Jump to content

Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread


joshuam

Recommended Posts

Sprint CEO presses for speedier small cell deployment

 

Link: http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/story/sprint-ceo-presses-speedier-small-cell-deployment/2015-12-11

 

FCC Filing: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001354143

 

Hopefully this was a productive meeting!

  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think T-Mobile is aggregating B4 and B12 in NY. At least that is true from some of the engineering screens Milan put up on Reddit a while back.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

They are aggregating B4 and B12 here in South Florida on a handful of sites. However, I've noticed that on the sites that aggregate B4 and B12, they're slower than the single B4 20Mhz carrier.... I've gotten 72Mbps on that single B4 carrier, and the max i've seen on an aggregated link, 14Mbps.... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are aggregating B4 and B12 here in South Florida on a handful of sites. However, I've noticed that on the sites that aggregate B4 and B12, they're slower than the single B4 20Mhz carrier.... I've gotten 72Mbps on that single B4 carrier, and the max i've seen on an aggregated link, 14Mbps.... 

 

Doesn't aggregation have to be with equal size carriers?  If so, anything aggregated with B12 would have to be another 5MHz carrier.  So, maybe there is a separate 5MHz B4 carrier in South Florida.  And that could be why it is far slower than a single wider band B4 LTE carrier by itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't aggregation have to be with equal size carriers?  If so, anything aggregated with B12 would have to be another 5MHz carrier.  So, maybe there is a separate 5MHz B4 carrier in South Florida.  And that could be why it is far slower than a single wider band B4 LTE carrier by itself.

 

That depends upon device hardware and lab testing.  But per FCC filings, most support variable PCC + SCC pairings.  So, you will see 5 MHz FDD + 10 MHz FDD, 10 MHz FDD + 5 MHz FDD, etc.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I aggregate 5 mhz band 4 with 10 mhz band 17 all the time, and used to with 5 mhz band 2 but that's been upgraded to 10 mhz recently.

 

Also now according to a post on HoFo Verizon has CA live in Chicago and is aggregating 20 mhz B4 with 10 mhz B13. The speed was in the 170s. Not sure if that was a fluke or not but seemed real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I aggregate 5 mhz band 4 with 10 mhz band 17 all the time, and used to with 5 mhz band 2 but that's been upgraded to 10 mhz recently.

 

Also now according to a post on HoFo Verizon has CA live in Chicago and is aggregating 20 mhz B4 with 10 mhz B13. The speed was in the 170s. Not sure if that was a fluke or not but seemed real.

VZ is unreal in that market. I suspect that test was real. On a side note, I posted my VZW tests from Sparta, IL over there. I suspect my tests were coming from a small cell. There are no towers in Sparta proper for Verizon, yet signal levels were in the 60's when I got out of my car near the high school.

 

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the kind of B.S the T-Mobile community has.

 

Band 12 seems to fix speed issues and upgrading your phone will fix things!

 

5Ria3kq.png

I can confirm T-Mobile speeds are awful in the inner harbor area downtown. Like 1Mbps at 5 bars, HSPA runs closer to 10Mbps. Sprint was the same before CA, need to go back to test now.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://imgur.com/a/ushC5

 

Here's a screenshot of B4-B12 aggregation in Arkansas, between Fort Smith and Fayetteville in Arkansas. So I guess it isn't just in the big coastal cities.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/3wl139/b12_and_b4_carrier_aggregation_between/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://imgur.com/a/ushC5

 

Here's a screenshot of B4-B1 aggregation in Arkansas, between Fort Smith and Fayetteville in Arkansas. So I guess it isn't just in the big coastal cities. 

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/3wl139/b12_and_b4_carrier_aggregation_between/

 

Band 12.  Band 1 is IMT 1900+2100 MHz used internationally.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't aggregation have to be with equal size carriers?  If so, anything aggregated with B12 would have to be another 5MHz carrier.  So, maybe there is a separate 5MHz B4 carrier in South Florida.  And that could be why it is far slower than a single wider band B4 LTE carrier by itself.

 

I've connected to 10Mhz B4 carrier aggregated to a B12 5Mhz carrier before.

CA_Tmo.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The interesting thing about these examples is that the band 4 is the PCC while band 12 is the SCC. It has been stated previously that Sprint would need to use band 26 as the PCC to aggregate band 25 (or band 25 as the PCC to aggregate band 41) since you don't want to lose the PCC; but these examples seem to indicate otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The interesting thing about these examples is that the band 4 is the PCC while band 12 is the SCC. It has been stated previously that Sprint would need to use band 26 as the PCC to aggregate band 25 (or band 25 as the PCC to aggregate band 41) since you don't want to lose the PCC; but these examples seem to indicate otherwise.

 

There is no "need" to use low band as the PCC and mid/high band as the SCC.  CA is standardized in both directions, probably for flexibility and load balancing.

 

But low band PCC + mid/high band SCC is ideal -- the converse of mid/high band PCC + low band SCC is not.  If the mid/high band PCC drops, then reacquisition of LTE or fallback to "3G" will be required.  That could interrupt constant data streams, such as VoLTE, though VoLTE intentionally may eschew CA.  However, if the network is dense enough that the mid/high band PCC is strong throughout the intended coverage area, then that concern may be minimal.  And in the case of T-Mobile, its network is optimized for mid band; moreover, it ostensibly prefers the band 4 PCC for its 20 MHz FDD uplink.

 

As for Sprint, band 25 PCC or band 26 PCC, both would have the same 5 MHz FDD uplink.  So, that would not be an issue -- except, of course, where/when band 25 has a 10 MHz FDD carrier.  The real issue, thus, is standardization.  And to my knowledge, band 25 + band 26 CA or vice versa has not yet been 3GPP codified.  That is set for a future release.  If still accurate, then that is the primary reason why CA is limited to intra band 41.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few new Rootmetrics reports out today.

This definitely reflects my experience in the Jacksonville market.  Things have slowed down!!!

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/jacksonville-fl/2015/2H

 

Sprint ranked 3rd in Chicago.  Definitely comparable with the other top carriers, though.

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/chicago-il/2015/2H

 

One of the first markets where I saw Verizon did the worst?!

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/spokane-wa/2015/2H

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few new Rootmetrics reports out today.

This definitely reflects my experience in the Jacksonville market.  Things have slowed down!!!

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/jacksonville-fl/2015/2H

 

Sprint ranked 3rd in Chicago.  Definitely comparable with the other top carriers, though.

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/chicago-il/2015/2H

 

One of the first markets where I saw Verizon did the worst?!

http://www.rootmetrics.com/us/rsr/spokane-wa/2015/2H

 

Same story everywhere, Sprint recording the faster median download, but due to a lackluster upload they lose the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same story everywhere, Sprint recording the faster median download, but due to a lackluster upload they lose the market.

 

Yep, I still respect RootMetrics as the best objective testing among what we have available, but this is becoming a chink in the armor.  For example, T-Mobile is winning Network Speed and Data awards while its downlink speeds are sinking like a stone, only getting propped up by its uplink speeds holding steady.  That is not a strong network -- it is headed down a bad path.

 

AJ

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, I still respect RootMetrics as the best objective testing among what we have available, but this is becoming a chink in the armor.  For example, T-Mobile is winning Network Speed and Data awards while its downlink speeds are sinking like a stone, only getting propped up by its uplink speeds holding steady.  That is not a strong network -- it is headed down a bad path.

 

AJ

What kind of speeds would the Sprint network see once they do carrier aggregation on the uplink?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of speeds would the Sprint network see once they do carrier aggregation on the uplink?

 

Does Sprint have plans for uplink 2x CA.  I am not aware of any.  Transmitting two uplinks would decrease battery life.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Sprint have plans for uplink 2x CA. I am not aware of any. Transmitting two uplinks would decrease battery life.

 

AJ

Yep. Uplink 2x carrier aggregation on band 41 using mu-mimo transmission mode.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. Uplink 2x carrier aggregation on band 41 using mu-mimo transmission mode.

That should balance out the down/up discrepency of b41 CA. Those median download scores in the 20s strikes me as a Verizon level network experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...