Investigation on Signaling Overhead for Mobility Management with Carrier Aggregation in LTE-Advanced

Kengo YAGYU  Takeshi NAKAMORI  Hiroyuki ISHII  Mikio IWAMURA  Nobuhiko MIKI  Takahiro ASAI  Junichiro HAGIWARA  

Publication
IEICE TRANSACTIONS on Communications   Vol.E94-B    No.12    pp.3335-3345
Publication Date: 2011/12/01
Online ISSN: 1745-1345
DOI: 10.1587/transcom.E94.B.3335
Print ISSN: 0916-8516
Type of Manuscript: Special Section PAPER (Special Section on Cooperative Communications for Cellular Networks)
Category: 
Keyword: 
LTE-Advanced,  carrier aggregation,  component carrier management,  control overhead,  

Full Text: PDF>>
Buy this Article



Summary: 
In Long-Term Evolution-Advanced (LTE-A), which is currently in the process of standardization in the 3rd generation partnership project (3GPP), carrier aggregation (CA) was introduced as a main feature for bandwidth extension while maintaining backward compatibility with LTE Release 8 (Rel. 8). In the CA mode of operation, since two or more component carriers (CCs), each of which is compatible with LTE Rel. 8, are aggregated, mobility management is needed for CCs such as inter/intra-frequency handover, CC addition, and CC removal to provide sufficient coverage and better overall signal quality. Therefore, the signaling overhead for Radio Resource Control (RRC) reconfiguration for the mobility management of CCs in LTE-A is expected to be larger than that in LTE Rel. 8. In addition, CA allows aggregation of cells with different types of coverage. Therefore, the signaling overhead may be dependent on the coverage of each CC assumed in a CA deployment scenario. Furthermore, especially in a picocell-overlaid scenario, the amount of signaling overhead may be different according to whether the aggregation of CCs between a macrocell and a picocell, i.e., transmission and reception from multiple sites, is allowed or not. Therefore, this paper investigates the CC control overhead with several CC management policies in some CA deployment scenarios, including a scenario with overlaid picocells. Simulation results show that the control overhead is almost the same irrespective of the different management policies, when almost the same coverage is provided for the CCs. In addition, it is shown that the increase in the control overhead is not significant even in a CA deployment scenario with overlaid picocells. We also show that the amount of signaling overhead in a picocell-overlaid scenario with the CA between a macrocell and a picocell is almost twice as that without the CA between a macrocell and a picocell.