Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Telecommunications Management
1
This paper is based upon contributions of the respective authors to the following conferences during 2005: 9th IFIP/IEEE
International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM) in Nice, France, 61st IEEE Semi-annual Vehicular
Technology Conference (VTC) in Sweden, Stockholm, and 6th World Wireless Conference (WWC), in SF Bay Area, USA. We
are thankful to the conference participants and anonymous referees for useful feedback at the earlier stages of this research. In
particular, we would like to thank Dr. N. K. Shankaranarayan and Dr. Byoung Jo J. Kim, both with AT&T Labs, NJ, USA, for
their valuable comments and understanding the economics and technical aspects of emerging technologies (Mr. Gunasekaran
spent the summer of 2004 working with them in AT&T Labs). Finally, many thanks to Dr. A. Curtis and Dr. K. Ryan, both at
Stevens Institute of Technology, and Dr. George Thomas at the University of Louisiana, for their valuable input regarding
technological and other details of wireless networks.
2
Corresponding Author: Dr. Fotios Harmantzis, Assistant Professor, Head of Performance and Economics of
Telecommunications Networks research team, School of Technology Management, Stevens Institute of Technology.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 2
Abstract: Wi-Fi currently has emerged not only as a dominant standard for wireless
Local Area Network (LAN) but also as the wireless Personal area Networks (PAN)
and Metro Area Network (MAN). There is clearly a widespread support for metro
area Wi-Fi around the world and the experts believe that city wide Wi-Fi could
make ubiquitous broadband a reality. Wi-Fi networks are getting integrated with the
Internet and cellular infrastructure, offering innovative services (data and voice) to
the individuals and businesses. In the metro area network we believe that a
integration of WiMAX and Wi-Fi technologies will provide the most cost effective
solution of backhaul and access for both voice and data services. In the cellular
arena, as mobile operators are looking for new ways to connect, Wi-Fi can easily be
integrated with the existing mobile data networks (2.5G/3G), leading to the
heterogeneous wireless networks that are mainly Wi-Fi centric, proposing new
service models.
VoWi-Fi
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 3
1. Introduction
Wi-Fi is widely accepted since it introduces the flexibility of wireless access into
any small office, home, enterprise, restaurant or school, and the cities where
deployments which can be summarized as follows [5]: The first type is the
deployment at home, businesses and enterprises where the service is offered without
charge. The second type is offered by micro carriers, e.g., Starbucks coffee-shops
and Border bookstores in the United States [9]. Carriers set up their own access
points and maintain customer and billing relationship with subscribers. Though
revenues are not high, the model is still profitable for small business owners. The
third type is offered by Wi-Fi startup companies3 that aggregate micro carriers’
network and provide a single access service to the end user. The fourth type applies
to Wi-Fi services offered by cellular operators4. They can partner with the micro-
carriers or aggregators or they can roll-out their own Wi-Fi network and integrate it
with their cellular network. The fifth type is the deployment of a city wide Wi-Fi
development tool in both developing and developed countries. In some cases, even if
the city authorities aim to improve the overall efficiency of the government services
and deliver lower-cost Wi-Fi Internet services to communities and businesses, there
3
www.boingo.com
4
www.t-mobile.com
5
http://www.muniwireless.com/reports/docs/June2004Report.pdf (URL accessed on Feb 2005)
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 4
is still opposition from various fronts, trying to prevent cities from sponsoring their
own Wi-Fi networks. The telecom companies in the United States are also
concerned about their dominance over local markets, as local governments are trying
to build their own affordable wireless broadband network, e.g., Wi-Fi. However, city
authorities have realized that city wide Wi-Fi is a strategic investment as it provides
an infrastructure that can provide internet access to low income citizens and small
Since Wi-Fi is just an access technology it has to be integrated with other backbone
wired and wireless networks. In some cases it has also been integrated with other
the networks they are connecting to. International standard bodies and vendor
groups are formed to set up standards on how one technology interoperates with
6
The digital divide is both a social and political issue addressing the gap bettwen the communities that have accesss to internet
and those who do not. We have to address three main issues in bridging the Digital Divide; Affordability, Availability, and
Accessibility of services and applications. Wi-Fi is one such technology that can address all these three issues.
Cities/Municipalities have to build a communication infrastructure that is affordable and available all the time every-where to
offer small businesses and low-income households.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 5
and we are witnessing it now: Wi-Fi with 2.5G & 3G, Wi-Fi with WiMAX, Wi-Fi
done. This paper attempts to present emerging business models of Wi-Fi integration
with PAN, MAN and WAN. We believe that this is the first time that an emerging
service model of Wi-Fi integrated with cellular, WiMAX, VoIP, and Bluetooth, i.e.,
a Wi-Fi ecosystem, has been proposed and unique insights are presented. The other
main goal of this article is to compare and contrast Wi-Fi with other wireless
technologies that are likely or have been already integrated with Wi-Fi. From an
integration point of view, we believe that Wi-Fi is the winning technology in such a
wireless ecosystem. That integration brings not only technical issues but also
<Table1>
7
Wi-Fi®, or Wireless Fidelity, allow to connect to the internet from virtually anywhere at speeds of up to 54Mbps. Wi-Fi -
enabled devices use radio technologies based on the IEEE 802.11 standard to communicate data anywhere within the range of
an access point. The Wi-Fi Alliance formerly known as WECA is the global Wi-Fi organization that created the Wi-Fi brand.
A nonprofit organization, the Alliance was formed in 1999 to certify interoperability of IEEE 802.11 products and to promote
them as the global, wireless LAN standard across all market segments. www.wi-fi.org.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 6
The 802.118 is a WLAN standard developed by the IEEE and it was officially
accepted in 1997. IEEE 802.11 operates in the unlicensed 2.4 GHz ISM band with a
total available bandwidth of 83.5 MHz (2.4GHz - 2.4835 GHz). As seen in Table 2
IEEE 802.11 defines a group of WLAN standards that includes original 802.11,
and 802.11s. The first IEEE 802.11 standard published in 1997 described only the
MAC (Medium Access Control) and PHY (Physical Layer). The other 802.11
standards are either enhancements to the original MAC for QoS (Quality of service)
and security, or extension to the original PHY for high-speed data transmission.
IEEE 802.11g offers further high-speed extension in the 2.4 GHz band. It uses
OFDM in the 802.11b frequency band (2400-2485.5 MHz) and it has a maximum
data rate of 54Mbps. 802.11g is backward compatible with 802.11b and it includes a
technique for prioritizing data packets to improve quality of streaming media, such
as VoIP, voice, and video conferencing. 802.11a uses 5 GHz unlicensed U-NII
spectrum. Since it is not compatible with 802.11b, dual-band access points are used
802.11e defines Quality of Service and it supports streaming traffic and audio video
access points. 802.11h deals with the spectrum and transmit power control. 802.11i,
also called Wi-Fi Protected Access, supports a more advanced encryption standard,
along with 802.1x authentication and key management features. 802.11k is for radio
resource management and will provide power measurement information for access
8
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11/index.html
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 7
points and switches to make wireless LANs run more efficiently with less
to raise efficient WLAN throughput to more than 100Mbps. 802.11r is for fast
roaming and will address maintaining user connectivity from one access point to
another while maintaining high QoS for applications like VoWi-Fi. 802.11s standard
will deal with mesh networking and it is not expected to get ratified in the near
<Table 2>
<Table 3>
This technology enabled the mass replacement of many of the short-range cables we
to replace device cables and wires. This technology standard is being developed by
the Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG)10. There are more than 2,000 member
companies now that support this technology. Bluetooth SIG’s goal was to build up
9
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/index.html
10
https://www.bluetooth.org/ .The Bluetooth SIG launched it in May 1998. It is supported by major computing and
telecommunications industry giants. Bluetooth SIG comprises of nine promoter companies including 3Com, Ericsson, IBM,
Intel, Lucent Technologies, Microsoft, Motorola, Nokia and Toshiba, and thousands of member companies.
Bluetooth got its name from a tenth century Scandinavian king, Harald Bluetooth, who managed to unite several unruly
kingdoms. So this technology was aimed at integrating telecom and computing.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 8
2.4GHz unlicensed ISM band. Bluetooth technology uses low power and signals
communicate at less than 1 Mbps. The Bluetooth radio is optimized for very low
frequency hopping. The nominal distance for a Bluetooth device with a one-milli
watt RF power output is 10 meters and this is extendable to 100 meters by raising
the power to 100 milli watts. The raw data rate for a Bluetooth device is 1Mbps.
However, the available data rate is 723 kbps. Irrespective of the brand or
Bluetooth devices. Any Bluetooth device in the world can connect to other
Bluetooth devices within its proximity. Bluetooth uses the ad-hoc mode and can
interact with one or more other Bluetooth devices in several different ways. The
simplest scheme is when only two devices are involved. This is referred to as a
piconet, with one acting as the master and the other seven as slaves [4]. A piconet
sequence. Although a piconet can include no more than eight devices, attaching one
of the slaves to other piconets can extend its coverage. That is, in Bluetooth, a slave
can serve more than one master. Several of these piconets can be formed and linked
together in ad hoc fashion. This makes a scatternet with many independent and non-
<Figure 1>
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 9
Another emerging high speed personal area network standard is IEEE 802.15.3
which is based on UWB (Ultra wide broadband); it supports data rates over 400
Mbps. This is designed for delivering high speed multimedia services e.g., digital
broadband access. A group of vendors and service providers (those who founded
the WiMAX forum)12, believe that it will be widely deployed in the same way as
that of Wi-Fi. Standardization will not only reduce equipment and components costs,
allowing mass production, but it will also allow interoperability between equipments
of different vendors. The most suitable frequency band for WiMAX would be 3.5
GHz band, followed by 5.2-5.8 GHz band. It is also expected that a 2.5-2.7 GHz
band would also be a potential band for WiMAX, in some countries. The economics
of FBWA (Fixed Broadband Wireless Access) technology never made it suited for
last mile; it was also thought that it can be deployed only in areas where there is no-
the whole BWA industry dynamics. There are a several ways WiMAX can be
deployed. The first type of WiMAX deployment would be as the last mile, which
11
http://www.ieee802.org/16
12
www.WiMAXforum.org: The WiMAX Forum is an industry-led, non-profit corporation formed to promote and certify
compatibility and interoperability of broadband wireless products. Their member companies support the industry-wide
acceptance of the IEEE 802.16 and ETSI HiperMAN wireless MAN standards.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 10
serves the residential and enterprise users as an alternative to cable and DSL. The
second type is providing backhaul for Wi-Fi hotspots and also serves as a backhaul
between conventional cellular towers. The third type is similar to metro Ethernet,
The fourth type is the mobile version of WiMAX based on 802.16e standard, ratified
<Table 4>
The evolution of mobile wireless networks began in the 1940’s. These early devices
and networks were based on the Advanced Mobile Phone Service (AMPS)
the second generation (2G) of wireless [11]. GSM, CDMAOne, TDMA and PDC
are based on 2G standards. GPRS represents the initial packet-based technology for
advancement from 2G GSM networks to 2.5G networks. GPRS data speeds are
<Table 5>
The 3rd generation (3G) mobile technologies are established under ITU13 umbrella of
13
The ITU was established as an impartial, international organization within which governments and the private sector can
work together to coordinate the operation of telecommunication networks and services and advance the development of
telecommunications technologies. It’s been working more than one hundred years to create a global communications network
which now integrates a huge range of technologies.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 11
followed the GSM path and the other the CDMA 2000. The Universal Mobile
Telephone System (UMTS) is the GSM path which uses WCDMA as the air
interface and the other follows CDMA2000 Code Division Multiple Access 2000.
theoretically offer up to 2 Mbps in a given location. But there are some significant
3GPP -GSM Path: All GSM Radio Access Network (RAN) specification work was
transferred to 3GPP14 in mid 2000. 3GPP was already responsible for the evolution
of the GSM core network. 3GPP formed the one global organization responsible for
RAN and core networks. 3GPP examined how to achieve a closer integration of the
two principle radio access networks: GSM/GPRS/EDGE and WCDMA radio access.
Project 2 (3GPP215). Three standards have been defined by 3GPP2: cdma2000 1x,
evolution of packet data service up to 144 kbps. The second evolution, namely
cdma2000 1xEV-DO, is data only and has a packet data service up to 2.4 Mbps on
the downlink and 153 kbps on the uplink. The evolution cdma2000 1xEV-DV for
both data and voice is all IP architecture for radio access and core network with a
14
3GPP was formed on Technical Specifications and Technical Reports for a 3rd Generation Mobile System based on evolved
GSM core networks and the radio access technologies that they support (i.e., Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (UTRA).
Then later on evolved into radio access technologies like General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) and Enhanced Data rates for
GSM Evolution (EDGE)
15
3GPP2 provides globally applicable Technical Specifications for a 3rd Generation Mobile System based on the evolving
ANSI-41 core network and the relevant Radio Access technologies to be transposed by standardization bodies (Organizational
Partners) into appropriate deliverables (e.g., standards).
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 12
Spectrum of operations: The main similarity between the two systems is that both
share the same unlicensed 2.4 GHz radio spectrum, which causes Bluetooth and Wi-
Fi systems to interfere with one another. The 2.4 GHz ISM radio band is going to be
Range and Power: IEEE 802.11b is basically a technology intended for wireless
wireless personal area network (WPAN). IEEE 802.11b, on the other hand, has
transmission types with their own features to transmit signals. Bluetooth uses FHSS
(Frequency Hopping Spread spectrum) while IEEE 802.11b uses DSSS (Direct
Data rate: Bluetooth does not have the data rate that a Wi-Fi can provide. IEEE
802.11b offers higher speeds than Bluetooth. 802.11b is a higher bandwidth standard
designed for large amounts of data. Although voice can be sent in compressed form
Time Duration and Type of Network: Wi-Fi is used for a longer duration
Infrastructure based networks need an access point, which acts as a bridge to other
wireless or wired networks and has most of the functionality built in the access
point. Adhoc networks have no permanent infrastructure, and each node is very
complex. This is because every node has to implement medium access techniques
<Table 6>
Spectrum of operation: Unlike Wi-Fi, which has been deployed using primarily one
band of spectrum (2.4 GHz) and then the 5.8 GHz for 802.11a where both are
WiMAX spectrum situation is more complex than Wi-Fi due to the fragmented radio
Power settings: Wi-Fi systems usually transmit at the same power level all the time
as the output power is fixed. WiMAX has a separate ranging method which
calculates the right timing offset and power settings so that the transmissions from
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 14
each client device arrive at the base station at the correct time with the same power
level.
Range and coverage: WiMAX provides a range that is broader than Wi-Fi but more
limited than wide area networks. Wi-Fi is designed typically for 100 meters. But
with high gain directional antennas or with Mesh topology, Wi-Fi coverage can be
extended. On the other hand WiMAX is designed typically for cell size of 3-6 miles
and up to 30 miles for long range. Wi-Fi is basically for indoor settings but due to
more recent to technical innovations it has been started being used in outdoor
environments.
Data Rate or Speed: WiMAX has ranges up to 30 miles and speeds up to 70 mbps.
Though the standard does not describe how much of that capacity an operator should
provide each user, a single base station could handle tens of megabits per second of
data. In a typical cell radius deployment of between 3-6 miles, WiMAX systems can
deliver data rate of up to 40 Mbps per channel, for both fixed and portable access
applications.
Media Access Control (MAC) layer: The Carrier-sense multiple access is sufficient
for Wi-Fi but a much more advanced radio access control mechanism is required for
but the same (MAC) layer for all PHYs layer; single carrier and multicarrier.
Transmission type: Both 802.11a/g and WiMAX are based on orthogonal frequency
QAM. But Wi-Fi has a fixed 20-MHz bandwidth with 52 subcarriers while WiMAX
systems can use variable bandwidths from 1 to 28 MHz with 256 subcarriers (192
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 15
data subcarriers) in both the licensed and unlicensed spectrum. The standard
WiMAX channel sizes in both unlicensed and licensed channels are 3.5, 5, 6, 7, 10
<Table 7>
Spectrum of operation: Cellular operates at 800, 900, 1800, 1900 and 2100 MHz all
licensed band. Cellular technologies built on 2G are basically for voice application
and later 2.5G and 3G technologies are adding data capability to it. Several service
providers are short on bandwidth for both their voice and new data subscribers. Wi-
Fi operates in the unlicensed band and is designed for high speed data service; it can
Data rate and speed: 2.5G is able to theoretically support data rates in the range of
170 Kbps kb/s, and 3G systems are able to support 2 Mbps, while Wi-Fi can support
up to 54 Mbps. More practical data rates for 2.5 G are currently in the order of 40-60
Kbps and for 3G it is up to 300 kbps. The available data rate of the cellular
Coverage: There is a clear tradeoff between coverage and capacity. Wi-Fi has
coverage as it is intended for a range of about 300 ft. However, coverage of cellular
networks is much wider than that of Wi-Fi networks and has a range of several km.
16
http://www.dailywireless.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4612
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 16
Standards and Bodies: There are two main Cellular technologies (GSM and
CDMA) and their respective migration path to 3G is via 3GPP and 3GPP2. On the
other hand, Wi-Fi has 100% global recognition and has become the “single”
and the end users. So advantage with Wi-Fi is that a large scale service-level
roaming between different WISP is possible as Wi-Fi certification has become a de-
<Table 8>
Internet access (both wired and wireless). VoIP allows users to make voice calls
over broadband Internet connection and Wi-Fi is for wireless broadband access.
Therefore, VoIP integration with Wi-Fi is nothing but transmitting a voice call
through a Wi-Fi internet connection. When WLAN standard was initially developed,
voice application was not the key consideration for design and deployment. The Wi-
Fi technology evolved so fast that its infrastructure demands for voice application.
Therefore, seamless roaming and quality of service become main issues and IEEE
802.11e (QoS) is designed to guarantee the quality of voice application. In the near
future more people will be using Internet telephony as we are witnessing a migration
trend from the traditional PSTN towards VoIP. As market studies indicate17, the
17
www.instat.com
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 17
customer base is gradually growing for broadband VoIP service both in North
America and in major European countries e.g., France, Germany, Italy, Spain,
Sweden and UK. It is also estimated that more users start using Wi-Fi phones for
their residential broadband VoIP services instead of using ordinary analog phones
with an adapter. It can be inferred that a home or office Wi-Fi network forms a
convenient platform for Internet telephony using Wi-Fi enabled phones. Basically
substitute for regular analog handset and they can start using the same phone in the
public or private Wi-Fi when they are on the move. The other main factor for
4. A Wi-Fi Ecosystem
for connecting devices like PDA's, cell phones, headphones etc, which have small
data rates. On the other hand, Wi-Fi is used to connect networks involving high data
rates. The ISM band, apart from being used by Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, is also used by
the HomeRF wireless networking system, cordless analog and digital phones,
microwave ovens, and some medical equipment. But the main source of interference
for a 802.11b networks in 2.4 GHz is Bluetooth system. The users must share the
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 18
radio spectrum in this unlicensed radio band because no one owns any particular
frequency in this band. While WLAN technology has already been widely accepted
problem exists. The Bluetooth SIG and Wi-Fi Alliance are working together to solve
the interference problem and coming up with different strategies to solve this. Many
Bluetooth is a good first step. However this is not a long-term solution and it does
not solve a key to all interference problems. Any remedy to the interference issues
that exist between these two technologies could enhance the adoption of both.
Frequency hopping spread spectrum is a system, which divides the spectrum into
time the radio selects a new channel to transmit the packet. This process is repeated
so that the message spread across the spectrum. The FHSS (Frequency hopping
severe problem for nearby by Wi-Fi communications. Since DSSS (Direct Sequence
Spread Spectrum) systems statistically occupy a given 22 MHz channel, they are
stationary within the band and do not move to avoid interference. The Wi-Fi device
has packet transmission durations that can be considerably longer than the Bluetooth
hopping interval and this leads to interference collision in the time domain. Many
other common devices such as cordless phones, microwaves, etc. use the 2.4 GHz
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 19
frequency band, and this may cause potential interference in this frequency band.
used in North America and Europe. They contain key provisions that make spectrum
sharing possible. The condition is that if any of the devices is using this ISM band it
may be subject to some interference and it should automatically adjust to reduce the
interference.
<Figure 2>
Integrating cellular (2.5G/3G) and Wi-Fi gives both ubiquitous coverage and support
high data rate in strategic locations (schools, office, airports, hotels, coffee shops
etc.). If both Wi-Fi and cellular networks are integrated, then cellular operators are
able to offer 3G-like services. There has been a delay among some service providers
in the deployment of third generation wireless network (3G) in the US, the most
cellular cannot support the high data rates required in business and multimedia
application. If operators integrate Wi-Fi with the existing cellular network (2.5G
GPRS/EDGE), they could meet some requirements for 3G like services which allow
them to provide high quality data services in strategic locations. Even though these
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 20
two technologies are quite far from completely replacing each other, some major
cellular operators have realized the benefit of integrating these technologies. With
their high capacity and low implementation cost, some operators consider Wi-Fi the
ideal candidate for expanding the cellular data capability [7]. For example, the
mobile user can schedule high speed file transfers for downloading when they are
near a Wi-Fi hot spot. 3GPP has mentioned six inter-networking scenarios for
cellular and Wi-Fi integration [13]. Some scenarios consider offering cellular based
services within the Wi-Fi coverage. However, the seamless Wi-Fi connection
continuity from cellular network is optional. Though cellular based services may be
available in the hot spot, there might not be service continuity as the user moves
from one network to the other. There are two types of integration, tight coupling
connected to the operator’s core network. The hotspot can reuse the cellular
infrastructure e.g., core network resources, subscriber databases and billing systems.
The mobile users can select their network preferences or choose to get connected at
the best available network speed. This is all done by software and users are
<Figure 3>
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 21
Type 2: Loose Coupling Architecture: The hotspots are coupled with the cellular
network in the operator’s IP network. The Wi-Fi data traffic goes directly to the
operator’s IP network, instead of going via the Cellular core network. Though the
Wi-Fi and cellular networks remain separate, there is a common platform for
authentication, accounting and authorization. The hot spot may be owned by any
third party carriers with roaming enabled via a dedicated connection between the
<Figure 4 >
incorporating WiMAX with Wi-Fi systems for two scenarios where both
technologies coexist to offer a cost effective fixed broadband internet solution. The
first type is the multi dwelling unit in a dense urban area where there are lot of
subscribers per square mile; the second market is the individual buildings and
houses where Wi-Fi /WiMAX serves as the last mile. Since WiMAX signals are
likely to fade out like a cellular service inside of buildings, the technology is actually
Type 1: Wi-Fi / WiMAX serving Multi Dwelling Unit: In this type the majority of
WiMAX is used to deliver megabits of data to the apartment or office buildings; Wi-
conference room, etc. Though the WiMAX standard does not describe how much
capacity an operator can feed each Wi-Fi access point, a single WiMAX base station
could handle hundreds of megabits per second of data and can feed Wi-Fi AP’s
<Figure 5>
Type 2: Wi-Fi / WiMAX serving Independent houses: In the second type, individual
buildings and houses may be packed closely to each other or may be scattered. In
this case, the capital expenditure is dominated by the large number of Wi-Fi access
points needed to cover large geographic areas. The leasing cost would be much
lower, as this can use the lamppost or the rooftop of a residential building, reducing
the operating cost significantly. The coverage can be provided by the Wi-Fi APs
with high gain antennas to extend the coverage. There is a provision of using AP’s
with higher gain antennas to extend the coverage but still limiting the maximum
Effective Isotropic Radiated Power (EIRP) within the legal limit as described by
FCC. The normal Wi-Fi access point (802.11 b or 802.11g) only covers 300 feet
which is roughly 0.0102 square mile but for outdoors one must increase the
coverage by using higher gain antennas. It is feasible to extend the coverage further
<Figure 6>
VoWi-Fi Phones (Hard & Soft): Two protocols are currently being used, namely the
H.323 and Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). At present, vendors are offering hard
phones based on both H.323 and SIP. The WISIPTM phones18 are IP
with Wi-Fi installations. These phones can be used in any Wi-Fi network. There are
also Soft phones which can be downloaded into PDA or laptop with additional
networks. The SIP soft phones can be downloaded into laptops, PDAs, and their
likes. The dual mode mobile phones allow the user to use the same device while in
Wi-Fi coverage and shifts to WAN (GSM or CDMA) mode when in need of cellular
coverage.
New products and services emerged as two or more technologies are integrated.
technologies. A device could integrate Wi-Fi with Bluetooth, UWB, 2.5G, 3G, and
WiMAX or a subset of these technologies. These devices can communicate over the
best air interface and can switch between different networks without any manual
switching mode. The signal received from one network could be processed and
retransmitted over another seamlessly, depending on the application and the chosen
18
http://pulverinnovations.com/wisip.html
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 24
Service Model of Wi-Fi with Cellular: Traditionally, cellular data networks (2.5G)
other hand, Wi-Fi service has a different revenue model. There are several payment
options, such as a subscription fee on a monthly basis, a one time charge per
connection, or usage-based pricing. However, most Wi-Fi charges are based on flat
pricing with a connection fee which usually varies between 4$ to 10$ per day for a
single user at a given location. The price differential between the two services is not
only due to the infrastructure cost but also due to their capacity characteristics. If a
cellular operator invests in Wi-Fi, the Average Revenue per Hotspot (ARPH)
increases due to two sources of revenue: one from integrated service and another
from the Wi-Fi only service. The cellular data usage (like 2.5G) has been limited to
certain size of megabytes; the users have to pay extra above this limit. Therefore,
with unlimited Wi-Fi usage, users can connect at any hotspot anytime, to gain the
most value for the money they pay. If they are outside the Wi-Fi coverage, they have
to pay extra for every megabyte they exceed above the Mb limit in the 2.5G
coverage. Cellular operators have done only price bundling19 so far; if they provide
technology bundling, then they can use their Wi-Fi networks to get additional
revenue due to integration with existing data users and also offload GPRS/EDGE
traffic to the hotspots. Although the users could pay separately to use the Wi-Fi
services, the operators hope that bundled discount promotions will create more
demand for their regular service. But other kinds of revenue streams can also be
19
T-Mobile customers add a monthly $20 for unlimited Wi-Fi service to their monthly cellular bill. This is a 50% discount
over the company’s regular hotspot rate plans. We believe this price is low, since the subscriber has subscription to both their
Wi-Fi and cellular services. But on the other hand, the subscribers, who have subscribed only to Wi-Fi, have to pay the same
amount of $40; therefore, they have an incentive to prefer the integrated service which has both GPRS and Wi-Fi, for the same
amount of money.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 25
added using integrated networks. The integrated users can be given an incentive
even on the connection fee, so that a “heavy” user may tend to browse in a hotspot
Wi-Fi integrated with cellular network provides significant advantage to the cellular
price. Wi-Fi offers fast connectivity and relatively cheaper services compared to all
2.5G/3G data networks. The integration not only increases the revenue but also
improves performance of the cellular system since it reduces the traffic load in
cellular system. The operators have two choices: a) have their own Wi-Fi network
network by integrating to their IP network instead of the core network. Thus, loose
coupling architecture is not only beneficial to the cellular operator but also to third
party hot spots, because it increases revenue by increasing traffic load at their hot
spot networks. Thus, integration provides profitable business opportunities for both
the cellular operators and the new Wi-Fi startup companies. Cellular networks
integrated with Wi-Fi have some advantages over the individual Wi-Fi networks
already have an established customer base to which they can integrate Wi-Fi and
offer 3G like services with their existing 2.5G network, avoiding the cost of
deploying the expensive 3G systems. More than that, cellular operators have the
advantage of using the existing OSS (Operational Support System) and the BSS
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 26
(Business Support System) for the deployment of the new Wi-Fi systems. With
integrated billing the operator is breaking down the barrier to people to access the
mobile devices can also connect to private and public networks through Bluetooth
Access Points which can support video, data and voice service. However,
Bluetooth’s success in the recent times has been dismissed by the evolving ubiquity
of Wi-Fi and most believe that Wi-Fi networks may make Bluetooth obsolete as a
service model due to greater market momentum for Wi-Fi. But there is still a lot of
potential for Bluetooth to complement Wi-Fi in the fact that it is already available in
more end user devices. Therefore, Bluetooth and Wi-Fi are used for different
applications; there are devices that have both technologies integrated for different
purposes.
SIM based authentication for public hotspot via Bluetooth: If Wi-Fi networks are
increasingly integrated with cellular networks, then the users will expect to have
authentication is possible between public Wi-Fi and cellular networks. The Wi-Fi
users in the public hotspot can do it via a SIM (Subscriber index module) card to
their Laptop or PDA, wirelessly through Bluetooth. The client Wi-Fi chip needs
software connected by Bluetooth to the SIM technology for cellular phones. The
client software on the device can also be used to automate the Wi-Fi hotspot login
20
www.intel.com/business/bss/ solutions/blueprints/pdf/axalto.pdf
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 27
for users with Bluetooth enabled mobile phones. If the mobile technology initiates
an authentication, the client software can run the handshake process by using the
Bluetooth capabilities in the Laptop or PDA. This can be done by connecting to the
mobile phone SIM at the same time getting connected by Wi-Fi through the hotspot
Access Point’s to cellular operator’s core network. The client software will access
the SIM card whether it is getting attached to the Laptop or PDA, via Bluetooth in
the mobile phone. The whole process will be seamless if there is synchronization
between Wi-Fi and Bluetooth frequency operating in the same spectrum. The
integrated wireless capabilities adaptively allocate the frequencies for both Wi-Fi
and Bluetooth to work harmoniously together. Therefore, Bluetooth has the potential
to offer the most innovative solution for low to medium-speed applications in the
integrated environment.
Service Model of Wi-Fi with WiMAX: While the backbone networks are heavily
matured and more reliable with more bandwidth, the last mile to the end user is
weak [6]. At present, the operators can take leverage of the most matured
technology, e.g., Wi-Fi, to reach the end user as the last mile access; at the same
time, it can take advantage of WiMAX to minimize backhaul cost and efficiently
reduce the time for service provisioning. This is because the rental of the wired
backhaul networks accounts for a major cash outflow [2]. So to reduce backhaul cost
we can use WiMAX and to have more efficient use of the wired backhaul the
operator can also consider implementing WiMAX infrastructure mesh for backhaul
traffic. Aggregating backhaul lines into higher capacity lines is not only cheaper but
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 28
also reduces the physical space compared to smaller speed circuits. The
disadvantage of using WiMAX as the access is that of the total estimated cost of all
WiMAX equipment sales: over half of them will be for customer premise
equipment. If properly planned and deployed, Wi-Fi with WiMAX can turn the
whole region within the geographic boundaries into what is called a “hot zone”.
affordable to all classes of the society. Wi-Fi integrated with WiMAX has not only
enough potential to compete on a cost-per-megabyte with both cable and DSL but it
correctly applied, a Wi-Fi network can be built around an entire city with WiMAX
primarily to the residential market in urban and suburban regions, while DSL is
limited to about 12,000 feet from the central office. In many parts of the world, the
wire line infrastructure does not exist, making Wi-Fi with WiMAX an attractive
technology to deliver broadband service. The city wide Wi-Fi networks can be
deployed by three main interest groups. The first, WISPs, aim to deliver high-speed
fixed and mobile voice and data services. Second, fixed line ISPs, who want to
municipalities and cities who want to provide emergency services to the first
responders like police, fire, and ambulance; apart from that, they can also provide
The city wide Wi-Fi business case is different for each category mentioned above.
As seen in Table 9, operators can have three sources of data revenue from each type
the second one from the SOHO’s, and the third source of revenue from on demand
service (on a per connection basis). There could be a monthly subscription fee for
data subscribers which may even be 50% less than the monthly subscription fee of
cable or DSL service21. At the same time, the service can be affordable at a lesser
rate for business users. The third type of revenue is usage based; with an average
Wi-Fi connection fee of $4-$10 (good for a day), users can transmit unlimited
volume. Considering only business travelers, there are 6 million22 visiting a big city
each year. Even if just 1%-2% of the total business visitors (per year) use pay-as–
you-go service23 the operators can make significant revenue compared to the other
service model. By paying a Wi-Fi connection fee, users can connect to the network
anywhere in the city on a given day, to get the most value. Apart from this, operators
can also deploy VoIP services over Wi-Fi. With the substitute to their VoIP,
residential users can make unlimited calls, both local and long distance. In the same
way, the SOHO’s VoWi-Fi service can also be offered much cheaper.
WiMAX will lower backhaul costs due to traffic aggregation and efficient use of
wired backhaul, thereby reduce operating cost. Therefore, with lower backhaul costs
and with zero dollars on CPE subsidies and truck rolls, this architecture, i.e., the
21
www.chaska.net
22
The Philadelphia region attracted 6.3 million business visitors to the city and the leisure travelers rose to 17.9 million in
2003. http://www.centercityphila.org/docs/SOCC05_TOURISM.pdf
23
The British Library in central London, a most active and largest public Wi-Fi hotspot has an average of 1200 Wi-Fi
connections or sessions per week. The mainly indoor Wi-Fi zone allows the 3,000 visitors the library receives each day to
connect to the Internet and access e-mail using either their existing service provider or by using the Library's own pay-as-you-
go service. http://www.4ni.co.uk/nationalnews.asp?id=35396 (URL accessed on May 2005)
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 30
broadband access.
the transmission of voice calls over the Internet using a wired network, thereby
eliminating fees from traditional phone companies. Voice over Wi-Fi also uses the
Internet but without any physical medium. VoWi-Fi can be integrated with both
existing wired phone systems as well as the cellular systems. If inside their home or
office building, users can take advantage of the existing internet infrastructure to
perform their calls over VoWi-Fi network. In the office environment employees can
take their extensions wherever they go. VoWi-Fi will offer better coverage indoors
access Wi-Fi hotspot could lead to a significant revenue increase for the hotspot
aggregators and so hotspot operators can make their business strategies more
lucrative by integrating VoWi-Fi with their data service. Internet telephony over
public Wi-Fi hotspots has the potential to take away considerable amount of traffic
from the cellular networks. If Internet telephony is made available in all public
hotspots there may be a serious threat to the cellular operators. The hotspot
utilization currently is very low and it has lot of capacity left unused. Therefore,
there is a huge potential for increasing hotspot usage by providing wireless Internet
telephony in the hotspot. This increase in the utilization rate due to voice services
along with data may have a significant impact on hotspots regular service model.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 31
<Table 9>
network, Wi-Fi based mobile phones are able to connect to a Wi-Fi AP or with the
cellular base station, without the use of any other hardware. This can also support
seamless transfer of calls from Wi-Fi network to the cellular network and vice versa.
The cost of making a call over the cellular network is very high when compared to
the VoWi-Fi network. This notable price difference between the two networks can
influence the way users use these networks under different circumstances. Some
users may be willing to use a VoWi-Fi network, especially for their phone calls, if
they need to talk over a long time or to perform a business call on the move.
Therefore, users have the choice of using either the cellular network with a higher
price label but with wider coverage or take advantage of VoWi-Fi services with
lower price in a limited coverage. Hybrid VoWi-Fi / Cellular phones are designed to
access public or private Wi-Fi AP’s, and then switch to a Cellular network
automatically when the caller has left the Wi-Fi coverage area. With adoption of
QoS and guaranteed call quality, in VoWi-Fi, Cellular operators have a choice to
offer services in broadband serviced locations with high quality at lower costs than
mobile access network. VoWi-Fi also creates other revenue opportunities for
operators by replacing fixed line phone service inside buildings. Wi-Fi phones are
not only advantageous in terms of competitive pricing of phone calls but also offer
Wi-Fi Technology options: The Wi-Fi chip makers are already announcing a tri-
mode chip having IEEE802.11b/g and 802.11a as their portfolio product for the near
future. Therefore, the operators planning to deploy Wi-Fi network, can strategically
place their access points to support as many technologies and standards as possible.
This allows the client software to "sniff" and select the best technology available at
any given spot. The most widely known, 802.11b, supports smaller number of audio
streams when compared to the high performing standard, e.g., 802.11a or 802.11g.
802.11g which has only three non overlapping channels. The Wi-Fi services
providers can consider installing access points that include both 802.11a for voice
users and 802.11b for data users. This is a business decision; it may or may not be
coverage locations.
We have discussed many different technologies integrated with Wi-Fi making it the
an alarming rate more care should be taken for the interference that is caused due to
the operation of other technologies at the same ISM band. Though Wi-Fi systems
are well established, coexistence between Bluetooth and Wi-Fi is the key issue in the
2.4 GHz ISM band for the success of Bluetooth. Many doubt Bluetooth’s future due
to the huge success of Wi-Fi in the recent years. Wi-Fi technology will dominate all
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 33
applications and carve out a niche interoperating with Wi-Fi, 2G, 2.5G, and 3G
For a cellular service operator, an integrated offering that combines the mobility of
cellular and the speed of Wi-Fi is a perfect mix for mobile users. In addition, by
integrating two technologies together, operators can attract new customers with
value added services provided by Wi-Fi networks, thereby hopefully, reducing the
churn. Furthermore, if Wi-Fi is integrated with existing 2.5G networks, then the
cellular operators can delay their 3G deployments as the integration could offer 3G
like services. Cellular operators can also provide a common bill to customers in the
integrated network.
basis with both cable and DSL to offer a cost effective alternate broadband solution.
The position of the WiMAX technology today (in the year 2005) follows the same
interoperability between different vendor products made Wi-Fi prices very low and
facilitated rapid penetration from a niche to mass market. It is expected that at some
stage WiMAX will also reach a price and performance level similar to Wi-Fi. At
least for the next few years, Wi-Fi will proliferate rapidly as a last mile option and
deliver wireless broadband access at a price dramatically lower than WiMAX. Till
we find the mobile version of WiMAX, i.e., IEEE 802.16e, both technologies, i.e.,
overall traffic and revenue at hot spots. VoWi-Fi complements both cellular and
wired phones because it provides better coverage indoors and higher voice quality
compared to conventional cellular services. Users who are not willing to pay high
prices for cellular voice service, will eventually start utilizing the VoWi-Fi network,
In the future, as Wi-Fi services include a more diverse set of partners such as retail
also evident that in the near future public Wi-Fi hotspots will support proximity
applications, in which Wi-Fi devices are automatically connected when they are
Finally, we believe that Wi-Fi networks will eventually integrate with the Internet
and a cellular infrastructure, forming a Wi-Fi cloud around us, offering both data
References
[1] Ahmavaara K., Haverinen H., and Pichna R. (2003). Interworking architecture
[2] Bjorkdahl J., Bohlin E., and Lindmark S. (2004). Financial assessment of
71-94.
Hall, NJ.
[4] Brent A. M., and Chatschik B. (2001). Bluetooth Revealed-The Insiders Guide
NJ.
[5] Camponova G., Heitmann M., Slabeva K.S., Pigneur. Y. (2003). Exploring the
[6] Cordeiro H., Gossain R., Ashok and Agarwal D., The Last Mile: Wireless
Technologies for Broadband and Home networks, Center for Distributed and
[7] Doufexi A., Tameh E., Nix A., Armour S., and Molina A. (2003). Hotspot
networks, IEEE Communications Magazine, vol.41, Issue 7, July 2003, pp. 58-
65.
[8] Eklund C., Marks R., Stanwood K., and Wand S. “IEEE Standard 802.16: A
[9] Friedman E. and Parkes D. (2002). Pricing Wi-Fi at star bucks-issues in online
[10] Henry P. S. and Luo H. (2002), Wi-Fi: What’s Next? IEEE Communications’
Magazine, pp 66-72.
[11] Lehr W. and Mcknight L. (2003). Wireless Internet access: 3G vs. Wi-Fi?
[12] Oliver S., and Poiraud P. (2002). Public WLAN for mobile operators, White
paper, Alcatel.
[14] Wanichkorn K., and Sirbu, M. (2002). The Role of Fixed wireless Access
Conference.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 37
24
www.etsi.org
25
www.ieee.org
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 38
802.11a High speed WLAN standard for 5 GHz band. Supports 54 Mbps.
802.11h Defines the spectrum management of the 5 GHz band for use in
Europe and in Asia Pacific.
802.11r For fast roaming and address maintaining user connectivity from
one access point to another.
2G 2.5G 3G
28 – 65Kbps 56 – 144 Kbps 384 – 2000 Kbps
TDMA GPRS EDGE
GSM GPRS WCDMA
PDC WCDMA
CDMA CDMA2000 CDMA2000 1xEV
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 42
Wi-Fi Bluetooth
Spectrum 2.4 GHz & 5.8 GHz 2.4 GHz
Data rate Up to 54 Mbps 1 Mbps
Range 100 meters 10 meters
Power Medium Low
Transmission Type DSSS & OFDM FHSS
Primary devices Laptops, Printers and Cellular phones, headsets,
other networking devices other small powered
devices
Standard Body WECA Bluetooth SIG
The main similarity between Wi-Fi and Bluetooth is that both uses unlicensed spectrum in 2.4 GHz
band. Wi-Fi is basically a networking technology and Bluetooth is designed for connecting
peripherals to a host system.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 43
WiMAX provides a range that is broader than Wi-Fi but more limited than wide area networks. Wi-Fi
is designed typically for 100 meters but a recent innovation has made it an alternate access
technology for last mile access.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 44
Spectrum 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz 800, 900, 1800, 1900, 2100
MHz
Coverage Several km 300 ft for indoor usage
Can be extended up to 1 mile
Data rate and Speed 802.11b -11Mbps 2.5G- 170 Kbps
802.11a/g-54 Mbps 3G- 300Kbps
These two technologies complement one another in terms of capacity and coverage. Wi-Fi operates
in the unlicensed band and is designed for high speed data service; it can be used to extend and
complement 2.5G/3G data service with good coverage.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 45
Strength Weakness
Wi-Fi service model is complementary to cellular voice and data service. The main strength and
opportunity with Wi-Fi service model is that a large scale service-level roaming between different
WISP is possible as Wi-Fi certification has become a de-facto standard for IEEE802.11 based
products.[10]
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 46
FHSS DSSS
Frequency
Time Time
WiMAX is used to deliver megabits of data to the apartment or office buildings; Wi-Fi is used to
distribute services to the individual houses, office rooms, lobbies, conference room, etc.
Towards a Wi-Fi Ecosystem, Telecommunications Policy 51
In this type, individual buildings and houses may be packed closely to each other or may be
scattered. The leasing cost would be much lower, as this can use the lamppost or the rooftop of a
residential building, reducing the operating cost significantly. The coverage can be provided by the
Wi-Fi APs with high gain antennas to extend the coverage.