Jump to content

Dish Network/Boost Mobile cell/5G buildout thread


PythonFanPA

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Jenn_3012 said:

Could you explain how would virtualizing both the enodeB and the RRU help in the urban settings?

Thanks in advance!

If they virtualize both the ended and RRU there will only be antenna panels+amplifiers on sites. Now you will need fiber or the equivalent to the sites which should not be a problem for urban areas. Not all virtualization scheme virtualize the RRU as well but present a standardized interface to the RRU from the enodeB so you can mix and match RRUs from different vendors. Now in rural areas fiber is not readily available so the virtualization scheme has to be more conservative.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Jenn_3012 said:

Could you explain how would virtualizing both the enodeB and the RRU help in the urban settings?

Thanks in advance!

In urban settings where you need a lot of sites due to capacity considerations, the more equipment you can virtualize the less rent you pay so you save on rent payments.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I wonder is whether Dish will keep the relationship Ting Mobile has with VZW long-term, parlaying that into an LTE or NR roaming agreement for their own-brand network. If they got both T-Mobile and VZW roaming agreements set up when launching their own network, they'd almost certainly have the best mobile (home + roaming) coverage of any provider, between T-Mobile B71 and VZW B13, assuming the agreement included LTEIRA coverage (which it almost certainly would).

My bet is that they signed something reasonably long-term with VZW, given that the new Ting plans allow VZW network use.

On another topic, I seriously doubt Dish will build a capacity-focused network for quite awhile. The first overlay will be enough sites to provide outdoor n71 coverage. The next set of sites they turn up will be enough density to provide outdoor coverage on n66/70, which will also give them indoor coverage on n71/26. By that point, n48 will exist, and they might have C-Band, so they'll just throw ~3.6 GHz radios on sites that need them. I would be surprised if Dish is *ever* more than the 4th-densest network in a given area, unless Fujitsu equipment is low-quality enough that they *have* to densify.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, PythonFanPA said:

Wait...what's happening with Fujitsu radios? Guess they'll be using both?

Guessing they'll get some pretty great pricing on both, as neither are major vendors on the mobile network side...haven't even heard of MTI 'til now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Dish is apparently behaving like they didn't know T-Mobile was going to drop CDMA relatively quickly post-merger:

https://www.fiercewireless.com/financial/dish-sheds-363k-wireless-subs-warns-t-mobile-3g-shutdown

This is the sorta thing that you price into your acquisition of Boost et al.; they're just posturing here to get money/devices out of T-Mobile. Or an extension to the CDMA EOL. They're weirdly silent about capacity being allocated away from Sprint on the LTE side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/22/2021 at 5:13 PM, iansltx said:

Dish is apparently behaving like they didn't know T-Mobile was going to drop CDMA relatively quickly post-merger:

https://www.fiercewireless.com/financial/dish-sheds-363k-wireless-subs-warns-t-mobile-3g-shutdown

This is the sorta thing that you price into your acquisition of Boost et al.; they're just posturing here to get money/devices out of T-Mobile. Or an extension to the CDMA EOL. They're weirdly silent about capacity being allocated away from Sprint on the LTE side.

Do we know if current Tmobile phones such as S20 Fe 5g or A71 5G would work for all of Dish Networks likely cell phone bands?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IrwinshereAgain said:

Do we know if current Tmobile phones such as S20 Fe 5g or A71 5G would work for all of Dish Networks likely cell phone bands?

Barely. No VoNR on either so they'd have to do some weird non-QoS'd IMS thing or fall back to TMo VoLTE. Also no n26/29/70 support. But n66 and n71 are there so they *could* work, just with unimpressive performance as at launch they'd be missing 30 MHz of downlink and 15 MHz of uplink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, IrwinshereAgain said:

Valid point.  Is that an issue with Tmobiles implementation of VoLte, a phone issue or do we have any idea?

Beats me.  I honestly don't remember how well it worked before the buy-out, as I didn't make a lot of long calls on my cell phone before COVID-19.  But it definitely irks me now.  One would think that T-Mobile would have this sorted out by now.  I'll drop a call and when I call back it'll be on CDMA.  Or I've taken to just turning off VoLTE entirely before making calls that I know, in advance, will be lengthy.  Doesn't help when someone calls me.

Beyond the lack of service in the Shentel region, lack of ability to turn off VoLTE was one of the reasons I had myself removed from ROAMAHOME.

- Trip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Trip said:

Beats me.  I honestly don't remember how well it worked before the buy-out, as I didn't make a lot of long calls on my cell phone before COVID-19.  But it definitely irks me now.  One would think that T-Mobile would have this sorted out by now.  I'll drop a call and when I call back it'll be on CDMA.  Or I've taken to just turning off VoLTE entirely before making calls that I know, in advance, will be lengthy.  Doesn't help when someone calls me.

Beyond the lack of service in the Shentel region, lack of ability to turn off VoLTE was one of the reasons I had myself removed from ROAMAHOME.

- Trip

You could try forcing wifi calling preferred. I started doing this before my phone got VoLTE since the call quality was so much better than CDMA. And now I keep it since VoLTE on my magic box cuts out a lot. At the very least it should prevent it from dropping calls, since it should handoff to and from VoLTE.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ingenium said:

You could try forcing wifi calling preferred. I started doing this before my phone got VoLTE since the call quality was so much better than CDMA. And now I keep it since VoLTE on my magic box cuts out a lot. At the very least it should prevent it from dropping calls, since it should handoff to and from VoLTE.

Wi-Fi calling drops more often than VoLTE does, and I've yet to see it successfully hand off to the cell network.  Actually, I suspect that's part of the problem; I have Wi-Fi calling disabled on my phone, yet I seem to get a notification that Wi-Fi calling can't connect on a semi-regular basis, as if it's enabled.  I suspect T-Mobile has my phone set to ignore my preference and use Wi-Fi calling anyway.  I've taken to turning off Wi-Fi on my phone as well to get around that particular issue when I know I'm leaving the house.  I'd love to block it at the router if I could figure out how.

- Trip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/25/2021 at 1:49 PM, Trip said:

Wi-Fi calling drops more often than VoLTE does, and I've yet to see it successfully hand off to the cell network.  Actually, I suspect that's part of the problem; I have Wi-Fi calling disabled on my phone, yet I seem to get a notification that Wi-Fi calling can't connect on a semi-regular basis, as if it's enabled.  I suspect T-Mobile has my phone set to ignore my preference and use Wi-Fi calling anyway.  I've taken to turning off Wi-Fi on my phone as well to get around that particular issue when I know I'm leaving the house.  I'd love to block it at the router if I could figure out how.

- Trip

Block the DNS lookups (return NX or something like 127.0.0.1) for epdg.epc.mnc260mcc310.pub.3gppnetwork.org and epdg.epc.mnc120.mcc310.pub.3gppnetwork.org and epdg.epc.mnc530.mcc312.pub.3gppnetwork.org

And/or block UDP outbound to 208.54.0.0/16 port 4500. You could probably just block all outbound to that subnet, but if you want to be sure it just blocks wifi calling, also restrict to that UDP port.

The latter is probably preferred, but the DNS block should work if you don't have the ability to set outbound firewall rules on your router.

Regarding the handoffs, that has always worked reliably for me. But you might have to make sure that "always on mobile data" is enabled under developer options.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PythonFanPA said:

Looks like they're continuing their streak of buying up T-Mobile MVNOs. I wonder how they plan on unifying all of them under one brand down the line, if they plan on doing that at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2021 at 1:45 PM, Paynefanbro said:

Looks like they're continuing their streak of buying up T-Mobile MVNOs. I wonder how they plan on unifying all of them under one brand down the line, if they plan on doing that at all.

What other ones have they bought?

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

    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
  • Recently Browsing

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