I mentioned earlier that voice and data both work fine, as long as you're inside the MicroCell's coverage radius. So what happens if you step outside? In theory and per advertising, your call is supposed to transition "seamlessly" to the nearest macrosite. In fact, the first time I tried walking out of location 1, it transitioned perfectly! I then proceeded to spend over a half hour trying to repeat my initial success...

The Theory of Handovers

But before I dive into the problems I experienced, let's briefly touch on some of the tech behind it. There are two types of handover that happen on a cellular network: soft and hard handovers. In a soft handover, the phone is continually talking to multiple macrocells at the same time - the transition happens seamlessly because you're already connected and communicating with towers you're going to handover to. This is a make-before-break transition. The transition is simply a matter of choosing which one has the best link quality, and this is generally how most transitions happen because it's robust.
 
The other case is a hard handover - this is less seamless break-before-make transition that's nearly instantaneous in practice, but still perceptible if you know what to look for. In a hard handover, the phone literally releases its active connection and transitions to another. Also of relevance are so-called vertical handoffs - these are transitions that happen across network technologies, in this case from UMTS to GSM, though other cross-technology handovers are possible as well. There's a huge amount of complexity to these systems; effectively handing off users while maintaining voice and data sessions is a challenging multidimensional problem. One that's often taken entirely for granted because of just how well we're used to it working. 
 
So you can imagine my surprise when I discovered that the handover from femtocell back to public 3G wasn't just rough, it's downright crude. First of all, virtually every femtocell handover is of the hard variety, and in practice almost all of the ones I saw were also vertical, from UMTS (3G) to GSM (2G). During that long provisioning process, I mentioned that the femtocell is building a rough list of all the macrocells it can see. Hopefully, it can see a few of both 3G and 2G variety, which it passes onto the phone in the form of a neighbor list. The phone also builds out its own neighbor list, which you can see some of in the Field Trial (*3001#12345#*) dialer application. It's been gimped significantly since the iPhone 2G, but there's still enough here to get the point across:
 
Neighbor Cells - Just like advertised
 
Anyhow, when you leave the femtocell's radius, if there's a macrocell in range and your phone can hard handover to it, the call continues. Hopefully this is what happens, otherwise the call drops. Of course, the big caveat here is that if you're installing the femtocell in a place with little to no signal (why it's there in the first place) handover is going to be a difficult prospect. That's why I tried the AT&T MicroCell both in an area with good existing coverage, and one with poor coverage. The results at both were equally disappointing.
 
AT&T advertises an effective range of 5000 square feet. This seems about right, but it's signal dependent. Location one is just over of 2000 square feet, and continual femtocell coverage barely makes it across two rooms. Location two is effectively 5000 square feet, and femtocell coverage includes the whole house, guest house, and most of both long driveways. Again, this is largely in part because the femtocell is sitting atop existing 3G spectrum - there's no spectrum overlay just for microcells yet. The result is that if signal is bad where you are, your microcell range is larger. Conversely, if signal is already reasonable, you're not going to see more than a room or two of microcell coverage. It's a complex problem akin to the cell breathing phenomenon, and I think AT&T's 3G MicroCell product is doing a lot of ranging at setup.
Performance Analysis: Voice and SMS Femtocell Handovers are Hard
Comments Locked

63 Comments

View All Comments

  • atiller - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    Thanks for the excellent and detailed report. One comment - your view of picocells is rather out of date. Just like femtocells, today's picocells use IP backhaul and can be installed without any specialist skills. Some people call them 'enterprise femtocells', but they have a larger capacity and range than a femto.
  • Brian Klug - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    Awesome tip, thanks, I definitely didn't know about these. Do you know what kind of carrier interaction is required for installing one of those? I mean, are they carrier agnostic, some common brand, and can anyone just buy them?

    I think there's definitely a market for malls and large shopping centers that want to improve coverage indoors - it seems to be a systemic problems for large buildings with high population density inside.

    -Brian Klug
  • Paulman - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    Except that I was reading an 4/1/2010 post on a friend's blog which made me wonder when the tech sites would start posting their crazy stories, and then I realized... wait a second...

    Before realizing this, I had read up to page 4 (Inside the Networking), at which point I was like, "I'm done with this article - I was just really curious to see if this was a 3G signal repeater, or if it got the data through a broadband connection and then just broadcast it locally over 3G". Lol.
  • TGressus - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    ...by failed handovers on AT&T.

    In southern California we as a community drive a lot (serious understatement), and many careers involve driving throughout the work day. Certain devices and occupations have moved my colleagues and family to AT&T at times, including the present. Everyone I know is regularly affected by the worst case handover scenarios you were surprised about in your article.

    It so predominant that I estimate 1/4 of my calls with AT&T I answer, "sorry, dropped call" rather than, "hello". It is the consensus of the mobile professionals with whom I interact through AT&T that one can not afford to make important phone calls on the road. I know that must seem like the most obvious statement ever, but try and empathize here; the nature of many businesses in massive urban sprawl lends itself to perpetual mobile telephony.

    People regularly attribute these issues to the coverage maps and, more recently, smart-phone burden. I'm no cellular techncian, but I suspect it's something more fundamental with GSM and/or AT&T technology. I'm not surprised you noticed this issue. In fact, I'm surprised you are surprised.
  • Brian Klug - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    I can't speak for the load in that area, but migrating calls and handing them over if the adjacent cell sites are overloaded is generally what causes soft handovers to fail. So imagine that you're on a node, being serviced perfectly fine, but migrate (while driving, say) into an adjacent cell that's completely overtaxed. The phone will try to migrate its session, but if it's so overloaded that it can't, the call will fail.

    It's a sad state of things, but that's probably what's going on if you see that you have good signal but still encounter problems. In fact, I'd say if you don't hear distortion or blocking, but rather just have the call fail (and you're moving) this is probably the case. Of course, that market is one that AT&T is particularly stressed about and focusing on now, hopefully it improves.

    Both CDMA2000, GSM, and UMTS are equally robust in the soft handover arena, and it *usually* works flawlessly - this is a technology that's rolled out pretty much everywhere. The technology is robust, but it's entirely carriers prerogative to install it properly and watch out for these load issues. Nothing is going to overcome the laws of physics. ;)

    Cheers,
    Brian Klug
  • slyck - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    Comments so far are right on. This should be a choice of last resort only for those who are connected to their cell number. If you need internet to make your call there is always VOIP which costs far, far less.
  • sxr7171 - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    Firstly pardon my language here. But this is bullshit.

    These stupid wireless carriers have a lot of nerve trying to extend their wireless coverage off of the customer's dime. On top of the ridiculous prices they charge for voice and data and most importantly: SMS. They have a lot of nerve asking customers to pay for the device and to pay for calls on it.

    The only advantage this has over a VOIP solution is basically seamless hand-offs - WHICH THIS CRAP PRODUCT DOES NOT DO.

    For GSM users this functionality was built into the standard and has been around for years and was mentioned in the article: SIP. T-mobile uses it but they restrict the devices.

    SIP is a feature built into many open unlocked phones like Symbian phones from Nokia and others, but our US carriers don't like such open phones so they would never allow a carrier sponsored phone to have the SIP software intact in the FW/OS. The whole technology was designed around having a choice of cell phone provider and SIP provider - you know choice as in the kind that creates competition. But our carriers will never allow that, and our consumers will always get sucked into carrier contracts and locked phones. This sort of thing is what makes it impossible to launch a phone or technology without the carrier's blessing and it is what makes us indentured to carriers.

    That iPhone is not $200 always remember the $1680 of overpriced service that is part of it. An unlocked iPhone costs $999. Think about why that is. It's because with the carriers control the device prices since they control who can buy it and what services must be purchased and how much that service costs. Will wireless ever be a free market in the US?
  • HotFoot - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    Have to agree with you. This is just silly.

    Where I live, there are two good solutions for the problem this device/service is trying to solve.

    1) Rogers has wifi capable cell phones that will switch to using your home 802.11 (or other hotspots) for making calls. When you're on wifi with these phones, you get different rates for calls much more in line with VoIP.

    2) Smart phone that will Skype over wifi. I pay $15/mo for my cell phone service plus another $3 to Skype for unlimited calling in North America. That's $18/mo, no contracts. I did pay $600 for my N900, so if that lasts me 3 years add another $18/mo to the total so I pay $36/mo to have basic cell phone service while I'm out and about and unlimited calling while at home, work, or coffee shop/anywhere there's free wifi.

    Anyone feeling like this AT&T offer is a load of steaming crap in comparison?
  • sxr7171 - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    But the 2 are open technologies that were supposed to enable seamless hand-offs and choice of service provider.
  • Wayne86 - Thursday, April 1, 2010 - link

    I was hoping this article was an April Fools joke. Alas, after Topekaing, it is not. :)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now