Two-Step Random Access Using Distinct Identifiers
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current wireless communication systems face delays in determining the success or failure of random access procedures, which can impact network efficiency and user experience.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of a two-step random access procedure that uses distinct identifiers, such as C-RNTI and RA-RNTI, to differentiate between successful and failed access attempts, allowing for quicker determination and potential fallback to alternative procedures.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If traditional four-step random access procedure is used, then reliability is maintained through multiple confirmation steps, but access delay increases due to multiple message exchanges
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the random access response into two distinct parts: one addressed to RA-RNTI (for failed attempts) and one to C-RNTI (for successful attempts). This segmentation allows the wireless device to quickly identify the relevant response portion based on the preamble type, reducing the time needed to process responses while maintaining the reliability of both four-step and two-step procedures.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies preliminary action by having the wireless device monitor for responses using both RA-RNTI and C-RNTI in advance, before knowing the actual outcome of the random access procedure. This allows the device to be prepared to immediately identify success or failure based on which identifier receives a valid response, reducing overall access delay while maintaining reliability through proper confirmation.
2Loss of time
If two-step random access procedure is implemented, then access delay is reduced through fewer message exchanges, but reliability may be compromised without proper success/failure differentiation
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by assigning different identifiers to different parts of the response message based on the random access outcome. The response addressed to RA-RNTI contains failure indication information, while the response addressed to C-RNTI contains success confirmation. This local differentiation ensures that each part of the system handles success and failure cases appropriately, maintaining reliability while using the faster two-step procedure.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent uses identifiers (RA-RNTI and C-RNTI) as intermediaries to convey success or failure information from the base station to the wireless device. These identifiers act as mediators that carry the outcome information without requiring additional explicit signaling, thus maintaining reliability through clear indication while reducing the number of message exchanges needed in the two-step procedure.
3Device complexity
If single identifier monitoring is used, then device complexity is reduced, but ability to differentiate access outcome is insufficient
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies universality by making the wireless device capable of monitoring for responses using multiple identifiers (both RA-RNTI and C-RNTI) within the same procedure. This multi-functionality allows a single monitoring mechanism to handle both success and failure detection, improving outcome detection accuracy without significantly increasing device complexity, as the same hardware and software infrastructure is used for both identifier types.
Data Source
AI summary
Wireless communications are described for access procedures. A wireless device may use a plurality of identifiers to monitor for a response from a base station. The wireless device may determine whether a random access procedure is a success or a failure based on the identifier that the wireless device is able to use to receive the response.