3GPP TS V (). 2. Release 8. Keywords. UMTS, radio. 3GPP. Postal address. 3GPP support office address. Route des. Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol specification (3GPP TS version Release 11) Ocr ABBYY FineReader Ppi Release 8. 2. 3GPP TS V (). Keywords UMTS, radio. 3GPP Postal address 3GPP support office address Route des Lucioles – Sophia.
|Published (Last):||13 November 2012|
|PDF File Size:||2.48 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.48 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
In some case, we spend pretty much time and effort to troubleshoot something which is not supported by UE. Followings are some of common items you’d better check. So I would split the message into a couple of categories as shown below and post separate pages for each of the categories.
Why we need to worry about the size limitation of RRC message?
If the UE support full capability of Rel 13 and a lot of band combination. The current several hundred different combination is not with 3CC CA. The real explosion of the size came out with the support of Carrier Aggregation.
One brutal solution would be to reserve super-large message buffer size and ensure that your ASN decoder works properly for such a reelase large tree structure. When LTE first came out, this process was very simple, but as LTE evolves the information that are required gets larger and complicated.
3GPP TS (1 of 18) – E-UTRA RRC
We haven’t even thought of this for most of the case, but we start worrying about size limitation of RRC message as UE Capability Information message gets almost exploded in terms of message length size. The root cause was a kind of message buffer overflow, meaning that the size of the incoming signaling message hit the size of memory allocated to store the message. As a result, I see much more issues related to ‘lack of capability’ or ‘mismatch between UE capability report and real implementation’.
UE reports the information to NW as requested.
Feature Group Indicators (FGI bits) in LTE – Rel. 8, Rel. 9 and Rel. 10 – Techplayon
Followings are not directly related to UE Capability, but sometimes releasee see various issues caused by these message correlation.
Followings are some of the complete message example for UE Capability Information message. This list would get longer as the technology evolves. What would be the solution for handling this kind of too over-sized message?
Feature Group Indicators (FGI bits) in LTE – Rel. 8, Rel. 9 and Rel. 10
The Enquiry item is configured very simple. The process is very simple as shown below. But I would suggest you to understand at least on how to interprete the contents of the highlighted items. I am not aware if there is any explicit size limit for any RRC message. The more you know of the contents the more you can understand about the UE and the better position you are at for troubleshooting.
As a result, releasr the contents of the message has become pretty complicated. Sometimes UE information says ‘Supported’ but in reality does not working correct. Network request UE to send capability information.
So I recommend you to rrlease before troubleshoot especially for radio stack issue. How long the message can be? Sometimes UE information does not mention something ‘supported’ but seems to work.
Also it would be a good idea to check these information first before you test anything on Measurement, InterRAT. With this, Network can force UE to send the only capability information that are necessary to the current Network. Very high level view of UE Capability Information message structure is shown below. Following is how UE Capability Enquiry works. Since the message is too long and too complicated, it would be tricky to describe all of the contents in the single page.
Another possible solution seemingly better solution would be to limit the scope of the information that UE report in UE Capability Information message. It informs on all the details of its capabilities.
Take this as a guideline but don’t trust too much.
But the size increase by FGI was minor.