- This topic is empty.
27th May 2010 at 06:16 #62896jackGuest
in my network optimizer set the
HO DL AVERAGING WINDOW FOR LEVEL=6
and HO DL AVERAGING WINDOW FOR QUALITY=3
i want o know what is the reason of set different averaging window size for level & quality.
the same values of averaging window size set for uplink ho.27th May 2010 at 18:32 #62897pixGuest
it is usual to detect quality variation quicker than level variation. So that Quality HO are triggered earlier.
Now “3” seems a little too fast, but it really depends on your network (urban + SFH 1×1 ? in this case 3 could work)
pix27th May 2010 at 20:00 #62898jackGuest
thanx for your reply
yes,it is urban and SFH 1×1
but i dont understand what is relation between AVERAGING WINDOW SIZE for quality and frequency hopping SFH 1×1??
meantime i think from the perception view it is better that network quickly trigger a Quality HO instead of level HO.is’nt it??28th May 2010 at 14:53 #62899pixGuest
Wow, I’m good ! you give me just one parameter setting, and I can describe your network topology 😀
The thing is that urban area = high traffic
SFH 1×1 = very sensitive to high traffic (more traffic = more frequencies are used at the same time = more interference)
therefore, if you want to protect your network quality, you must quickly detect any quality degradation.
As soon as a quality degrades, then the Ho should be triggered, in order to locate the MS into a new cell.
Doing this will minimize the amount of MS generating interferences, in your “sensitive” network.
Reducing the Avg Qual window detects a quality degradation quicker.
Therefore, the HO is triggered quiker than before, yes.
pix28th May 2010 at 19:54 #62900jackGuest
thanx a lot pix
i need to know your birthday.
i have one surprise for you!!29th May 2010 at 08:13 #62901pixGuest
jack, that’s a strange request…
let’s say my birthday is today then !1st June 2010 at 04:54 #62902jackGuest
i am sorry for delay in answer
i really thanx to you