Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network (MOCN)

ABSTRACT


INTRODUCTION
Distribution of reliable BTS networks with high system capacity, especially in new areas, pose challenges for Mobile Network Operator (MNO) in procuring devices and installations for upgrading or establishing new towers [1] [5].To overcome this, some MNOs need to prepare strategy, one of which is network sharing.Network sharing model between MNOs becomes an alternative to developing telecommunications companies in various countries because it allows sharing of spectrum and BTS in the same working scheme.Network sharing can be a solution to expedite network deployment, especially in rural or remote areas [2].One of the five network sharing models is Multiple Operator Core Network (MOCN).MOCN is a collaborative telecommunications network architecture proposed by multiple MNOs to integrate or utilize network resources together.MOCN is vital in the mobile telecommunications industry, especially in the context of network virtualization and technology.It can help MNOs reduce investment costs in network infrastructure while maintaining high-quality services.The basic idea behind MOCN arrangement is that one Radio Access Network (eNodeB) will provide network access to multiple MNOs, where each MNO maintains its core network.MNOs can also combine their frequencies to increase capacity.The integration of MOCN will extend network coverage and enhance capacity, resulting in better network quality for users [3][6].In line of this, the author seizes the opportunity of this MOCN as the research topic for the final project.The author focuses on the analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) for the BTS MOCN network (pair colocation) and the standalone BTS network (not-pair), comparing their KPI performances to determine whether using the BTS MOCN network or BTS not-pair network yields better results.The objective of this study is to obtain technical findings regarding the reliability of BTS MOCN compared to BTS not-pair networks.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The network sharing model is where operators or MNOs (Mobile Network Operators), as service providers, share the utilization of telecommunications network infrastructure, encompassing passive infrastructure (passive sharing) and active infrastructure (active sharing), both on the radio access network side and on the core network side [9][14] [15].

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)

MOCN and Not Pair
MOCN is a configuration that shares RF module and antenna resources by combining the frequencies of two MNOs while maintaining each MNO's core network.MOCN can be applied to two or more MNOs, with one of them acting as the Master Operator (MOP).On the other hand, a not pair BTS is a configuration done by an operator, where the RF module and antenna are installed separately without any connection to other operators [4]

Accessability KPI
Accessability KPI refers to the measurement of how much the network services are available or accessible to users.The Accessability KPI in 4G LTE consists of several important parameter that assess the network's ability to provide services to users.Some of the key components of the Accessability KPI in 4G LTE include: S1 Signaling Success Rate, Radio Resource Controller Setup Success Rate, ERAB Setup Success Rate, Call Setup Success Rate, and Circuit Switch Fall Back Success Rate.

Retainability KPI
Retainability KPI used in mobile networks to measure and monitor the network's ability to maintain established connections or services with users over a specific period without interruptions or disruptions.The Retainability KPI in 4G LTE include Drop Call Rate.

Service Integrity KPI
Service Integrity KPI used in a mobile network to measure and monitor the integrity or quality of services provided to users during a specific period of time.The key components of the Service Integrity KPI in 4G LTE include: Downlink Throughput and Uplink Throughput.

METHOD 3.1. Equipment
In this research, in general, the following tools are needed:

Research Samples
The research was conducted by collecting network KPI data from 4 (four) sample sites according to the research scenario.These sites include LTE_DANAU_SENTARUM_PL located on Danau Sentarum Street with MOCN configuration where IM3 serves as the Master Operator, LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL situated on Wonobaru 1 alley with MOCN configuration where 3ID acts as the Master Operator, IM3 LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP on Diponegoro Street with a non-pair configuration, and 3ID

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network (MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)
LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL on Putri Candramidi Street with a non-pair configuration.These four sites are used as scenarios for collecting KPI (Key Performance Indicator) data in this research, as depicted in Figure 2.

Research Methods
The research method used in this study is described in a flowchart as outlined in Figure 3 as follows:

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this final project research, KPI 4G network data was collected on July 4th and July 18th 2023 from the Evolved Packet Core (EPC) server at the Base Station Controller (BSC) owned by PT.Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison Pontianak.The data was collected 4 sample sites according to the research scenarios, namely the LTE_DANAU_ SENTARUM_PL site with IM3 as the Master Operator in MOCN configuration, the LTE_KOTA_BARU_PTK_PL site with 3ID as the Master Operator in MOCN configuration, the IM3 LTE_SANTIKA_PONTIANAK_EP site with a not pair configuration, and the 3ID LTE_ABDUL_RAHMAN_PL site with a not pair configuration.

Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network
(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)

Analysis and Comparison of S1 Signaling Success Rate
All four research sample sites exhibited good performance in S1 Signaling Success Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 99%.The highest average S1 Signaling Success Rate was observed in the BTS MOCN 3ID configuration at 99.9966%, followed by BTS not pair 3ID at 99.9944%, BTS not pair IM3 at 99.9808%, and BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.9181%.This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS in terms of S1 Signaling Success Rate.

Analysis and Comparison of RRC Setup Success Rate
All four research sample sites demonstrated good performance in RRC Setup Success Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 99%.The highest average RCC Setup Success Rate was recorded in the BTS MOCN 3ID configuration at 99.9829%, followed by BTS not pair 3ID at 99.9326%, BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.9172%, and BTS not pair IM3 at 99.7843%.This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS in terms of RRC Setup Success Rate.

Analysis and Comparison of ERAB Setup Success Rate
All four research sample sites exhibited good performance in ERAB Setup Success Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 99%.The highest average ERAB Setup Success Rate was observed in the BTS not pair 3ID configuration at 99.8949%, followed by BTS not pair IM3 at 99.8826%, BTS MOCN 3ID at 99.8344%, and BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.8146%.This indicates that the not pair BTS configuration is superior to the MOCN BTS configuration in terms of ERAB Setup Success Rate.BTS MOCN IM3 and 3ID, as well as BTS not pair 3ID, demonstrated good Uplink Throughput performance during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 2 Mbps.However, BTS not pair IM3 showed a decrease in performance during busy hours, failing to meet the KPI standard of 2 Mbps.The best average Uplink Throughput was observed in the BTS MOCN IM3 configuration at 2.54 Mbps, followed by BTS MOCN 3ID at 2.26 Mbps, BTS not pair 3ID at 2.25 Mbps, and BTS not pair IM3 at 1.27 Mbps.This indicates that the MOCN BTS configuration is superior to the not pair BTS configuration in terms of Uplink Throughput.

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Research Flowchart a. Expert Consultation Discussions were held by the author with the Head of Technical Officer at Indosat Ooredoo Hutchison Pontianak in person, and the Regional Kalimantan Network Planning Team in Balikpapan via Teams.These discussions aimed to gather data related to current telecommunications issues, existing BTS (Base

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. Average Graphic of S1 Signaling Success Rate4.2.Analysis and Comparison of RRC Setup Success RateAll four research sample sites demonstrated good performance in RRC Setup Success Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 99%.The highest average RCC Setup Success Rate was recorded in the BTS MOCN 3ID configuration at 99.9829%, followed by BTS not pair 3ID at 99.9326%, BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.9172%, and BTS not pair IM3 at 99.7843%.This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS in terms of RRC Setup Success Rate.

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Average Graphic of RRC Setup Success Rate 4.3.Analysis and Comparison of ERAB Setup Success RateAll four research sample sites exhibited good performance in ERAB Setup Success Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 99%.The highest average ERAB Setup Success Rate was observed in the BTS not pair 3ID configuration at 99.8949%, followed by BTS not pair IM3 at 99.8826%, BTS MOCN 3ID at 99.8344%, and BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.8146%.This indicates that the not pair BTS configuration is superior to the MOCN BTS configuration in terms of ERAB Setup Success Rate.

Figure 12 .
Figure 12.Average Graphic of Uplink Throughput

4. Analysis and Comparison of Call Setup Success Rate
Figure 7. Average Graphic of ERAB Setup Success Rate 4.All four research sample sites showed good performance in Call Setup Success Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 98%.The highest average Call Setup Success Rate was observed in the BTS not pair 3ID configuration at 99.9642%, followed by BTS MOCN 3ID at 99.9576%, BTS MOCN IM3 at 99.6506%, and BTS not pair IM3 at 99.6485%.This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS in terms of Call Setup Success Rate.
6 Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network (MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro)

. Analysis and Comparison of CSFB Success Rate
All four research sample sites demonstrated good performance in CSFB Success Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 98%.The highest average CSFB Success Rate was recorded in the BTS MOCN IM3 configuration at 99.9922%, followed by BTS MOCN 3ID at 99.9900%, BTS not pair IM3 at 99.9631%, and BTS not pair 3ID at 99.9612%.This indicates that the MOCN BTS configuration is superior to the not pair BTS configuration in terms of CSFB Success Rate.

. Analysis and Comparison of Drop Call Rate
All four research sample sites exhibited good performance in Drop Call Rate during busy hours, meeting KPI standards below 2%.The best average Drop Call Rate was observed in the BTS MOCN 3ID configuration at 0002%, BTS not pair 3ID at 0.0004%, BTS MOCN IM3 at 0.0017%, and BTS not pair IM3 at 0.0020%.This indicates that the 3ID-managed BTS still outperforms the IM3-managed BTS in terms of Drop Call Rate.
Network KPI Analysis in Network Sharing Technology Configuration Based on Multi-Operator Core Network(MOCN)(Andreas Gunawan Widiantoro) 0.

. Analysis and Comparison of Call Setup Success Rate
BTS MOCN IM3 and 3ID, as well as BTS not pair 3ID, demonstrated good Downlink Throughput performance during busy hours, meeting KPI standards above 10 Mbps.However, BTS not pair IM3 showed a decrease in performance during busy hours, failing to meet the KPI standard of 10 Mbps.The best average Downlink Throughput was recorded in the BTS MOCN 3ID configuration at 15.75 Mbps, followed by BTS MOCN IM3 at 15.18 Mbps, BTS not pair 3ID at 13.16 Mbps, and BTS not pair IM3 at 10.82 Mbps.This indicates that the MOCN BTS configuration is superior to the not pair BTS configuration in terms of Downlink Throughput.