Bell/Telus LTE roaming agreement?

[WorldIRC]

Folks,

I think many of us seize on the tagline in the media like this report...

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/technol...service=mobile



What not obvious is the the latter part regarding the "sharing" spectrum. Sure, Bell still has got its BRS spectrum licenses for LTE Band 7 (2600) like Rogers while TELUS has none. But in MOCN, the arrangement is using the EXACT same RAN. So it does not matter who set up the node B and RNC, who owns the spectrum in whatever service area, Huawei or NSN gears... Both Bell and TELUS subscribers have the equal access to the "pooled" resources with each other UMTS and LTE RANs. The backhaul, interconnect gateways for the internet, AAAs, however, are parting their ways...

So in layman's terms....they share the hardware (infrastructure), but not the spectrum?

[intlbizman]

so hc no i,

i think i understand the country wide implication... Telus build out the west... Bell build out the east, then they share... but what about places like GTA where both companies have their own towers, they share those too? only bell shares only their 1700 and not the 2600 network?

[HC - NO "i"]

So in layman's terms....they share the hardware (infrastructure), but not the spectrum?

so hc no i,

i think i understand the country wide implication... Telus build out the west... Bell build out the east, then they share... but what about places like GTA where both companies have their own towers, they share those too? only bell shares only their 1700 and not the 2600 network?

WorldIRC / intlbizman,

It is technically impossible NOT sharing their spectrum - be it AWS or BRS. Why?

TELUS does not have sufficient AWS spectrum in some service areas such as Toronto, for LTE deployment with the downlink up to 75Mbps. Under the current configuration, it needs 20MHz of spectrum to do so and TELUS currently only holds or utilizes just 10MHz. Same goes with Bell in some markets too. Just do a drive test with industrial analyzers or devices capable of showing the crucial field test parameters like frequency channel numbers, bandwidth, etc. Both Bell and TELUS will not disclose too much or flatly deny about it the pooled spectrum arrangement. (Similarly, MVNOs and newer carriers are not allowed to tell the public that Rogers is their network / roaming provider.)

Just treat it like our cars... I have got mine, you have got yours, he has got his. We may have different makes, models and colours, we may even fill up with different fuel but all cars can seat 5. We car pool together and it does not matter which car we hop on or who is driving everyday as long as we can agree on the schedule. Mary wants to join the carpool but does not own a car yet. She will eventually get one and adds to the car pool.

[Que_Ball]

They are certainly pushing less PR info on the sharing of LTE infrastructure as compared to the announcements they made for sharing the building and spectrum of the HSPA network. It could also be because of the supposed need to have 850 and 1900 Mhz bands available whenever possible they needed to share the frequencies on HSPA just to get enough reliability in the coverage to deflect the criticism of not having a 2G network to fall back on. Their 3g/HSPA network had to have rock solid coverage no matter what their competitive instincts might have said so it required a pooling of spectrum.

I'm not familiar with the details of the LTE radio hardware they are using. It's certainly conceivable that even with a shared radio interface there can be some virtual provisioning that separates the actual frequencies in use on that same radio so that all the Bell customers are using the frequencies that Bell purchased in the auction and all the Telus customers only use the frequencies that Telus purchased. If that's the case then yeah, they can share the tower, share the physical antenna and radio gear but have separate spectrum and separate core network and backhaul capacity. That would mean that the LTE radios are shared but not to the same degree as the sharing was done with HSPA. It's a pretty common trend in technology to virtualize everything, it would be like having two separate virtual radios on a single piece of hardware. That would likely work well for their needs.

If Telus were to launch LTE in Manitoba that would likely be a good indicator. As I understand things Bell never purchased any AWS spectrum in Manitoba so if they are not sharing the spectrum that would end up with Telus clients getting LTE access in that province and Bell being left out unless they were able to purchase access to AWS spectrum that someone else purchased in Manitoba but never used.

If the ability to do a virtual split of the spectrum in the shared radios is a new feature that the manufacturers added to the LTE equipment then I could certainly see Telus and Bell utilizing that feature so that they do not end up subsidizing the spectrum needs of a competitor through their infrastructure sharing agreements. Think about the billions of dollars they spend on those licenses, their natural inclination would likely be to keep it to themselves when technically possible. Since LTE now has HSPA as it's fallback and it's currently used for data only then the need to perfect coverage and signal availability is no longer driving a need to share spectrum.

The way I see it these companies would split up their spectrum for LTE if at all possible and keep it for themselves even if they share towers.

[sirtate]

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9630/5.0.0.732 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/126)

There is no reason to change or add additional hardware to the top of the tower to allow two separate radios at the base.

Simply splitting the coax would suffice, just like your cable TV, split the coax and the tuners of the radios hooked up will do the rest.

As long as the frequency bands are similar, it will be fairly loss-less, and propagation would be the same...

[polkaroo]

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9630/5.0.0.732 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/126)

There is no reason to change or add additional hardware to the top of the tower to allow two separate radios at the base.

Simply splitting the coax would suffice, just like your cable TV, split the coax and the tuners of the radios hooked up will do the rest.

Um, no. It's a tad more complex than that!

[Qwavel]

I think this is a very important question.

The UMTS network sharing arrangement between Bell and Telus was very successful in my opinion: by sharing their resources they were able to quickly achieve much better coverage then Rogers even in Rogers' own backyard (I'm on Rogers in Toronto).

(The idea that WIND and Mobilicity are building their own independent networks is madness.)

If I felt that they were going to continue that successful arrangement for LTE then I would be inclined to switch to Bell or Telus. If they were going to go their own ways then I would be more cautious, e.g. perhaps avoiding Telus in Toronto.

It sounds like the answer is somewhere in between, but that they will be doing enough sharing that switching to Telus in Toronto is probably safe. correct me if I'm wrong please.

[polkaroo]

If the "LTE" indicator on my Sierra Wireless watchers can be a gauge, I get LTE more often on my Telus aircard than Rogers in Toronto. Both LTE. When I do get LTE on Rogers, it's faster than Telus. But who cares if it's faster if it's less reliable?

[Qwavel]

If the "LTE" indicator on my Sierra Wireless watchers can be a gauge, I get LTE more often on my Telus aircard than Rogers in Toronto. Both LTE. When I do get LTE on Rogers, it's faster than Telus. But who cares if it's faster if it's less reliable?

Good to know. Yes, coverage (and reliability) are more important then raw speed.

[WorldIRC]

So let's put it in laymans terms:

In Toronto, can a client on TELUS receive a different level / quality of LTE service than a Bell client; purely referring to reception / ability to connect to the network.

As the Backhaul is different, we already know speed and latency may differ.

[HC - NO "i"]

Que_Ball,

I think you have missed something. The Radio Access Network is just one for both TELUS and Bell, period. TELUS can set up a site with using their spectrum, Bell can set up another with their spectrum in different blocks / bands but BOTH can access either (There are even instances Bell sites were built on TELUS' properties in the West!). If Bell wants TELUS LTE subscribers not to have access to its LTE Band 7 (2600), it can use the measures I have mentioned earlier or as simple as listed those nodes as "forbidden" in the PLMN list.

Qwavel,

Greetings.

I guess you are the best person to tell whichever carrier is the best for you. I can say Big-R/B/T works out nicely for me in town, but someone may observe the opposite at another place. LTE deployment is still in its early days and there are always enhancement, tweaking to the network. Networking sharing, strategic partnership, spectrum swap, merger/acquisition/consolidation... these may have an impact to the network reliability but not absolutely. It depends on the scale and rate of the build-out, and how much $$$$ to put into the game. Stay put and see if your situation has improved or degraded a year from now.

polkaroo,

Fellow HC, Steve Punter and I have done a few drive tests in the GTA since last year. So far, we have found Rogers may not spread out to different regions but Bell/TELUS' LTE was more like a cheese cake in town! Of course, we are not all conducting industrial drive tests with industrial analyzers that covers 50% of all the accessible roads. However, we have got fairly good observations in general. Now, both sides have been moving forward. Still, I would say Rogers is still have a slight lead in the GTA at this point.

WorldIRC,

Yes, it should be the case by using the same (unlocked) device to compare while it is picking up the same serving site. But like what you have said, the data throughput, latency, etc. are not solely affected by the conditions in the RAN side.

[HC - NO "i"]

Folks,

I have got some updates for this topic.

First, I have to correct myself a few things...

- Devices conform to the LTE UE Category 3 specs is possible for the downlink to go up to 75Mbps with 10MHz of spectrum, 2x2 MIMO and 16QAM. (3GPP TS 36.306)

- Unlike the RAN in UMTS (UTRAN), RNC is no longer present in the LTE RAN (E-UTRAN) along with the e-NodeB.

- In the LTE network sharing, spectrum can either be pooled as in the Multi-Operator Core Network (MOCN) arrangement or dedicatedd spectrum can be assigned for different operators as in Multi-Operator Radio Access Network (MORAN) implementation...



Yesterday, I have the opportunity to verify if Bell and TELUS are "pooling" the BRS spectrum or not. I have picked a LTE site that has both Band 4 (AWS) and Band 7 (2600) in Cambridge, ON and using an unlocked Sierra Wireless AC763S mobile hotspot that supports both LTE Bands. With a Bell data line, I have observed LTE data sessions take place in both bands. However, with a TELUS data line, data sessions only take place in the LTE Band 4 (AWS). To be sure, I have connect / disconnect and swapping the SIM cards more than once. The outcomes have been consistent.

Though I do not fully understand every single technical detail, I have got better idea after researching this topic more. Also, I want to thank several qualified professionals in the field as well as HoFo members like WorldIRC and Steve Punter through out the learning experience.

[bandersnatch]

Interesting -- Thanks. What would you say the implications are for service quality (speed/reliability) for Bell vs. Telus?

[intlbizman]

i think it makes perfect sense that the telus line only connected via AWS spectrum whereas the bell one did 2600 in addition to AWS.

but the questions are:
whose tower/site is that you tested? was it bell or telus's? that's the first thing we're trying to figure out
within the AWS spectrum, is it telus's or bell's or both?

[HC - NO "i"]

bandersnatch,

Greetings.

It is comparable at this point - neither side has led by a wide margin. (However, Rogers' LTE has got relatively lower latency consistently in the greater Toronto area.) Until LTE UE Category 4 capable devices become widely available, the full potential may have yet to be realized. Even so, unless we are tethering with a computer and dealing with tasks demanding for high-speed broadband e.g. multiple FTP sessions, HD video streaming simultaneously during my test there, I doubt that it is significant for the typical usage patterns with our handsets.

intlbizman,

Greetings.

It is a Bell site according to the TAFL at Industry Canada (W0820 - 954 Bishop Street North, Cambridge, ON) and TELUS DOES NOT have sites propagated in the BRS or AWS spectrum in that service area. Therefore, the LTE footprint is offered under the network sharing agreement with Bell. This is one good reason to travel far away from the metro Toronto area. I have also compared with the Cell ID among the data sessions.