Current and future trends in wireless connectivity for the iotIntel Labs – Ireland

Wael Guibene, Ph.D

Intel’s StrategyIf it computes, it does it best with Intel

Data Center Client Ultra-Mobile Wearables/IoT

QUARKQUARK

Intel® Processors

Intel Labs Europe

4

Research Strategy & Partners

ACADEMIC PARTNERS Open Research PROGRAMSINDUSTRIAL PARTNERS

LEIXLIPNetwork & PlatformsResearch

LondonICRI

Urban IoT Networks

MunichV2I/V2X Platforms

Intel Business Units

Chang Seung-Taek - Connectivity Technologies and Interference Signal Analysis for IoT Service

Thierry Lestable - Location-Enabled LoRa™ IoT Network: “Geo-LoRa-ting” your assets

Wael Guibene - An evaluation of low power wide area network technologies for the Internet of Things

Wael Guibene - Techniques for resilient real-world IoT

Wael Guibene - Evaluation of LPWAN Technologies for Smart Cities: River Monitoring Use-case

5

Disclaimer - Slides Sources

6

What is the Internet of Things (IoT)?

7

Smart Energy

-Generation & trading

-Transmission-Distribution & metering

-Storage-Services

Wearables

-Healthmonitor-Fitness trackers-Smartwatch-Smart glasses-Smartbands-E-textiles-Hearing-aid

SmartHome

-Security &alarm-Lightcontrol-HVACcontrol-Remotecontrol-Door control-Energyefficiency-Entertainment-Appliances

Industry Automation

-Smartmachine-Surveillance camera

-Factoryautomation

-Assettracking-Logistics and optimizationof supplychain

ConnectedCar

•V2V / V2X /V2I communications• eCall• Infotainment•Trafficcontrol• Navigation• Autonomous

vehicles•Maintenance

Smart City

-Traffic management

-Waterdistribution-Waste

management-Security-Lighting-Environmental monitoring

-Parkingsensor

Strategic IoT Usecases/Services

Connecting Things to the Cloud

<10cm <5km

Proximity

WLAN

WWANWPAN

WHAN

NFC EMV

Bluetooth/LEANT+MiWi

ZigBee Z-WaveThread (6LoWPAN)EnOceanMany others

802.11a/b/g/n/ac (WiFi)802.11ah (WiFi HaLow 1km) 802.11p (V2X)802.11af (white space)

Wi-SUN (6LoWPAN) ZigBee NAN (6LoWPAN)Wireless M-busMany others SIGFOX

LoRa TelensaOnRamp/INGENU Weightless P Many others

Cellular (licensed)

LPWAN (un-licensed)

<100km

WFAN

Terms not preciseWNAN

ISA100.11a (6LoWPAN)WirelessHARTMany others

IoT Radios

Blue: > billion units/year nowRed: emerging

WPAN: Wireless Personal Area Network WHAN: Wireless Home AreaWFAN: Wireless Field (or Factory)Area WLAN: Wireless Local AreaWNAN: Wireless Neighbourhood AreaWWAN: Wireless WideAreaLPWAN: Low Power Wide Area Network

LPWAN (licensed)

3GPP NB-IoT3GPP LTE-MTC, eMTC/Cat M, LTE-V3GPP GSM, WCDMA, EC-GPRS3GPP2 Cdma2000, WiMAX

Popular Frequency Use470 779 86813.56 169 220 315 426 433 915 920 24005800 5900 MHz

54-698

802.15.4-2003, c, d

802.15.4-2003/6loWPAN

802.15.4e/6loWPAN

802.15.4e

ISO14543-3-10

ITU G.9959

802.15.1

802.15.4k

802.15.4g/e/6loWPAN

ISO14443

EN13757

WMRNET I, II, III, IV

V2X

WiFi

WhiteSpace

802.15.4p

Usually calledNFC/EMV

Wireless M-Bus China WMRNET

LoRa SIGFOXTelensa

OnRampWi-SUNZigBee Thread

WirelessHART ISA100.11a

Z-Wave EnOcean

ANT+Bluetooth

802.11a/b/g/n/ac802.11ah

802.11p802.11af

Positive Train Ctrl

Aliases

Frequently Cited IoT BandsNon-cellular license exempt and lightly licensed (MHz)

Cellular licenced (MHz)Regional GSM, WCDMA, C2K, LTE and WiMAX bands ~450 to 3900

White space (MHz)Regional bands ~54 to 698

779433 470

868 433

169

426Japan

920

433915

433 433

5900

915315

220

Worldwide13.56

24005800

Agenda– IoT/M2M Introduction and Market Situation

– IoT/M2M Key Enabling Wireless Technologies

• IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Working Group

• Wide area networks (LPWAN) and NB-IoT– Summary

IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Working Group

IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee

802.1 Higher Layer LAN Protocols Working Group

802.11 Wireless

Network (WLALocal Area

N)Working Group

802.15 Wireless Personal Area

Network (WPAN)Working Group

TG1othWPAN/Blueto

Task GroupTG2 Coexistence

Task GroupTG3 WPANHighRate Task Group

TG4 WPAN LowRate Task Group

802.16 Broadband wireless access

Major IEEE 802 LAN/PAN standards used for IoT

IEEE 802.15.4IEEE 802.15.1(BT standard is no longer maintained byIEEE, it is controlled by Bluetooth SIG )

…..

Bluetooth® Standard Evolution

1999 2003 2004 2007 2009

•Many problems•Difficult making products interoperable

•Faster connection/ discovery•Use AFH•Up to 721 kbps

•Introduction of EDR•EDR Up to 2.1 Mbps

•SSP, EIR•power consumption optimization

•Alternate MAC/PHY•Unicast connectionless data•Enhanced power control•HS up to 24 Mbps

•Adoption of Bluetooth LE•LE up to 260 kbps•Including classic, LE and HS

V1.0

V1.2

V2.0 + EDR

V2.1 + EDR

V3.0 + HS

V4.0

•Coexist with 4G•Smart connectivity•Data transfer improvement

20142010 2013

V4.1 V4.2

•For IoT (Support IPv6/6LoWPAN)•High privacy•Data throughput increase (10x packet capacity increase)

For dual-mode: LE + LegacyBT

Two New Trademarks for Certified BT Devices

For single-mode: LE only

IoT Key Enabling TechnologiesBluetooth Smart – Powering IoTBluetooth Core 4.0/4.1/4.2 enables a world of sensors– Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) enables low cost sensors to send their data over

the internet

• Version 4.2 enables IPv6 to a BT device

– Very low duty cycle = low power consumption

– Ability to run for years (up to 5 years) on standard coin-cell batteries

– Target applications:

• Health monitors such as heart rate monitor

• Fitness devices, smart watches

• Environmental sensing

• Proximity applications and many others

Wireless Standards

Blue

toot

h/Bl

ueto

oth

Low

Ener

gy

ApplicationLa yer

Network

Transport

MAC

PHY

IEEE

802.

15.4

IEEE

802.

15.4

ZigB

ee

IEEE

802.

11W

LAN

IEEE

802.

15.4

Thre

ad

IEEE

802.

15.4

Wire

less

HAR

T

IEEE

802.

15.4

IEEE

802.

11

ISA1

00.11

a

IEEE 802 defines standards, does not define a certification process ortest plans, that is done by the individual standards/working groups

802.15.4…. Something for Everyone

= A popular non-interoperableformatMHz

802.15.4…… 2003 2006 c da e jf g k m n p q

2400

780868

2400915

868

??

920 2400

2400

920

24002400 915

2400IP??

Positive Train

Control

220

IPv6

Non-IPProprietary upper stack

802.15.4 includes >60 non-interoperable PHY combinations

IEEE 802.15.4

– Important standard for home networking, industrial control and building automation

– Deals with low data rate, long battery life (months or even years) and very low complexity

• Data rates of 250 kbps, 40 kbps, and 20kbps

– Specifies PHY and MAC layers for LoWPAN networks

• Ex. ZigBee, THREAD, WirelessHART, ISA100.11a

– Upper layers for WPAN are not developed by IEEE 802.15 working group

• Standards or working groups, such asZigBee Alliance, implement upper layers to enable multi-vendor interoperable solutions

Low Rate Wireless Personal Area Network (LoWPAN)

Upper Layer Stack

IEEE 802.15.4 MAC

IEEE 802.15.48 68/915 MHzPHY

IEEE 802.15.42.4 GHz PHY

IoT Key Enabling TechnologiesZigBeeLow power, low data rate, mesh network

– Conceived in 1998, first standardized in 2003 and revised multiple times, latest in 2012 (ZigBee PRO)

– Based on IEEE 802.15.4 physical andMAC layers operating in sub-GHz and2.4GHz frequency bands

– Transmission distances range from 10 to 100 meters - depending on power output and environmental characteristics

TargetApplications:

Upper Layer Stack

IEEE 802.15.4 MAC

IEEE 802.15.4 868/915 MHz PHY

IEEE 802.15.42.4 GHz PHY

IoT Key Enabling TechnologiesTHREAD

– Thread Group launched in July 2014

– Main competitor to ZigBee for home automation

• Appliances, access control, climate control, lighting, energy managementetc..

– Collection of existing IEEE and IETF standards:

• IEEE 802.15.4-2006 PHY/MAC operating in 2.4 GHz

• 6LoWPAN (IPv6) based protocol

– Requires only software update to run on existing IEEE 802.15.4 based silicon such as 2.4 GHz version of ZigBee

Thread ProtocolStack

Ref:www.threadgroup.org

IoT for Home AutomationTechnology Tradeoffs for Home Automation Application

Pros:• Low energy• Available on

mobile devices (Already supported on IOS and Android)

• IPv6 based

Cons:• Star network• Short range• New technology –

not well establishedcompared to ZigBee

Pros:• Well established

standards• Available on

mobile devices• Good range• IPv6 based

Cons:• Star network• Not low energy –

new standard coming in 2016 (802.11ah)

Pros:• Low energy• Well established

standards• Mesh network• Good range

Cons:• Not IP based for

home automation(ZigBee IP for Smart Energy 2.0 is IP based)

• Not available on mobile phones/ tablets

Pros:• Low energy• Mesh network• Good range• IPv6 based

Cons:• Not well

established compared to ZigBee

• Not available on mobile phones/ tablets

IoT Key Enabling TechnologiesWi-SUN– IPv6 based Wireless Smart Utility Network (Wi-SUN) based on IEEE 802.15.4g

• IEEE 802.15.4g, also known as the Smart Utility Networks (SUN), was approved by IEEE in March, 2012

– Initially Japan focused, now expanding globally (US, South East Asia, India, Europe)

– Target smart utility use cases:• Gas metering; demand/response; distribution automation

– PHY layer based on IEEE 802.15.4g but the specification will be categorized based on use cases– Frequency: 868 MHz (EU), 915 MHz (USA), 2.4 GHz ISM bands (worldwide)

– MAC may be based on or not based on 802.15.4. Application dependent.

3 PHY formatssupported:• MR-FSK: 2FSK and 4FSK• MR-OFDM: available but not

popular• MR-O-QPSK: DSSS and

multiplexed DSSS

IEEE 802.11 Standards EvolutionWLAN

IEEE 802.11

802.11-1997

2 Mbps, DSSS,FHSS

802.11b11 Mbps, CCK, DSSS

802.11a54 Mbps,OFDM, 5

GHz

802.11g54 Mbps,

OFDM, 2.4GHz

802.11n600 Mbps with 4x4

MIMO, 20/40 MHz BW, 2.4

or 5 GHz

802.11ac

802.11ad

802.11ahUp to 4 MHz

(16 MHz optional) BW

Below 1 GHz

802.11af

TVWS

WirelessGigabit(WiGig)

Very High Throughput, 60 GHz

Very High Throughput, <6 GHz

TV WhiteSpaces

802.11p27 Mbps, 10MHz BW, 5.9

GHz

Wireless Access for Vehicular Environment (WAVE/DSRC)

DSRC = Dedicated Short-Range Communications

Low power, low rate, long range

applications

– Target use cases• Large scale low power sensor networks and smartmeter

• Video surveillance, wearable consumer electronics

• Backhaul for aggregated sensor and meterdata

• Outdoor Wi-Fi for cellular trafficoffloading

IoT Enabling TechnologiesIEEE 802.11ah – Middle 2016– Optimized for IoT applications– PHY/MAC – trade-off of power, range, rate

• PHY based on 802.11ac with data rates > 100 kbps• Optimizations for highly robust links and low power consumption required for batteryoperated

devices

• Sub-1 GHz unlicensed bands• Range up to 1 km – beyond 2.4 and 5 GHz range due to improved propagationcharacteristics

of sub-GHz radio waves

11a/g/n/acAP

11ah AP

Indoor

IoT Enabling Technologies

16 MHz

8 MHz

4 MHz

2 MHz

1MHz

20 MHz

150kbps – 4Mbps

650kbps – 7.8Mbps

1.35Mbps – 18Mbps

2.9Mbps – 39Mbps

5.8Mbps – 78Mbps

Mandatory & Globally Interoperable modes optimized for sensor networking

Optional higher data rate modes for extended range WLAN

6.5Mbps – 78Mbps

High data ratesMinimum 11n/acbandwidth

Extended range

IEEE 802.11ah Bandwidth and Data Rates11ah Bandwidth Modes

IoT Key Enabling TechnologiesIEEE 802.11p– Adds a vehicular communication system to IEEE 802.11 WLAN standard ->

Wireless Access in Vehicular Environment (WAVE)– Supports low latency, Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) and Vehicle-to-Infrastructure

(V2X) communication• Vehicle broadcasts its position and velocity and receives broadcastsof

neighboring road users• Uses channels of 10MHz bandwidth in the 5.9GHz band (5.850-5.925GHz)• Developed based on 802.11a but targets for reliableconnection

– Main uses:• Vehicle safety services• Commerce transactions via cars• Toll collection• Traffic management

– USA, Europe, China, Japan, Korean and Singapore are working towards hard/soft mandate or MOU for dedicated short range communication (DSRC)installation.

Smart City Environmental Sensing - Dublin

IoT Traffic Characterisation

Event-Based

Periodic

System Statuse.g. 10-600bytes

Observation/Actuation Message e.g. 10-600bytes

Mixed-Mode

Challenges

1: Power 2A: Inconsistent reporting intervals2B: Lossy networks3: Interference & congestion

48 hour period

25%

15%

5%

Challenge 1: Solar Power (in Ireland)

Approach

Adaptive messaging rates based on battery performance

Transceiver On Receiving TransmittingXbee 868 60.82mA 73mA 160mA

Example Outcome – 2 sensors

100%

55%

5%

Sensor #1 with > 90% battery charge is operating on a 3 min reporting interval

Sensor #2 switches between 13min and 8min reporting intervals

operating lifetime extended

Challenge 2A: Inconsistent Reporting Intervals

Challenge 2B: Managing Data in Lossy Networks

Require network edge cache storage for potentially hours

Approach

Caching at the network edge – extending disruption tolerance to several hours

Example outcome

In this example, 100% of data lost during a 3 hour disruption were recovered & backfilled

Challenge 3: congestion(ISM bands)

Spectrum Usage (2.4GHz)

Scenario – mesh coverage in Hyde Park, UK

Spectrum Usage (868MHz)

Significantly reduced congestion & suitable for NLOS

Subject to duty cycle limitations however

ISM 868MHz Bandplan

600kHz25mW

100kHz5mW

500kHz25mW

100kHz10mW

250kHz500mW

600kHz25mW

300kHz, 5mW

868 868.6 868.7 869.2 869.4 869.65 869.7 870

Effe

ctiv

e Ra

diat

ed P

ower

(m

W)

Frequency (MHz)

Duty cycle: < 1% < 0.1% < 0.1% < 10% < 10% Up to 100%< 0.1%

100kHz10mW

< 1%

Non-specific short range device

Application-specific e.g. alarms

<10cm <5km

Proximity

WLAN

WWANWPAN

WHAN

NFC EMV

Bluetooth/LEANT+MiWi

ZigBee Z-WaveThread (6LoWPAN)EnOceanMany others

802.11a/b/g/n/ac (WiFi)802.11ah (WiFi HaLow 1km) 802.11p (V2X)802.11af (white space)

Wi-SUN (6LoWPAN) ZigBee NAN (6LoWPAN)Wireless M-busMany others SIGFOX

LoRa TelensaOnRamp/INGENU Weightless P Many others

Cellular (licensed)

LPWAN (un-licensed)

<100km

WFAN

Terms not preciseWNAN

ISA100.11a (6LoWPAN)WirelessHARTMany others

IoT Radios

Blue: > billion units/year nowRed: emerging

WPAN: Wireless Personal Area Network WHAN: Wireless Home AreaWFAN: Wireless Field (or Factory)Area WLAN: Wireless Local AreaWNAN: Wireless Neighbourhood AreaWWAN: Wireless WideAreaLPWAN: Low Power Wide Area Network

LPWAN (licensed)

3GPP NB-IoT3GPP LTE-MTC, eMTC/Cat M, LTE-V3GPP GSM, WCDMA, EC-GPRS3GPP2 Cdma2000, WiMAX

Introduction to Low Power-Wide Area

LPWA Requirements and Characteristics (1/2)

Introduction to Low Power-Wide Area

LPWA Requirements and Characteristics (2/2)

Introduction to Low Power-Wide Area

LPWA Expected Revenues• Average revenue per LPWA

connection: USD$2-3 / Year• The turning point for the market

growth will take place in 2018• Analysys Mason forecasts the

total cumulative revenue for 2015-2017 to reach $450mn.

• In 2018, the annual revenueforecasted at $970mn,

• By 2022, annual connectivity revenue will reach US$7.5 billion.

• The top three application categories: agriculture and environment markets (25% of the forecast for 2022), consumer applications, which include pet, bicylcle tracking and wearables (21%), and smart buildings (18%).

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by Semtech• Proprietary PHY Layer

• Constant envelop - spread spectrum based

modulation with 7 spreading factors

• Demodulate below noise level (up to 20dB

under noise)

• Robustness to interference, noise, and

jamming

• Support various BW from 7.8 KHz to 500

KHz and PHY bitrate from 18 bps to 37.5

kbps

• Supports ISM bands frequency bands WW

(137 - 1020 MHz)

• DToA based localization.

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by Semtech

• Up to 30 dB enhancement Vs

best in class FSK

• 3-4 dB from Shannon theoretic

limit

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by Semtech

Over 30miles from San Jose to San Bruno

10 LoRa gateways create LPWAN IoT network over Munich

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by Semtech

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by SemtechThere are many different needs to LoRaendpoints. Accordingly the LoRaWAN supportsthree classes of endpoints:•Class A - bi-directional end-devices: LoRaWANclass A endpoint devices provide bidirectionalcommunications. To achieve this, each endpointtransmission is followed by two short downlink receivewindows.•Class B - bi-directional end-devices withscheduled receive slots: LoRa Class B devicesprovide the Class A functionality and in additionto this they open extra receive windows atscheduled times. To achieve the requiredsynchronisation from the network, the endpointreceives a time synchronized Beacon from thegateway.•Class C - bi-directional end-devices withmaximal receive slots: LoRa Class C devicesprovide nearly continuously open receivewindows. They only closed when the endpoint istransmitting. This type of endpoint is suitablewhere large amounts of data are needed to bereceived rather than transmitted.

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by Semtech

Relative localization/ Ranging is a “MUST HAVE” for many industrial applications, and

thus KEY Differentiator amongst IoT Systems.

• RSSI- based localization: non reliable, vulnerable to interference and noise levels.

• DToA: more reliable technique:

• Need for more sophisticated transceivers to append a fine timestamp on the

TX and use it as reference on the RX.

• Network-wide precise clock synchronization.

• LoRa E2E system offers DToA based ranging and localization.

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by Semtech

LPWA Technologies

LoRa: Long Range by Semtech

LPWA Technologies

ILE-DCC Demonstrator

Solving a real-world problem

53

Introduction and Context

• Intel, Nimbus and Dublin City Council launched a Smart City program

• Multi-phase PoC:• Deployment of sensors: rain gauges, ULS river monitoring devices and floating buoy

• 8-9 months data collection and storage

• Create predictive models on Liffey flooding through sensor fusion and AI

54

Introduction and Context

55

Intel/Nimbus Buoy Overview

56

Intel/Nimbus Buoy Overview

57

End-to-End System Architecture

58

End-to-End System Architecture: Deployment Map

59

A fixed-size packet of 64 bytes is sent by the buoy LoRa transmitter:

00 00 00 00 32 81 5C 56 24 00 00 00 33 33 33 3F 00 00 00 00 CD CC A0 41 00 00 02 42 9C 09 A1 45 CB 09 50 C4 00 0C C7 47 33 33 B5 41 AC 1C 24 42 AE 47 45 51 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

60

End-to-End System Architecture: Frame Structure

61

Experimental Results

62

Experimental Results

63

Experimental Results

64

Experimental Results

An over all error of 102 data-point over a total 5745data-point or a ratio of 1.78% for the 8 month experiment

LPWA Technologies

SigFox UNB Communications

66

LPWA Technologies

SigFox UNB Communications

• SigFox Model: Network operator.

• The network have different offers based on volume of device and number of messages transmitted per days:

• Platinum : 101 to 140 messages + 4 downlink

• Gold : 51 to 100 messages + 2 downlink

• Silver : 3 to 50 messages + 1 downlink

• One : 1 to 2 messages + no downlink

• Using UNB communications for uplink and downlink

• Maximum of 12 bytes/ message with fixed 3 times repetition of the same message (decreasing channel capacity)

• Uplink BPSK at 100bps on 100Hz channel

• Downlink GFSK at 500bps on a 600Hz channel: no data on ACKs

67

LPWA Technologies

SigFox UNB Communications

68

Wide area networksTechnology Trade-offs

Pros:• Long range• Long battery life (>10

years)• Low cost• Uses cellular network

as backhaul

Cons:• New standard• Unlicensed band -

interference• Very low data rate –

can only be used forIoT

Pros:• Well established

standards• Long rage• High data rate• Very wide coverage• Licensed band (except

LTE-U)

Cons:• Not optimized for IoT

• Battery life• Cost

Pros:• Long range• Long battery life (up to

20 years)• Low cost

Cons:• New standard• Unlicensed band -

interference• Can’t run on existing

cellular network –needs a dedicated SIGFOX network

• Very low data rate -can only be used for IoT

Clean slate:• NB-IoT 180kHz BW• LTE and GSM base station software upgrade• Trial service 2016, commercial service 2017

LTE derivative• LTE Cat M 1.4MHz BW• LTE base station software upgrade• Commercial service 2017

GSM derivative• EC-GSM (EC-GPRS) 200kHz BW• GSM base station softwareupgrade• Commercial service TBC

Key 3GPP Release 13 updates

3GPP Release 13 Cellular IoT timelines

Standardization2015 2016 2017

GER

ANNB-LTE

3GPPRel13R

AN NB-IoT

EC-GPRS

eMTC Cat M

eMTC Cat M:• Machine Type Communication• 1.4MHz Bandwidth LTE derivative• Software update to LTEinfrastructure• 1Mbps, full mobility, 156dB link, 10 year batt

NB-IoT:• Narrowband IoT• 200 (180kHz) Clean sheet format• Software update to LTE or GSMinfrastructure• <~250kbps, nomadic, 164dB, 10 year batt

EC-GPRS• Extended coverage GPRS• 200kHz GSM/EDGE• Repetitions to get to 164dB link budget• EC-PDTCH and EC-PACCH, ~52 min DRX• Software update to GSM infrastructure

GERAN Objectives• 164dB link budget (GPRS +20dB)• 40 devices per home (~50k/cell)• >160bps at range limit• 10 second latency• 10 year life with 5Wh ~AA battery

3GPP spec dev

3GPP test case development

Conformance testing

Field trials

Commercial service

GSMA Mobile IoT initiative backed by 21 MNOs:AT&T, Bell Mobility, Bermuda Digital Comm, China Telecom, China Unicom, China Mobile, Deutsche Telekom, Etisalat, KDDI, KT, Mobistar, NTT DoCoMo, Orange, Singtel, Softbank, Taiwan Mobile, Telecom Italia, Telefonica, Telenor, Telstra, Verizon, Vodafone

March-June 2016

LTE Cat 0 LTE Cat 00

NB-M2M NB-CIoT

NB-OFDMAC-UNB

NB-CSSNB-GSMEC-GSM

3GPP Rel 12 3GPP Rel 13

MTC Cat 0 eMTC Cat M* EC-GPRS NB-IoT*

Heritage LTE LTE GSM Clean-slate

Bandwidth(downlink) 20 MHz 1.4 MHz 200 kHz 180kHz (12 by 15kHz)

Bandwidth(uplink) 20 MHz 1.4 MHz 200 kHz Single-tone (180kHz by 3.75kHz or 15kHz) or multi-tone (180kHz by

15kHz)

Multiple access (downlink) OFDMA OFDMA TDMA OFDMA

Multiple access(uplink) SC-FDMA SC-FDMA TDMA Single-tone FDMA or multi-tone SC-FDMA

Modulation(downlink) QPSK, 16QAM, 64QAM

QPSK, 16QAM, 64QAM

GMSK, optional 8PSK BPSK, QPSK, optional 16QAM

Modulation(uplink) QPSK,16QAM QPSK,16QAM GMSK, optional 8PSK TBC π/4-QPSK, rotated π/2-BPSK, 8PSK optional 16QAM

Peak data rate 1 Mbps 1 Mbps 10 kbps to 240kbps TBC DL up to 250kbps TBC, ULsingle tone up to 20 to 64kbps TBC, UL

multi-tone up to 250kbps TBC

Coverage (link budget) ~141dB ~156dB ~164dB ~164dB

Mobility Full Full Full Nomadic

3GPP Cellular IoT summary

Note * Cat M also currently referred to as Cat M1, NB-IoT also referred to as Cat M2. Details for NB-IoT are subject to change as 3GPP drafting continues

Enhanced mobile broadband

Massive machine type communications

Data rateLow latency

Low power

NB-IoT 5G context

Density

Deep coverage

Mobility

Drones Vehicles

Ultra reliable low latency

NB-IoT is a pre-5G technologylikely to be developed into 5G massive MTC

Local InterworkingDevice discovery, publish, subscribe Competing consortia

AllSeen Alliance (Qualcomm)

Open source Qualcomm, Sharp,Sony,Cisco, Microsoft, LG…….

Apple HomeKit Google WeaveOpen Interconnect Consortium (Intel)

Open sourceIntel, Samsung. GE, Cisco, Broadcom, IBM….

Coffee’s readyTime for coffee

Someone’s at the door

Global Interworking “If Company A runs a fleet of trucks and Company B runs a fleet of container ships then their mutual customer, Company C, can use one application to track the cargo, regardless of the handler”

OneM2M• Formed July 24th 2012, Founding partners: ARIB, ATIS, CCSA, ETSI, TIA, TTA, TTC• Reference architecture and conformance test regime for a common service layer for

global interworking• Focus is edge to cloud so good synergy with Allseen & OIC. Also looking at HomeKit

interworking• CoAP, MQTT, DTLS, OMA LWM2M

76

– IoT is not a particular technology nor a particular device – it is about embedding connectivity - via sensors and actuators -

into devices and sharing data across them

– Energy efficiency and wireless connectivity are key in making IoT work

– Heterogeneous mix of wireless technologies are used, some are competing, and others to cover a wide variety of use cases serving

diverse requirements in various environments

– Low power, low rate personal area network technologies - such as those based on IEEE 802.15.4 - have proven instrumental

in driving sensor implementations

– Cellular, WiFi and low power wide area communication technologies serve as a backbone for transferring the collected data to the

cloud

– LPWA technologies and networks are changing already the rules of competition by proposing new disruptive business models,

thanks to tailored technology, well dimensioned from the beginning with the true fundamental and simple primary needs from

major industrial IoT:

– (Very) Low Power

– (Very) Long Range

– (Very) Low Cost (TCO)

– This allows new actors to join the Connected Economy, by adopting available & affordable wireless technology, with simple and

fast roll-out.

Conclusion