.
[14] Neilcy Tjahjamooniarsih, Fitri Imansyah, Dasril. (2018). Textbook of Basic Telecommunications Subjects.
Pontianak: Aloy House Library (PRA).
[15] ITU-T. 2022, March 16. Recommendation ITU-T F.743.15 Requirements for Multi-Operator Core Network
Enabled Multimedia Services.

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)

You might also like