skip to main content
10.1145/3117811.3117831acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmobicomConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Orion: RAN Slicing for a Flexible and Cost-Effective Multi-Service Mobile Network Architecture

Published:04 October 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Emerging 5G mobile networks are envisioned to become multi-service environments, enabling the dynamic deployment of services with a diverse set of performance requirements, accommodating the needs of mobile network operators, verticals and over-the-top (OTT) service providers. Virtualizing the mobile network in a flexible way is of paramount importance for a cost-effective realization of this vision. While virtualization has been extensively studied in the case of the mobile core, virtualizing the radio access network (RAN) is still at its infancy. In this paper, we present Orion, a novel RAN slicing system that enables the dynamic on-the-fly virtualization of base stations, the flexible customization of slices to meet their respective service needs and which can be used in an end-to-end network slicing setting. Orion guarantees the functional and performance isolation of slices, while allowing for the efficient use of RAN resources among them. We present a concrete prototype implementation of Orion for LTE, with experimental results, considering alternative RAN slicing approaches, indicating its efficiency and highlighting its isolation capabilities. We also present an extension to Orion for accommodating the needs of OTT providers.

References

  1. 3GPP. 2017. Architecture enhancements for dedicated core networks. TS 23.707. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 3GPP. 2017. Architecture Enhancements to Facilitate Communications with Packet Data Networks and Applications. TS 23.682. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3GPP. 2017. Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Physical layer procedures. TS 36.213. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ian F Akyildiz, Pu Wang, and Shih-Chun Lin. 2015. SoftAir: A software defined networking architecture for 5G wireless systems. Computer Networks Vol. 85 (2015), 1--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. OpenAirInterface Software Alliance. 2017. Openair-cn repository. https://gitlab.eurecom.fr/oai/openair-cn. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Xueli An et al. 2016. On end to end network slicing for 5G communication systems. Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Unknown Author. 2005. IEEE 802.1q -- IEEE standard for local and metropolitan area networks virtual bridged local area networks. IEEE Computer Society (2005).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Arijit Banerjee et al. 2015. Scaling the LTE Control-Plane for Future Mobile Access Proceedings of the 11th ACM CoNEXT. ACM, 19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Alessio Botta, Alberto Dainotti, and Antonio Pescapé. 2012. A tool for the generation of realistic network workload for emerging networking scenarios. Computer Networks, Vol. 56, 15 (2012), 3531--3547. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Pablo Caballero et al. 2017. Network slicing games: Enabling customization in multi-tenent networks Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM 2017. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Brent Chun et al. 2003. Planetlab: An Overlay Testbed for Broad-Coverage Services. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review Vol. 33, 3 (2003), 3--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Xavier Costa-Pérez et al. 2013. Radio Access Network Virtualization for Future Mobile Carrier Networks. IEEE Communications Magazine Vol. 51, 7 (2013), 27--35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. DASH Industry Forum. 2017. DASH Reference Client. http://dashif.org/reference/players/javascript/v2.4.1/samples/dash-if-reference-player/index.html. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Ericsson. 2016. A Vision of the 5G Core: Flexibility for New Business Opportunities. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Ericsson. 2017. 5G Systems - Enabling the Transformation of Industry and Society. (Jan 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. ETSI. 2017. Open Source MANO. https://osm.etsi.org/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Eurecom. 2017. Demo at MWC 2017:5G Cloud RAN slice. https://insights.ubuntu.com/event/mobile-world-congress-2017/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Xenofon Foukas et al. 2016. FlexRAN: A Flexible and Programmable Platform for Software-Defined Radio Access Networks Proceedings of the 12th ACM CoNEXT. ACM, 427--441. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Xenofon Foukas et al. 2017. Network Slicing in 5G: Survey and Challenges. IEEE Communications Magazine Vol. 55, 5 (2017), 94--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Linux Foundation. 2017. NetEm Linux network emulator. https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/networking/netem. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Thomas Frisanco et al. 2008. Infrastructure Sharing and Shared Operations for Mobile Network Operators from a Deployment and Operations View. In Proceedings of IEEE NOMS 2008. IEEE, 129--136.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Pablo Caballero Garcés et al. 2015. RMSC: A Cell Slicing Controller for Virtualized Multi-tenant Mobile Networks Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), 2015 IEEE 81st. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Anteneh A Gebremariam et al. 2017. Resource pooling via dynamic spectrum-level slicing across heterogeneous networks 14th IEEE annual consumer communications and networking conference (CCNC).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Aditya Gudipati, Li Erran Li, and Sachin Katti. 2014. RadioVisor: A Slicing Plane for Radio Access Networks Proceedings of the third workshop on Hot topics in software defined networking. ACM, 237--238. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Jun He and Wei Song. 2015. AppRAN: Application-Oriented Radio Access Network Sharing in Mobile Networks Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC). IEEE, 3788--3794.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Matt Helsley. 2009. LXC: Linux container tools. IBM devloperWorks Technical Library (2009), 11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Pieter Hintjens. 2013. ZeroMQ: Messaging for Many Applications. O'Reilly Media, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. ITU-R. 2015. IMT Vision -- Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond. (Sept 2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Xin Jin et al. 2013. Softcell: Scalable and Flexible Cellular Core Network Architecture Proceedings of the ninth ACM CoNEXT. ACM, 163--174. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Vinay Joseph and Gustavo de Veciana. 2014. NOVA: QoE-Driven Optimization of DASH-based Video Delivery in Networks Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM. IEEE, 82--90.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Mahmoud I Kamel, Long Bao Le, and André Girard. 2014. LTE Wireless Network Virtualization: Dynamic Slicing via Flexible Scheduling Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall), 2014 IEEE 80th. IEEE, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Young Han Kim et al. 2014. Slicing the Next Mobile Packet Core Network. In Wireless Communications Systems (ISWCS), 2014 11th International Symposium on. IEEE, 901--904.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Avi Kivity et al. 2007. kvm: the Linux virtual machine monitor. In Proceedings of the Linux symposium, Vol. Vol. 1. 225--230.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Ravi Kokku et al. 2012. NVS: A Substrate for Virtualizing Wireless Resources in Cellular Networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON) Vol. 20, 5 (2012), 1333--1346. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Adlen Ksentini and Navid Nikaein. 2017. Toward Enforcing Network Slicing on RAN: Flexibility and Resources Abstraction. IEEE Communications Magazine Vol. 55, 6 (2017), 102--108.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Li Erran Li, Z Morley Mao, and Jennifer Rexford. 2012. Toward Software-Defined Cellular Networks. In Proceedings of 2012 European Workshop on Software Defined Networking (EWSDN). IEEE, 7--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Yan Li et al. 2008. Content-Aware Playout and Packet Scheduling for Video Streaming over Wireless Links. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia Vol. 10, 5 (2008), 885--895. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Chengchao Liang and F Richard Yu. 2015. Wireless Virtualization for Next Generation Mobile Cellular Networks. IEEE Wireless Communications Vol. 22, 1 (2015), 61--69.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Linux Foundation. 2017. ONAP. https://www.onap.org/. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Rajesh Mahindra et al. 2013. Radio Access Network Sharing in Cellular Networks Proceedings of 21st IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP). IEEE, 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Toktam Mahmoodi and Srini Seetharaman. 2014. Traffic Jam: Handling the Increasing Volume of Mobile Data Traffic. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine Vol. 9, 3 (2014), 56--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Ilaria Malanchini, Stefan Valentin, and Osman Aydin. 2014. Generalized Resource Sharing for Multiple Operators in Cellular Wireless Networks Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC), 2014 International. IEEE, 803--808.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Dirk Merkel. 2014. Docker: lightweight linux containers for consistent development and deployment. Linux Journal, Vol. 2014, 239 (2014), 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Microsoft Test Content. 2017. DASH Sample Video. http://wams.edgesuite.net/media/MPTExpressionData02/BigBuckBunny_1080p24_IYUV_2ch.ism/manifest(format=mpd-time-csf). (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Mehrdad Moradi et al. 2014. SoftMoW: Recursive and Reconfigurable Cellular WAN Architecture Proceedings of the 10th ACM CoNEXT. ACM, 377--390. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Akihiro Nakao et al. 2016. Demo at ITU FG IMT-2020 Workshop:Softwarized LTE in FLARE network slices. http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/Workshops-and-Seminars/201612/Pages/Programme.aspx. (Dec 2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Akihiro Nakao, Ping Du, Yoshiaki Kiriha, Fabrizio Granelli, Anteneh Atumo Gebremariam, Tarik Taleb, and Miloud Bagaa. 2017. End-to-end Network Slicing for 5G Mobile Networks. Journal of Information Processing Vol. 25 (2017), 153--163.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. NGMN-Alliance. 2015. 5G White Paper. (Feb 2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Navid Nikaein. 2017. FlexRAN tutorial on RAN sharing. https://gitlab.eurecom.fr/mosaic-5g/mosaic-5g/wikis/ran-sharing. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Navid Nikaein et al. 2014. OpenAirInterface: A flexible platform for 5G research. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review Vol. 44, 5 (2014), 33--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Navid Nikaein et al. 2015. Network store: Exploring slicing in future 5G networks Proc. 10th ACM International Workshop on Mobility in the Evolving Internet Architecture (MobiArch'15). 8--13. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Nokia. 2014. Network Sharing: Delivering mobile broadband more efficiently and at lower cost. http://resources.alcatel-lucent.com/asset/200192. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. OpenAirInterface Software Alliance. 2017. OpenAirInterface repository. https://gitlab.eurecom.fr/oai/openairinterface5g. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Peshala Pahalawatta et al. 2007. Content-Aware Resource Allocation and Packet Scheduling for Video Transmission over Wireless Networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Vol. 25, 4 (2007). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Klaus I Pedersen et al. 2016. A Flexible 5G Frame Structure Design for Frequency-Division Duplex Cases. IEEE Communications Magazine Vol. 54, 3 (2016), 53--59.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Kostas Pentikousis, Yan Wang, and Weihua Hu. 2013. Mobileflow: Toward Software-Defined Mobile Networks. IEEE Communications magazine Vol. 51, 7 (2013), 44--53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Zafar Ayyub Qazi et al. 2016. KLEIN: A Minimally Disruptive Design for an Elastic Cellular Core Proceedings of the Symposium on SDN Research. ACM, 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Qualcomm. 2016. Making 5G NR a reality. (Dec 2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Peter Rost et al. 2016. Mobile Network Architecture Evolution Toward 5G. IEEE Communications, Vol. 54, 5 (2016). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Peter Rost et al. 2017. Network Slicing to Enable Scalability and Flexibility in 5G Mobile Networks. IEEE Communications magazine (2017). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Konstantinos Samdanis et al. 2013. Service Boost: Towards on-demand QoS enhancements for OTT apps in LTE Network Protocols (ICNP), 2013 21st IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Konstantinos Samdanis, Xavier Costa-Perez, and Vincenzo Sciancalepore. 2016. From Network Sharing to Multi-Tenancy: The 5G Network Slice Broker. IEEE Communications, Vol. 54, 7 (2016). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Rob Sherwood et al. 2009. FlowVisor: A Network Virtualization Layer. OpenFlow Switch Consortium, Tech. Rep (2009), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Aisha Syed and Jacobus Van der Merwe. 2016. Proteus: A Network Service Control Platform for Service Evolution in a Mobile Software Defined Infrastructure. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM MobiCom. ACM, 257--270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Tarik Taleb et al. 2015. EASE: EPC as a Service to Ease Mobile Core Network Deployment over Cloud. IEEE Network, Vol. 29, 2 (2015), 78--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Tarik Taleb, Adlen Ksentini, and Abdellatif Kobbane. 2014. Lightweight Mobile Core Networks for Machine Type Communications. IEEE Access Vol. 2 (2014), 1128--1137.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  67. Volkan Yazıcı, Ulas C Kozat, and M Oguz Sunay. 2014. A New Control Plane for 5G Network Architecture with a Case Study on Unified Handoff, Mobility, and Routing Management. IEEE Communications Magazine Vol. 52, 11 (2014), 76--85.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Yasir Zaki et al. 2011. LTE Mobile Network Virtualization. Mobile Networks and Applications Vol. 16, 4 (2011), 424--432. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. Liang Zhao et al. 2011. LTE virtualization: From Theoretical Gain to Practical Solution Proceedings of the 23rd International Teletraffic Congress. International Teletraffic Congress, 71--78. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Orion: RAN Slicing for a Flexible and Cost-Effective Multi-Service Mobile Network Architecture

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              MobiCom '17: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking
              October 2017
              628 pages
              ISBN:9781450349161
              DOI:10.1145/3117811

              Copyright © 2017 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 4 October 2017

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              MobiCom '17 Paper Acceptance Rate35of186submissions,19%Overall Acceptance Rate440of2,972submissions,15%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader

            ePub

            View this article in ePub.

            View ePub