VoIP Handover Thresholds via Negotiated Packet Loss Rates
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current wireless communication systems face challenges in maintaining reliable voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP) network coverage, particularly at the edge of coverage areas, where uplink coverage is often limited, leading to increased packet loss rates and potential handover issues during voice sessions.
Innovation Solution
The method involves codec negotiation between user equipment (UE) to determine the maximum tolerable packet loss rates (PLRs) for each terminal, which are then communicated to the base station to set appropriate handover thresholds, ensuring robust codec usage and efficient resource allocation to maintain voice session quality.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If traditional handover thresholds are used in wireless communication systems, then handover decisions can be made based on signal strength, but packet loss rates increase and voice session quality degrades at the edge of coverage areas
Solution Approach 1:
The patent changes the handover threshold parameter from a fixed signal-strength-based value to a dynamic value derived from maximum tolerable packet loss rate (PLR) parameters. These PLR parameters are negotiated between UEs based on their codec capabilities and network conditions, allowing the handover threshold to adapt to actual voice session quality requirements rather than relying on traditional signal strength metrics alone.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements feedback mechanisms where UEs exchange information about their maximum tolerable PLR parameters during voice session establishment. This feedback loop allows the network to adjust handover thresholds based on actual codec performance characteristics and network conditions, creating a closed-loop system that continuously optimizes handover decisions for voice quality.
2Reliability
If robust codecs are used throughout the coverage area, then voice session quality is maintained, but network resources are wasted in areas with good coverage
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by negotiating different maximum tolerable PLR parameters for different UEs based on their specific codec capabilities and local network conditions. Instead of uniformly applying robust codecs across the entire coverage area, the system allows each UE to use the most efficient codec configuration that still maintains acceptable voice quality for its specific location and conditions, optimizing resource usage locally.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent makes the codec selection dynamic by allowing UEs to negotiate their maximum tolerable PLR parameters during voice session establishment and potentially adjust them during the session based on changing network conditions. This dynamic approach allows the system to transition between different codec robustness levels as UEs move through the coverage area, rather than being locked into a static configuration.
3Productivity
If handover thresholds are lowered to prevent unnecessary handovers, then handover frequency decreases, but coverage edge reliability deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent changes the handover threshold parameter from being based solely on signal strength to being derived from negotiated maximum tolerable PLR parameters that reflect actual voice session quality requirements. This parameter transformation allows the system to identify true coverage edges based on voice quality degradation rather than arbitrary signal strength thresholds, maintaining reliability at coverage edges while reducing unnecessary handovers.
Data Source
AI summary
The disclosure generally relates to various methods to increase network coverage for a Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP) session between a first user equipment (UE) and a second UE. In an aspect, a first and second UEs negotiate a codec configuration to use in the VoIP session, transmits, to the second UE, a maximum end-to-end packet loss rate (PLR) that the first UE can tolerate for received media given the negotiated codec configuration, receives, from the second UE, a maximum end-to-end PLR that the second UE can tolerate for received media given the negotiated codec configuration, and determines a distribution of the maximum end-to-end PLRs among respective uplinks and downlinks at the first UE and the second UE.