Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
2/10
Table of contents
3.Scenario descriptions......................................................................6
3.1Throughput-based optimization of the packet scheduler deactivated.......................6 3.2License for HSDPA 15 codes has expired...............................................................6 3.3Important intra-frequency neighbor missing...............................................................6 3.4Iub bandwidth is insufficient.......................................................................................7 3.5Virtual channel for Signaling Link on Iur is insufficient................................................7 Update table of contents: [Alt+Ctrl+Shift+T]
3/10
1.
4/10
2.
Concept
This exercise can be handled with two different concepts as described below. The general idea is to describe the scenario and let the participants ask questions on KPIs, counters, network configuration etc. They should narrow down and finally pinpoint the reason for the described performance degradation. The trainer should take the role of the reporting system, i.e. he/she should mainly give specific information that was directly asked for. This could be handled in a strict way by refusing to answer anything else but questions on the behavior or value of specified counters and KPIs or configuration. Examples: Q: How does KPI 00040 behave in this scenario? A: The KPI had a steep drop of 300kbps 2 days ago and hasnt recovered since then.
Q: What value do we observe on M5000C87 in the affected cell? A: Hasnt been triggered since observation of the effect.
Q: Do the affected cells belong to a specific region? A: Yes, all are located at an RNC boundary.
Or there could be a relaxed way, when the trainer would also give additional hints or information or answers general questions like this: Q: Do we see impact on mobility KPIs? A: Yes, for instance Active Set Update Success Rate has dropped.
Q: Is the amount of baseband resources in the WBTS sufficient? A: It is, but it might be a good idea to also consider other capacity areas.
5/10
2.1
Short Option
The trainer chooses a scenario from chapter 3, describes the scenario to the participants in terms of what is observed on high level KPIs and asks them to find out the root cause for the performance problem. This might be quite fast (e.g. a few minutes per scenario), if the relaxed answer style is deployed. Alternatively the trainer deploys the strict answer style and the participants will have to find exact counter and KPI references in the documentation. In this case the duration could be substantially longer (e.g. 15 to 30 minutes per scenario).
2.2
2.2.1
Long Option
First phase
The trainer divides the group into several teams and gives each team one fault description. Keeping their fault secret from the other teams, each teams shall then find out what KPIs will become bad and why what further counters could be helpful for further investigation on what level those counters should be investigated what assumptions about the network should reasonably be made to detail the scenario For this they will need access to the following documents: RNW counter description KPI description Parameter dicitionary
2.2.2
Second phase
The group will come together, each team describing the anticipated observations and answering the questions of the other participants, who should find out about the root cause (as in the short form). The trainer might help both the team and the group in this phase with hints, answers etc. to keep the required time acceptable.
6/10
3.
3.1
Scenario descriptions
Throughput-based optimization of the packet scheduler deactivated
The scenario assumes, that the feature has been deactivated unintentionally. As a result various capacity areas (Iub, CE, Spreading Codes) might face congestion in all or parts of the RNS. Affected KPIs: Interesting counters: M1001C106 and C111 M1000C226 and C227 M1000C72-74 M1000C76-82 M550 Call setup success rate RAB setup success rate RRCC setup success rate Code tree occupancy Code Blocking PS rejection rate
3.2
3.3
7/10
Affected KPIs Interesting counters: M1005C204 M1018C0 0005 0006 0009 (in the missing neighbor) 0020
3.4
3.5
8/10
9/10
10/10