Internet of Space - Communication Systems for Future Space-bases Internet Services
2 likes1,391 views
1) The document discusses the potential for satellite constellations in low Earth orbit (LEO) to enable a space-based internet through providing global connectivity with lower latency than traditional geostationary satellites. 2) Emerging LEO constellations from companies like SpaceX, OneWeb, and Telesat promise speeds close to fiber with nearly full global coverage and latency around 25ms. 3) For the space internet to be realized, challenges around developing low-cost user terminals, multi-tenant cooperation between constellations, and addressing different traffic needs across orbital regimes must be overcome.
Internet of Space - Communication Systems for Future Space-bases Internet Services
- 1. Internet of Space Communication Systems for Future Space-based Internet Services Paulo Mendes Senior Scientist Wireless Communications CTO/XRC, Central Research and Technology Airbus May 2nd, 2019 European Wireless Conference 2019 Aarhus, Denmark paulo.mendes@airbus.com http://www.paulomilheiromendes.com These slides do not reflect the view of Airbus
- 2. 2 At the Beginning Weather, TV, Radio, and Telephony Telstar 1: World´s first active communication satellite (1962) • A simple single-transponder low-earth-orbit (LEO) satellite In 1973 the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation began distributing its video programming to Canadian customers using the Anik A satellite By the 1990s, satellite communications would be the primary means of distributing TV programs around the world. Most commercial voice satellite services are provided by systems operating in the L-band by Iridium, Inmarsat, Globalstar and Thuraya. Telephone calls to satellite terminals are done by dialling numbers assigned to the Global Mobile Satellite System. Geostationary satellites can provide relatively high data speeds: newer satellites using Ku band to achieve downstream data speeds up to 506 Mbit/s.
- 3. 3 And then … Towards data-driven networking It is widely recognized that the world is increasingly data-driven, cloud-based and transnational, creating an increasing demand to move large quantities of data quickly and securely around the globe. Data usage has drastically increased in the last 10 years More data created in the past two years than ever before 2015: barrier of 1 Zeta Byte of global traffic undertaken. Forecast: data demand to grown exponentially
- 4. 4 Data-driven, cloud-based transnational services are being boosted by a new generation of technologies and demand for always-on data access everywhere based on green communications. IoT M2M Autonomous Vehicles Green Networks Always-on Connectivity So, how can Satellite Systems remain relevant? What would be the role of High Altitude Pseudo Satellites? And then … Towards data-driven networking
- 5. 5 Geostationary Satellites Not designed for data services Multi-beam High-Throughput Satellites • More suitable to provide Internet services than single beam satellites. • Increase on spectrum resources, based on multi-beam and frequency reuse. • Higher spectral efficiency modulation and coding. ! capacity from 70 Gbps to 150 Gbps Example: • Ka-Sat with 4 multi-feed antennas • Configured with 82 spot beams Bent pipe Single Beam • Satellites in Geostationary Orbit (GEO) suffer from high latency and provide little throughout. • Annoying for voice and video applications. • Limiting factor for data communications.
- 6. 6 Next Generation Satellites Designed for data services GEO • Strong for video broadcasting Space Internet Architecture • Data-driven services • IoT and M2M • 4G/5G backhaul/fronthaul • Enterprise connectivity • Connected mobility
- 7. 7 Space Internet Global data services High Throughput On Board Processing Low Latency Value Added Markets On-board routing and switching + multi-beam technology + new LEO systems From satellites as “gap-fillers” ! To truly network of satellites. Satellite networks operating as full-duplex spatial extensions of terrestrial networks.
- 8. 8 Space Internet Bent-Pipe is too limiting Why is Bent pipe not enough? • Bent pipe = Satellites as amplifiers and repeaters. • This design only allows for modulation of data in RF. • Worked well for long transcontinental connectivity in the 1960s and 1970s… • …. and still works for video applications. • BUT it does not work well for data and poses limitations for the integration with terrestrial networks. Usability Performance Traffic Volume Multi-tenant Heat dissipation Energy consumption Applications Services Towards On Board Processing • Satellites supporting full duplex ! seamless integration with terrestrial networks (IP, MPLS, or other standard). • Satellite supporting routing and switching capabilities ! seamless extension of terrestrial networks.
- 9. 9 Regenerative Payloads • Signal is demodulated, decoded, re-encoded and modulated aboard the satellite. • On-board processing: e.g. switching packets based on MPLS or IP routing. • In-orbit data caching may also be considered. • Advantages: efficient channelization, routing capabilities. • Disadvantages: more complex; use power also to process signals. Perspective for the integration with terrestrial networks: • Higher flexibility on resource allocation. • Possibility to embed a 5G gNB or gNB DU into a satellite. • SDN and NFV will significantly reduce the risk of updated orbiting systems. Space Internet On board processing Software Defined Flexible Payloads • Reprogrammable features to address dynamic markets. • Dynamic beam shaping and tracking capabilities. • Design for wide-area networks and dynamic traffic shaping. • Rapid response for public protection and disaster recovery. Example: • Eutelsat Quantum • Inmarsat-6
- 10. 10 Space Internet Latency matters • Latency: Time taken for a packet of data to get from one designated point to another. • Ideally: latency close to zero in order to create a smooth user experience. LEO at 600 km LEO at 1500 km MEO at 10000 km Elevation angle Path Distance D (km) Delay (ms) Distance D (km) Delay (ms) Distance D (km) Delay (ms) UE: 10° satellite - UE 1932.24 6,440 3647.5 12,158 14018.16 46.727 GW: 5° satellite - gateway 2329.01 7.763 4101.6 13.672 14539.4 48.464 90° satellite - UE 600 2 1500 5 10000 33.333 Bent pipe satellite One way delay Gateway-satellite_UE 4261.2 14.204 7749.2 25.83 28557.6 95.192 Round Trip Delay Twice 8522.5 28.408 15498.4 51.661 57115.2 190.38 Regenerative satellite One way delay Satellite -UE 1932.24 6.44 3647.5 12.16 14018.16 46.73 Round Trip Delay Satellite-UE-Satellite 3864.48 12.88 7295 24.32 28036.32 93.45 3GPP TR 38.811 V15.0.0 – Study for New Radio (NR) to support non terrestrial networks (Release 15) • Satellite networks: • The closer to earth, the less latency there is. • LEO satellites orbiting the earth at around 1,500km ! 25 times closer than GEO satellites (36,000km) and 5 times closer than MEO satellites (8,000km) • Case: LEO for data networking becomes compelling, bring latency to value around 12 ms. ! 5 ms when the satellite is in a 90 degree angle. Typical LEO attitudes on range of (600-1200) km at low elevation of (0-10) º ! fraction of Earth covered = 1.69% to 7.95%.
- 12. 12 Federated LEO System Example -- Starlink Network • Expect latency over large distances (> 3000 Km) to be lower than terrestrial optical network. (Prof. Mark Handley @ UCL) • Expected free-space optical links of 100 Gb/s or higher (Speed of light in vacuum 47% higher than on glass). • 12,000 satellites with a bandwidth of about 240Tbps. • Potential new routing schemes, e.g. path-aware; data-centric. MEO System Example -- O3B network • 16 satellites to provide services to the “Other 3 billion”. • Ka-band multi-beam HTS (up to 1.2 Gbps per beam). • Services: mobile backhauling; IP trunking (MNOs). • RTT of 125 ms < ITU video and voice requirements (75 ms delay). • Second generation (O3B mpower) “first multi-terabit system” in orbit. • Software-defined routing between GEO and MEO fleets. Space Internet Satellite constellations
- 13. 13 Space Internet Satellite constellations: Leveraging inter-satellite links Telesat LEO simulations of traffic moving over only inter-satellite links Round-trip time at the network layer including processing latency for system and inter-satellite links.
- 14. 14 Space Internet Satellite constellations enabling real-time communications Source:
- 15. 15 Space Internet Changing tides with satellite constellations Emerging LEO constellations: • Promise nearly fibber-optic speeds, global coverage, and lower latency. • How many constellations? Maybe 2 or 3… • O3B got first to the MEO orbit. • OneWeb launched first to LEO orbit; • SpaceX and Telesat, already with prototype satellites in orbit. • How flexible? • Satellite life time of 5 to 10 years ! consider for fast-moving broadband market and technology. Success factors: • Bridging the digital divide is a laudable goal. • Terminals: • Low-cost, easy-to-install. • Able of steering beams towards moving satellites. • Backhauling may be a successful market with or without cheap antennas. • Consumer broadband is not the only potential success factor: • Emergent markets are in-flight connectivity, maritime, government networks, driverless cars, IoT and M2M. Chancing Tides: • Changing traditional value chain: from manufacturing and launch through operators and service providers, as well as customers. • Changing stakeholders: insurance providers, regulatory agencies/spectrum administrators, financial community sorting out the implications. • Changing manufacturers: expecting constellation construction contracts by promoting new smallsat platforms. • Changing providers: aiming to adapt or develop new launching technology for constellations. • Changing ground-station operators: installing new antennas to provide turn-key solutions for constellation operators.
- 16. 16 Space Internet Satellite constellations • 78 satellites in Ka-band frequencies. • Provide inter-satellite optical links. • Goal: serve broadband markets for energy, maritime, government and enterprise vertical markets. • 292 satellites in Ka-band spectrum (right to expand it in V-band). • Goal: provide high-speed broadband for maritime, aviation, remote enterprise and government, and cover cellular backhaul. • 1 testing satellite • Provide low data rate communications for IoT and M2M applications. • New verticals include smart cities, mining, agriculture, and transportation and predictive maintenance. • 75 satellites • Provide low data rate communications for IoT or M2M applications. • 900 satellites in Ku-band frequencies. • Small, low-cost terminal with cellular and Wi-Fi connectivity. • Goal: bridging the digital divide; home networks; connected cars, trains and planes; cellular backhaul. • 4,425 satellites in Ku- and Ka-band frequencies. • Provide inter-satellite optical links. • Goal: provide broadband connectivity to underserved areas of the globe, and competitive services to urban areas.
- 17. 17 Space Internet Low cost communications How much will we be charged per GB over LEO? – Lets look at SpaceX / Starlink • Deployment cost = $10 billion (satellite estimated live duration of 5 years). • Replacement cost = $4 billion (as hardware becomes cheaper and easier to produce and launch into space). • Aggregate downlink capacity of the full deployment is estimated to be 240 Tbps. • Assuming only a10% utilization and earnings of 3×the deployment cost ! ~ $0.06 per GB. Comparable to the $0.003 to $0.03 per GB that we pay today. LEO vs GEO communication cost: • GEO connectivity price decreased with the development of HTS satellites. • LEO expected to reduce cost per Gpbs in comparison to GEO. • CAPEX to deliver a Gbps: • LEO (OneWeb) 260k USD vs 2 to 9 million USD for GEO. LEO vs 5G: • LEO may end up not being competitive with terrestrial network when fixed infrastructures are already there. • Using satellite and especially LEO as a backhauling/fronthauling technology will be a way to complement rather than compete. “Gearing up for the 21st century space race” in Proc of ACM HotNets 2018
- 18. 18 Space Internet Satellite constellations: enablers Source: Low Cost Terminals Multi Markets Multi Tenants Multi Orbits
- 19. 19 Space Internet Low cost terminals Similarities with Mobile Sector • Develop low cost terminals (antenna, distributed power system and modems) • Increase impact the satellite communication markets as Nokia phones impacted the mobile markets on the mid-1990s. • Similarity between the mobile sector in the late 1990s and the current satellite communications sector: • Improvements in technology, decreasing cost of infrastructure, new economic models. LEO Antennas • MEO satellite systems ! conventional parabolic dish antenna technology suited for motionless GEO satellites. • LEO satellites ! high number of moving small satellites poses challenges for terminal antenna. • Potential solutions: • Electronically steered, or flat panel antennas (e.g SatixFy). • Optical beam-forming modules to create scalable conformal antennas (e.g. Isotropic Systems): • May cost 70 to 95 percent less than existing phased array and flat panel technology. • Consume 80 percent less power. • Require 70 percent less electronic components.
- 20. 20 Space Internet Multi-tenant cooperation Heterogeneity as key for cooperation • Expectation: competition would increase with more LEO constellations. • BUT: more differences between these LEO systems ! less competition there is. • Major constellations are quite different in terms of CAPEX profile, system promoters, system design, and target markets. Target markets • LeoSat ! high volume broadband markets. • OneWeb ! connectivity anywhere. • Iridium and Eutelsat ! low data rate communications for IoT or M2M. Challenges • Regulation, finance, commercial goals, and user terminals. • Time to gain market access and develop distribution networks ! delay ramp-up and commercial returns. • Competition of GEO/MEO communications satellite systems, such as Viasat-3 or O3b mPower. • So, some projects may join forces to overcome operational challenges.
- 21. 21 Space Internet Multi-orbit solutions Complementing LEO • Relying only on LEO availability may impair performance: • LEO satellites have intermittent availability. • Temporary communication blockage in some locations. • Not enough wireless resources for all the users in some locations. • GEO and MEO are more predictable. • The right solution: you can access the right satellite to carry the right traffic in the right way. Enablers • Operators (e.g. Telesat) with fleets spanning multiple orbits. • Potential cooperation between operators (e.g. OneWeb and Intelsat). • Terminals serving multiple orbits and multiple frequencies at the same time. Enhanced traffic management • Traffic differentiation. • GEO ! broadcast services based on HTS platforms. • MEO / LEO ! low delay Internet service provision.
- 22. 22 Space Internet Value added markets • In sectors such as telecommunications, multi-national enterprise, government services, aerospace, maritime and energy, LEO systems can: • Solve essential communications and connectivity issues. • Meet the ever-growing demand to move large quantities of data quickly and securely around the world. • For a typical Fortune 1000 company: 10 percent increase in data accessibility ! > 57 million Euros additional net income. Cellular Backhauling and Fronthauling Government Enterprise Secure communications Industry 4.0 Connecting Oil, Gas facilities Monitoring and operating remote equipment Connected Mobility Connected aircraft and vessel Autonomous vehicles
- 23. 23 Space Internet Value added markets Cellular Backhauling and Fronthauling Government Enterprise Secure communications Industry 4.0 Monitoring and operating remote equipment Connected Mobility Connected Vehicles Autonomous vehicles • Security and resilience are key attributes with a ‘touchless satellite architecture’. • Carrying traffic between any points on earth without touching the earth’s surface (isolated from any terrestrial infrastructure). • Airlines, and cruise lines are demanding for more bandwidth for consumer devices and for Internet access anywhere. • Autonomous vehicles require frequent upgrades independently of their location. • Narrowband services means bi- directional communication (e.g. for firmware updates, monitoring). • As IoT visions such as “smart cities” become more widely deployed, high performing LEO constellations will be a cost-effective way to connect devices. • Standard-based approach ! LEOs becoming a core component in the telecommunication infrastructure versus a stand-alone proprietary network (e.g. GEO). • Integration into cellular networks will increase LEOs role in core markets such as IoT and M2M, while fulfilling the 5G Vision.
- 24. 24 Space Internet Leveraging mobile internet services Vision: • Internet access from space may drastically change the way we get online. • Access to all 7.3 billion people. • Satellites operating at data rates of Tb/s in LEO orbit providing overall capacity of one Zetabyte/month. • Foreseen important role of Space Communications, in the success of the Digital Age. Advise from 5GPP: To achieve expected capacity, coverage, reliability, latency and improvements in energy consumption, the 5G architecture is expected to: Run over a converged optical-wireless-satellite infrastructure for network access, backhauling and fronthauling with the possibility of transmitting digital and modulated signals over the physical connections.
- 25. 25 Global Access to the Internet: • About 47% of the global population of 7.6 billion people does not have internet access. Global Data Services Mobile internet access
- 26. 26 Wireless coverage: • “5G is projected to cover more than 40 percent of the world’s population in 2024” – Ericsson Mobility report, Nov 2018 • Looking at 3G/4G availability in 95 countries: 93 countries: > 50% of time; 23 countries > 90% of the time. Global Data Services Mobile internet access
- 27. 27 Consistency of wireless services: • There's a huge variation in speed between the slowest 3G network (1 Mbps) and the fastest 4G network (30 Mbps). • Japan: 2nd in 3G/4G availability; but 9th in overall speed. Global Data Services Mobile internet access
- 28. 28 LTE Coverage with gaps within areas of good coverage LTE End-to-end (E2E) Mobile Latency Will require significant deployment investment 5G promises E2E mobile latency of ~ 5 ms, BUT E2E mobile latency depends on density of devices, distance of the RAN, processing delay in network devices, network load. E2E Internet Latency Outside the control of the 5G operator. May pass by the deployment of Edge Computing 4G coverage today – Gaps within areas of good coverage 5G – Network of Networks aiming to reach extensive KPIs Space Internet Increasing the capability of cellular networks
- 29. 29 Space Internet Cellular / Satellite integration 5G will use frequency bands similar to satellites (mmWaves) ! Satellite could be integrated into 5G (Backhauling / Fronthauling). This kind of complementarily is currently limited. Solutions exist but are often proprietary and costly. NG RAN architecture in NTN with gNB-DU processed payload NG RAN architecture in NTN with gNB processed payloadData network gNB UE NTN Remote Radio Unit 5G CN NR-Uu N1/2/3 over SRI N1/2/3 N6 NTN NG Radio access network Data network gNB - DUUE NTN Remote Radio Unit gNB- CU 5G CNNR - Uu F1 over SRI N1/2/3 N6 NTN NG Radio access network NRUu gNBDU
- 30. 30 Space Internet Support for efficient Edge Computing Reliable backhaul load – Example: autonomous cars • The data generated by each car would be: cameras at 20-60 mbps; radar upwards at 10 kbps; sonar at 10-100 kbps; GPS at 50 kbps; LIDAR between 10-70 mbps. • Cumulating: the data each car will require almost 4000 GB of data which means 4TB of data daily. 1 ms latency: • Industrial control systems. • Autonomous driving. • Smart grid. 10 ms latency: • Tele-medical applications • Augmented reality. • Process automation. 50 ms latency: • Gaming and virtual reality. • Cooperative driving. • UAV control. Deployment challenges: • Where to place the edge? • Orchestration of a highly distributed multi-tenant system. • Strict guarantees all the time. • Integrated with the (public, private) cloud.
- 31. 31 Space Internet Support for efficient Edge Computing The edge is a (set of) networked nodes where computational and storage resources may be accessed in the short time frame. Where is the Edge? by Vodafone by Vapor IO Kinetic Edge micro data center operating alongside a cellular tower.
- 32. 32 Space Internet Support for efficient Edge Computing The edge of communications • Placing edge nodes adjacent to existing cellular transmitters ! leverage their existing fiber to communicate with one another with minimum latency. • Example: Vapor Kinetic Edge has modules with 44 server rack units (RU) and up to 150 kilowatts of server power. • A cluster of six fiber-linked modules would host 0.9 megawatts. • Deploying distributed physical nodes connected by fiber ! highly resilient edge infrastructure that can be treated like a logical, single entity. Can we reduce deployment cost by using LEO links?
- 33. 33 Space Internet Support for efficient Edge Computing The Capability of the Edge Power perspective • We have milliwatts at one end of distributed computing (devices), and gigawatts at the other (cloud). • World's big data centres have a total power consumption of about 100GW. • Startup Kolos planning to build a data centre in northern Norway with 1000MW. • Most equipment racks use 3-5kW, but some can go to 20kW if power and cooling is available. • Device edge have very limited power (e.g. smartphone 1-3W, IoT gateway 5-10 W). • Micro data-centers near cell towers might be 50kW container sized units (135KW – Vapor IO). • Note: a typical macro-cell tower might have a power supply of 1-2kW. Rough calculation: Total realistic "network edge” will account for less than 1% of total aggregate computational capability.
- 34. 34 Space Internet Support for efficient Edge Computing Mitigate the low capacity at the edge Orchestration of a large number of edges (at base stations) Rely on a lower number of higher power edges (at micro data centers)
- 35. Lower distances between network equipment, but potentially higher processing delay 35 Space Internet Support for efficient Edge Computing Mitigate the low capacity at the edge Higher distance between network equipment, but potentially lower processing delay In live network test, the delay value may be easily reach 50 ms and even 100 ms. Delay values may be in the order of 50ms, with single LEO satellite Difference can be higher in a edge-to-cloud scenario Latency over larger distances (>3000Km) towards cloud centers < than terrestrial fiber optics
- 36. 36 Space Internet Support for efficient Edge Computing Amazon • AWS Ground Stations: 12 parabolic antennas installed at Amazon’s global regions. • Plus lower-cost antennas spread across other areas: • Allows for more connectivity and more opportunities to downlink data. • Repaves the playing field for sorting out edge computing problems. • All of this is available to customers as a service, so you’re only paying for it when you’re using it.
- 37. 37 Opportunities for Satellite Operators • Main value proposition of smallsat IoT constellations Single global network, low cost, IoT connectivity outside of cellular coverage. • However, the proportion of devices that need to be connected outside of the footprint of terrestrial networks may be limited. • Major use cases Maritime; Aerospace; Oil and gas exploration; Remote industrial facilities; Transportation services; Agriculture. Space Internet Support for Internet-of-Thinks IoT in LEO: • Low distances: less path loss ! less terminal power and antenna directivity • Advantages in terms of terminal cost and size. • Moving satellites: - Time variant communication channel - Requires a specific waveform and suitable antenna design. Hybrid terrestrial and satellite: • Solution: Low cost terrestrial IoT devices + satellite connecting aggregation terminals. • Terrestrial IoT devices = low cost. • Satellite aggregator = easier connectivity.
- 38. 38 General scenario • Satellite connected cars may ramp up: • Majority with narrowband L-band solutions and not broadband Ka-/Ku-bands. • There are three main types of connectivity applicable to connected cars: • Autonomous vehicles. • Entertainment (e.g. in-vehicle broadband connectivity and video streaming). • Industrial Internet of the car (e.g. predictive vehicle diagnostics and maintenance). Space Internet Support for connected cars Challenges • A perceived lack of value add for 100% connectivity vs. 99% cellular connectivity for most consumers • Most connected cars may remain connected solely via cellular. • Costs and various technical challenges may limit the overall growth of the satellite connected car
- 39. 39 Green System • Main boosters in the Ariane 5 satellite launcher use liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. • An entire year’s worth of Ariane 5 launches creates less greenhouse gases than one evening’s flights from New York to London. • The carbon footprint of the launcher should be spread across multiple satellites, which operate for ~15 years. • When in orbit, satellite use solar energy collected from large arrays of solar cells. Space Internet Green communication system Space debris • Space debris = defunct satellites that have not been re-orbited + fragments. • ESA Clean Space initiative considering the entire life-cycle of space activities: • EcoDesign: embedding environmental sustainability within space mission design. • CleanSat: developing technologies to prevent the creation of future debris. • Active debris removal: removing spacecraft from orbit and demonstrating in-orbit servicing of spacecraft.
- 40. 40 Space Internet Potential core functionalities On Board Processing Mesh Configuration Inter-Satellite Links Integration with Cellular Networks
- 41. 41 5G Integration (standardization) • Adoption of 3GPP-standardized New Radio over satellite. • Integration of gNB (full or DU) in satellites. • Handover management for mobile base stations. • Routing/forwarding solutions for inter-gNB communications. Cognitive Networking • Builds on cognitive radio, involving higher- layers of the protocol stack. • Distributed software agents autonomously learn network conditions, correlations and behaviours. Information-centric Networking (ICN) • Reduces communication latency. • Supports intermittent connectivity. • Supports network mobility. • Supports extra flexibility. • Embeds packet authentication and robustness against DoS attacks. Software Defined Radio /Payloads • Reduces operational risks of OBP. • Reduces product design cycles by reusing common components (e.g. RF front-ends, modular signal processing). • Extends live expectation by accommodation of new technologies. 5G CN gNB NR-Uu NG over SRI NR-Uu gNB NG over SRI NTN Gateway Xn UE 5G CN NTN Gateway Information Centric Networking Cognitive Networking 5G Integration Software Defined Radios Space Internet Core technology
- 42. 42 Space Internet Example of technical challenges: TCP/IP vs ICN TCP/IP limitations: • Internet host-centric communication models is not aligned with highly mobile scenarios with intermittent connectivity. Major advantage of ICN: • Decouples data (service) from the device creating/ storing it, though location independent naming. • Publish/subscribe information model which is robust against DoS attacks. • Allows tackling problems related with device mobility (user device, vehicles, satellites). • Facilitates data caching in network devices (e.g. satellites, gateways). • Efficient data distribution without the need for costly overlays (e.g. IP + CDNs). • Facilitates the implementation of different dissemination models: Many/Any-to-One (e.g. IoT); One-to-Many/Any (e.g. Data distribution); Many/Any- to-Many/Any (e.g. M2M). Satellite networks augment ICN with: • Wide-area coverage. • Inherent broadcast capability (e.g. allows simultaneous update to a large number of in- network caches and forwarding schemes).
- 43. 43 Space Internet Example of technical challenges: SDN; 5G NR and Smart Routing Satellite Virtualized Network • Leverages Software Defined Networking to deliver cost efficient, high-level resources availability and flexible resources sharing at the Satellite Access Network (SAN). • SAN includes the satellite gateways and the satellite terminals. • SAN needs to be integrated in the future 5G RAN. 5G New Radio to support Non Terrestrial Networking (NTN) • 3GPP channel model - 3GPP TR 38.811 • Impact of NR on NTN e.g. avoiding strict timing relations for forward compatibility and latency reduction. • OFDM family is the one getting most attention to derive the future 5G New Radio, as stated by Qualcomm. • Comparison with packet switched SAT Multiple Access Techniques: e.g. (Slotted) ALOHA Smart Routing over NTN • Solutions for NTNs including constellations based on different or combined orbits or platform types. • Exploit inter-satellite links to reduce ground infrastructure. • Exploiting in-network data caching to reduce latency. • Path computation on gateways or regenerative satellites.
- 44. 44 Space Internet Final thought: Space-enabled interconnection market Motivation • Bandwidth of each satellite may be at most just a few Gbps, but aggregate capacity expected to reach multiple Tbps. • Universal low-latency broadband access may bring significant benefits for the Internet. Idea • Integrate Space Networks into the Internet backbone as a global point of exchange. • Space Networks (e.g. OneWeb, TeleSat, SpaceX) sell connectivity to terrestrial Internet Service Providers. Challenges • Suitable interconnection models including transit providers, last-mile providers. • Relative movement between satellites in different orbits ! customized inter-satellite routing protocols for optimal path discovery between source and destination satellites. • LEO connectivity is intermittent with short, yet frequent, disconnection bursts ! may be a problem if exposed to inter-domain traffic (may increase BGP stability problem). • Handover between ground-stations and satellites is frequent: ground stations are within the footprint of a satellite only for a few minutes. • Bandwidth fluctuation, due to bursty Internet traffic and oscillation of satellite link capacity due natural phenomena. • To solve the connectivity volatility issue new trends such as path-aware routing and data-centric routing could be used. T. Klenze et al.“Networking in Heaven as on Earth” ACM HotNets 2018
- 45. Internet of Space Communication Systems for Future Space-based Internet Services Paulo Mendes Senior Scientist Wireless Communications CTO/XRC, Central Research and Technology Airbus May 2nd, 2019 European Wireless Conference 2019 Aarhus, Denmark paulo.mendes@airbus.com http://www.paulomilheiromendes.com