Improving LTE/EPC signalling for sporadic data with

a control-plane based transmission procedure

Izuru Sato

Ahmed Bouabdallah, Xavier Lagrange

Network System Laboratories

Fujitsu Laboratories Limited
Kawasaki, Japan
sato.izuru@jp.fujitsu.com

Institut TELECOM ; TELECOM Bretagne

Universit europenne de Bretagne
Rennes, France
{firstname.name}@telecom-bretagne.eu

Abstract The architecture and the protocols of LTE/EPC were

designed to deliver high transmission rates with QoS
requirements. In order to be able to guarantee different levels of
QoS each transmission is based on a bearer, which need to be set
up within the network. It then requires to store contexts in the
various entities of the network and to set up several tunnels or
connections both in the user and the control planes. We consider
the Short Message Service (SMS), which is a very simple but
popular service and analyze the number of signaling messages
that are exchanged within the core network and the access
network to transmit one data message. We then propose a new
procedure based on a set of simple messages to transport such
isolated messages only in the control plane. We show that this
procedure may generate additional signaling in some cases but is
efficient as soon as the proportion of sporadic traffic is not
negligible. This procedure is generic and may be used for any
type of sporadic traffic, which will be increased in the next few
years with the deployment of wirelessly connected smart devices.
Keywords: LTE/EPC, SMS, IMS, paging, idle mode, low bit
rate transmission

I.

INTRODUCTION

The Long Term Evolution / Evolved Packet Core

(LTE/EPC) may be defined as a generic IP access network. As
opposed to previous networks like GSM that provides a large
set of integrated services, LTE/EPC deliberately provides IP
packet transmission only. The EPC network is seen as an IPCAN (IP Connectivity Access Network) to external packet data
networks (PDN) or overlay networks like IMS (IP Multimedia
System).
Other objectives of LTE/EPC were to provide high
transmission rates with quality of service (QoS) guarantees and
low latencies [1]. Before making any transmission in LTE/EPC
it is necessary to set up a bearer. The bearer may be seen as a
path between two end-points that is made of several tunnels
through the network. A QoS level is associated to a given
bearer. Due to the always-on feature, a default bearer is always
set on. However, in order to avoid excessive resource usage the
bearer in the access network is only set up when some traffic is
really sent. When a terminal needs to send or receive data,
several tunnels or connections both in the user and the control
planes should then be set up. Due to the generic property of

LTE/EPC the same procedure is used for any type of service:

web access, voice call and Short Message Service (SMS).
The SMS is a text based communication which is popular
and available on virtually any mobile terminals. A survey
reports that 2.052 trillion SMS messages has been sent and
received annually [2]. In 2G and 3G networks SMS messages
are sent using control messages sent over Control Plane. In
LTE, SMS messages are sent using IP packets containing SIP
message as its payload.
Releasing and acquiring radio access network resources
requires several messages exchanged between nodes
comprising the operator network. This overhead is not an issue
when a service sends or receives many packets before the radio
access resources are released. Music file downloading is an
example of such service. When the data sent or received by a
service is short and sent sporadically, the overhead will be an
issue. One example of such service is the SMS in LTE.
This paper proposes a framework to reduce network
resource usage by using only the control plane to send short
sporadic user data such as SMS messages. It is organized as
follows. In sections 2 and 3 the realization of SMS in LTE is
explained. In section 4 new packet notification messages to
realize our proposal are presented. Section 5 includes an
analysis of the signaling load. Section 6 concludes the paper.
II.

SMS SERVICE OVER LTE/EPC

A. SMS basics
SMS can fundamentally be seen as a push service providing
an asynchronous limited-size text transfer between two mobile
terminals. An intermediate server (the SMS Center) allows to
split up the global transfer into two temporally uncorrelated
operations, namely the submission of the text and its delivery.
These two ones are acknowledged through reports indicating
their respective success or failure, bringing by this way some
global reliability to the service. Last but not least, sending or
receiving an SMS necessitates very few network resources and
can be concurrently executed with a current voice
communication or data session.

this paper was published at WPMC 2011

(The 14th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications, 3-6 october 2013, Brest, France)

B. Embedding SMS in the IMS messaging service

The SMS service can be easily embedded in the IMS
messaging service [3], if one accepts to loose its asynchronous
dimension. To understand why, let us briefly recall how this
later works. The messaging service defined in the IMS relies
completely on the capabilities of the SIP protocol [4,5]. The
basic approach called page mode messaging [3] allows a oneshot text transfer through the MESSAGE message, which can
convey a text in its body with the general 1500-byte SIP size
messages limitation.
In order to illustrate how SMS over LTE/EPC works when
it is embedded in the IMS messaging service we consider two
users Alice and Bob and a scenario in which Alice sends an
SMS to Bob. The same example is kept in following sections.
Alice has an ordinary IMS terminal and Bob has a mobile UE
(User Equipment). We assume that the UE of Bob is attached
to the LTE/EPC and that both Bob and Alice are registered as
IMS users. The SIP URI of Bob is SIP:Bob@op. Alice
composes her text and sends it as usual. For sake of simplicity,
neither Alice nor Bob gets a value-added service in its profile.
MESSAGE obeys the classical IMS routing rules going
through the S- and P- proxys associated respectively to Alice
and Bob (see Figure 1). Note that the one-hop 100 Trying is
not mandatory [4,5]. The success of the receipt of the
MESSAGE message is confirmed by the 200 OK response.

This approach can be fruitful when restricted to IMS

networks or more generally to SIP-based ones. But for
interoperability with legacy networks, a dedicated gateway
the IP-SM-GW has been introduced in IMS since Release 7
[6,7]. Acting as an application server from the IMS side, it
behaves like an SMS Center on the circuit side. This gateway
can also interact with the HSS/HLR through Diameter and
MAP protocols and the charging servers entities of the operator
[6,7].
C. Pros and cons of this embedding
We can quote that the general SIP-based messaging service
goes far beyond SMS in several directions. The first extension
concerns the ability to exchange messages of any size [4,5] or
containing not only text but any MIME type object. The second
one is devoted to the definition of a session mode allowing
text-based dialogue as exemplified in the instant messaging
service [3]. On the other side, as we have seen, the page mode
messaging between pure IMS terminals loses the SMS
fundamental push property. Moreover in the general case,
using a reliable transport protocol like TCP, is costly from the
point of network resources. One way consists in limiting the
size of the transported text and using UDP transport in order to
minimize the network load to one IP packet per MESSAGE
message. The new drawback which must be however quoted is
the complete unreliability of the service.
III.

SMS TRANSFER THROUGHT THE LTE/EPC NETWORK

In this section, we describe the message exchange within

the LTE/EPC that is generated when a SMS is transmitted. We
first give a reminder on the ECM (EPC Connection Management) layer.

Figure 1. Message Sequence Chart of the IMS page mode messaging

When the addressee is currently registered in, the page

mode way offers a behavior completely similar to our plain old
SMS service. In this case, the messaging service can be
transparently substituted to SMS, without requiring to the users
some changes of their habits. When the recipient is however
unregistered, the store-and-forward ability of the SMS
service, is not ensured by the messaging service. The direct
consequence is that the sender has to submit the text at a later
time, again and again until its addressee is finally registered.
This fundamental push feature can be easily compensated in
the IMS, through an AS based service which will have to store
each MESSAGE message sent to an unregistered user and
deliver it when the user is registered. Finally to reach with IMS
the same functional level as the classical SMS, the operator
must systematically and transparently associate the previous
feature to the page mode messaging service.

Figure 2. Tunnels in LTE/EPC when the mobile is in ECM-idle state

A. User plane of an UE
Two connection management states called the LTE/EPC
Connection Management (ECM) states are defined in the LTE.
They are ECM-IDLE and ECM-CONNECTED. A UE in
ECM-IDLE mode does not have a connection to MME. There
is no User Plane bearers established, which is used to send and
receive packets to and from IP-CANs. In ECM-CONNECTED
mode, there is a connection between the UE and the MME.
When there are User Plane bearers established, the UE is
always in ECM-CONNECTED state.

this paper was published at WPMC 2011

(The 14th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications, 3-6 october 2013, Brest, France)

Delivering an SMS message to an ECM-IDLE mode UE

A SIP message sent from P-CSCF is an IP packet having an
IP address of Bobs UE as its destination address. Such IP
packet will be routed to Bobs P-GW. The P-GW encapsulates
and sends the packet to Bobs UE via S-GW and eNodeB that
Bobs UE is associated with.

Figure 3. Tunnels in LTE/EPC when the mobile is in ECM-connected state

Radio resources and access bearers between eNodeB and SGW are released when a UE is not sending or receiving any
data for certain time. The UEs connection mode will be idle
mode. The network activates the UE when there are downlink
packets sent to the UE by initiating the Network Initiated
Service Request procedure.
When a SIP message is sent from P-CSCF to Bobs UE,
which is in idle mode, an IP packet containing the SIP message
is routed to the P-GW and sent to the S-GW as a GTPv1-U
encapsulated packet.
Because Bobs UE is in idle mode in this scenario, the SGW does not have a bearer to Bob. The S-GW buffers the
packet and starts Network Initiated Service Request Procedure
by sending a GTPv2-C Downlink Data Notification Message to
the MME. The MME sends S1-AP Paging message to the
eNodeBs in the Tracking Areas where the UE has registered
from. The requested eNodeBs page the UE in its areas.
The UE paged from its eNodeB responds to the MME by
sending Service Request message. If Bob could not respond in
a certain time, a timer on the MME expires and triggers the
MME to send a GTPv2-C Downlink Data Notification Reject
message to S-GW. The S-GW deletes the buffered packet
when it receives the GTPv2-C Downlink Data Notification
Reject message from MME. S-CSCF has a timer and resends
SIP message to Bob each time the timer expires. This may
trigger another paging for Bob.

Figure 4. Message Sequence Chart of SMS in the LTE/EPC network

IV.

PROPOSAL OF A PACKET NOTIFICATION SERVICE

The MME signals the eNodeB and the S-GW to establish a

bearer to the UE. The S-GW sends the buffered SIP message to
Bob through eNodeB after Network Initiated Service Request
Procedure re-establishes radio bearers to Bob.

As seen in the previous section, transmitting data in

LTE/EPC is only possible when the mobile is in ECMconnected state. Switching the mobile from ECM_idle state to
ECM_connected state generates several messages. We then
propose to add the possibility to transmit a data packet in the
control plane as shown in Figure 5 when there is isolated data.

When Bob receives the SIP message, it may return a "100

trying" message, which is not shown in Figure 4. Bob then
returns a "200 ok" message back to Alice. These messages are
sent uplink using the user plane bearer. After certain time
passed, eNodeB may release the established radio bearers using
S1-Release procedure.

Several additional messages should be defined. On the S11

interface between the S-GW and the MME, a pair of new GTPC messages is proposed, namely IP-Packet-Notification and IPPacket-Notification-Complete. These messages include the
control tunnel identification like any other GTP-C packet and
encapsulate an IP Packet.

this paper was published at WPMC 2011

(The 14th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications, 3-6 october 2013, Brest, France)

Figure 5. Transport of an IP Packet in the control plane

On the S1-MME interface, an equivalent pair of messages

is proposed, namely Packet-Notification and PacketNotification-complete. Four new RRC messages are necessary
on the radio interface: a specific paging message that indicates
that only one packet has to be transmitted on the downlink and
one packet on the uplink, a Ready-for-Notification message
sent by the UE to fulfill the 3-step handshake of the LTE
access procedure (see section 18.3 of [1]), two messages RRC
Packet Notification and Packet Notification Complete that are
the equivalent of the packet notification messages on the S11
and the S1-MME interface.
The procedure works as illustrated in Figure 6. If an IP
packet is sent by the corresponding node in the packet network
to the UE, it is transmitted by the PDN GW to the S-GW on the
default bearer, which is always kept active as it is defined in
the 3GPP recommendations. If the UE is in ECM-connected
state, the packet is forwarded to the UE through the S1-U
interface. If the UE is in ECM-idle state, the S-GW starts a
timer T1 for a very short duration (several milliseconds). If
another packet is received before T1 expires the ordinary
Network-Triggered-Service-Request procedure (see 5.3.4.3 of
[8]) is used. If no other packet is received then the IP packet is
transmitted on the control plane through the MME and a
second timer T2 is started. Note that the maximal value of T2
is larger than T1 and is typically several seconds. If a packet is
received before T2 ends then the packet is buffered and the
Network Triggered service Request procedure is used. In that
case, additional control messages are generated. If no other
packets are received, the UE stays in ECM-idle mode and no
context is established in the S-GW: no GTP-U tunnel is set up
between the S-GW and the eNodeB.
In the packet notification procedure, the IP packet is
transmitted in the control plane by the S-GW to the MME. As
the location of the UE is not known at the cell level by the
MME, a paging message should be sent on all the cells of the
list of tracking areas given to the mobile during the last
location procedure. What is proposed is just to transport the IP
packet together with the paging messages to the concerned
eNodeB (see Figure 5). The IP packet is cancelled by eNodeBs
that have no answers to their paging message and is kept only
by the eNodeB where the mobile is. The standard access
procedure is used on the radio interface and the IP packet is
only transmitted after the 3-step handshake once all possible
contentions are solved. An IP packet can be encapsulated in the
Packet-Notification-Complete message sent by the UE. It
allows an end-to-end answer at the IP level.

Figure 6. The packet notification procedure

The proposed procedure is generic and does not require any

deep inspection of the content of the GTP-U message by the SGW. Timer T1 is optional and Timer T2 may be very simple
because no specific action is required when T2 expires. When a
GTP-U packet is received and if the UE is in ECM-idle state,
the S-GW has just to store the current time and to set up a flag.
If another packet is received and if the flag is activated, the SGW has just to compare the current time and the stored time. If
the difference is larger than the T2 value, then the packet is
assumed to be isolated and the proposed packet notification is
used. If the difference is smaller then the standard service
activation procedure is used. Furthermore, T2 does not require
a fine tuning: it can be over dimensioned. Let us assume it has
an infinite value, then the standard LTE/EPC service activation
is always used except for the very first packet.
V.

SIGNALLING LOAD ANALYSIS

Very high data rates are available in the core network.

Hence, the total amount of signaling exchanged within the
network is no more an issue as we can assume quasi-infinite
link capacity. However, as nodes are able to manage a large
number of subscribers, the processing limitation can be the
bottleneck. We then base our analysis on the number of
messages received by each node. Any message concerning a
particular subscriber that is received by a node triggers an
interruption and that node should look for the context of the
concerned user.
We consider 2 types of traffic: web sessions and SMS. Let
be the SMS traffic proportion defined as the number of SMS
transmissions divided by the total number of both SMS
transmissions and web sessions. We compare the cost (i.e. the
number of messages received by a given node) for the standard
procedure and for the packet notification when increases.
An SMS session consists of one downlink packet
containing the SMS Message and one uplink message

this paper was published at WPMC 2011

(The 14th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications, 3-6 october 2013, Brest, France)

containing a 200 OK message. The traffic model of web

sessions is taken from [9] for non-real time services at 2048
kbit/s and is defined as follows (see Figure 7). A session
consists of a sequence of several packet calls, where Npc =5 is
the average number of packet calls per session. During a packet
call, on average 25 packets are generated. The time between
packet calls is the reading time and has a mean of 412 seconds.
These parameters are geometrically distributed. As LTE/EPC
was designed to be very reactive, we assume that both the UE
and the MME switch from MME-connected to MME-idle state
between two successive packet calls. Average inter-arrival time
between packets within a packet call is exponentially
distributed with a mean value Dd =1.95 ms.

the cost is 30.77-28.77 . The breakeven points of these

solutions are =0.77 and =0.20 respectively. See Figure 8 for
comparison of these solutions.
TABLE I.

SIGNALLING COST ON MME AND SGW (NUMEBER OF

RECEIVED MESSAGES FOR EACH ELEMENTARY PROCEDURE)

MME

SGW

Service Request

mS

Release

mR
mP

Packet Notification

Figure 8. Signaling message load

Figure 7. Signaling for a web session

VI.

CONCLUSION

Sending an SMS message or initiating a packet call, to an

idle terminal requires signaling to allocating the User plane
resources, and releasing them after sending and receiving the
messages. From figure 4, we see that an MME receives 3
signaling messages to allocate radio resources (Service Request
procedure) and 3 signaling messages to release those radio
resources (S1-Release procedure). An S-GW receives 4 and 2
signaling messages for Service Request and S1-Release
procedures By introducing the Packet Notification messages
proposed in this paper, the number of signaling messages to
MME and S-GW are reduces to 2 messages for each entity
(deduced from figure 6). No additional signaling is necessary,
because a UE in idle mode stays in idle mode. The cost for
Service Request procedure, S1 Release procedure and Packet
Notification procedure is denoted by mS , mR and mP
respectively and is shown in Table I.

In this paper, we analyzed signaling messages that are

exchanged for a simple but popular service like SMS. We
proposed a procedure to transmit isolated packets in the control
plane and to avoid to set up bearers and then to release them.
This procedure is generic as it does not rely on any inspection
of higher layer protocol data units. It can be advantageously
used for SMS but also for any type of sporadic data.

Without introducing Packet Notification, the cost per one

session can be represented as follows:

REFERENCES

Cost = ((1 )N PC + )(m S + m R )

When Packet Notification is introduced, the cost can be

represented as follows:

Cost = (1 )N PC (mS + mR ) + ((1 )N PC p + )mP

where p=exp(-T1/ Dd) is the probability that second packet

in a packet call in a web session arrives after time T1 is passed.
If we do not use T1 timer, T1 is 0, so p=1. If we assume
T1=5ms, then p= 0.077.
Using these formulae, we can calculate average messages
that SGW and MME receive. Signaling message load (i.e. cost)
for the standard based solution which does not introduce
Packet Notification is 30-25. If Packet Notification is
introduced and T1 is set to 0, the cost is 40-38. If T1=5ms,

The focus has been made since the 90s on providing higher
and higher data rates to users. However, with the development
of smart devices it is anticipated that a huge number of
terminals (perhaps several trillions) will be connected to a
wireless network, each terminal generating a very small
amount of data. Such an evolution will modify the paradigm of
wireless networks and requires to make network architecture
and protocols evolve.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]

E. Dahlman, S. Parkvall, J. Skld and P. Beming, 3G evolution: HSPA

and LTE for mobile broadband, 2nd edition, Elsevier, 2008)
CTIA-The Wireless Association, Semi-Annual Survey Results, March
22, 2011. http://www.ctia.org/media/press/body.cfm/prid/2062.
3GPP TS 24.247 V8.5.0 (2010-12), Messaging service using the IP
Multimedia (IM) Core Network Subsystem.
IETF RFC 3261 SIP: Session Initiation Protocol, march 2002.
3GPP TS 24.229, V8.14.0 (2010-12) IP Multimedia Call Control
Protocol based on SIP and SDP.
3GPP TS 23.204, V8.5.0 (2010-03) Support of Short Message Service
(SMS) over generic 3GPP Internet Protocol (IP) access
3GPP TS 24.341, V8.5.0 (2010-12), Support of SMS over IP networks
3GPP TS 23.401 V8.10.0 (2010-06), Evolved Universal Terrestrial
Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) access.
3GPP TR 30.03U V3.2.0 (1998- 04), Selection procedures for the choice
of radio transmission technologies of the UMTS.

this paper was published at WPMC 2011

(The 14th International Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications, 3-6 october 2013, Brest, France)