SPACE INFORMATION NETWORKS
Ultra-Dense LEO: Integration of
Satellite Access Networks into 5G and Beyond
Boya Di, Lingyang Song, Yonghui Li, and H. Vincent Poor
Abstract
To support the explosive growth of wireless
devices and applications, various access tech-
niques need to be developed for future wire-
less systems to provide reliable data services
in vast areas. With recent significant advanc-
es in ultra-dense low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite
constellations, satellite access networks (SANs)
have shown their significant potential to inte-
grate with 5G and beyond to support ubiqui-
tous global wireless access. In this article, we
propose an enabling network architecture for
dense LEO-SANs in which the terrestrial and
satellite communications are integrated to offer
more reliable and flexible access. Through var-
ious physical-layer techniques such as effective
interference management, diversity techniques,
and cognitive radio schemes, the proposed
SAN architecture can provide seamless and
high-rate wireless links for wireless devices with
different quality of service requirements. Three
extensive applications and some future research
directions in both the physical layer and net-
work layer are then discussed.
Introduction
To meet the ever increasing data demand of users
created by the growing mobile applications, fifth
generation (5G) networks have posed stringent
requirements on reliable global services and mas-
sive connectivity [1]. Although heterogeneous
networks have been proposed as a dominant
architecture to achieve this goal, several issues
still remain unsolved. For example, nearly half of
the world still has no or bad Internet access [2],
revealing the network coverage problem caused
by intractable access point deployment. Another
bottleneck lies in the limited backhaul capacity of
traditional small cells (TSCs) due to their complex
communication environments and scarce spec-
trum resources.
With the recent rapid development of low
Earth orbit (LEO) satellites, the LEO satellite
access network (SAN) has shown its potential as
an expansion of terrestrial networks to address the
above issues. Several companies have announced
their plans to launch thousands of LEO satellites
by 2022 or so [3, 4], including SpaceX, OneWeb,
Kepler, and SPUTNIX. These projects aim to pro-
vide seamless and high-capacity global communi-
cation services by constructing an ultra-dense LEO
Digital Object Identifier: Boya Di and Lingyang Song (corresponding author) are with Peking University; Yonghui Li is with the University of Sydney;
10.1109/MWC.2019.1800301 H. Vincent Poor is with Princeton University.
62 1536-1284/19/$25.00 © 2019 IEEE
constellation, cooperating with terrestrial opera-
tors. To utilize the high-frequency band in space,
a terrestrial-satellite terminal (TST) equipped with
phase antenna arrays acts as the access point
(AP) for users. Each TST supports both the user,
TST links over C-band, and the TST-satellite links
over Ka-band, enabling terrestrial small cell cov-
erage for users. Benefiting from high altitudes,
broad operating spectrum, and ultra-dense topol-
ogy, LEO satellite networks can support a massive
number of users with their high-capacity back-
haul, vast coverage, and more flexible access
technique, which is less dependent on instanta-
neous radio environments [5].
Despite the advantages mentioned above, most
satellite operators do not have spectrum licens-
es over C-band. It is also not realistic to serve all
users via satellite networks considering the lim-
ited number of links [6]; thus, it is essential to
integrate satellite networks with 5G terrestrial net-
works. However, there are several premises and
challenges for achieving harmonious integration.
For example, the network should support users
smoothly switching between terrestrial 5G access
and the SAN by the same operator or by coop-
eration between operators [7]. Performance deg-
radation caused by propagation delay of satellite
links and limited backhaul capacity of TSCs needs
to be compensated through the complementary
interactions and joint optimization of terrestrial and
satellite communications. Each TST is expected to
support terrestrial communications and to achieve
spatial diversity in the satellite networks while track-
ing the rapidly orbiting satellites.
To tackle the above challenges, in this article
we propose an integrated terrestrial-satellite net-
work access architecture. Based on the proposed
network architecture, the global communication
services supported by SAN can be classified into
three types: moving mobiles, unserved or under-
served users, and broadcast/multicast users. To
ensure efficient coexistence of terrestrial and satel-
lite communications, several key technologies are
tailored to be applied in the integrated network,
including LEO satellite densification, diversity tech-
niques including both access and spatial diversity,
interference management, cognitive radio (CR),
and so on. The following three extensive applica-
tion scenarios are then discussed.
Data Offloading in SANs: In heterogeneous
networks, each user can access the network via a
macrocell, a TSC, or an LEO-based small cell (LSC).
IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019
For the LSC, the collected data of each TST is back-
hauled by the satellites. User association, TST-satel-
lite selection, and resource allocation need to be
jointly determined subject to the backhaul capacity
constraints.
Data Routing in Multi-Layer SANs: In an
ultra-dense constellation, LEO satellites traveling
at different altitudes form a multi-layer network. To
reduce unnecessary propagation delay and cope
with the dynamically changing topology, a data
routing algorithm taking advantage of inter-satellite
links should be developed.
Data Caching in Multicast SANs: In a SAN,
when users require files that are not cached in
LSCs or TSCs, the satellites can multicast the
cached contents to TSTs, thereby saving spectral
resources and reducing transmission delay. The
service provider needs to determine the caching
strategy as well as the multicast group formation.
The rest of this article is organized as follows. In
the following section, we provide an overview of
ultra-dense LEO satellite networks, illustrating their
advantages. Following that, we introduce a general
network architecture for LEO-SANs and present
three different types of services supported by this
architecture. After that, advanced technologies
supporting LEO-SANs are described. Three appli-
cation scenarios extended from the basic network
architecture are then presented. Some open prob-
lems and potential solutions are also discussed. The
final section concludes the article.
Overview of Ultra-Dense
LEO Satellite Networks
Given the dense topology of LEO satellite net-
works, we investigate their unique advantages
over traditional terrestrial and satellite networks,
which naturally pave a path to the integration of
LEO satellite networks and terrestrial networks.
Vast Coverage and High-Capacity Backhaul/
Multicasting: Compared to terrestrial APs, each
LEO satellite operates at an altitude between 500
and 2000 km, covering an area of over 1 mil-
lion km2. For those underserved users either in
remote areas or suffering access failure in dense
networks, LEO satellite networks offer new oppor-
tunities to access the Internet, allowing a radio
coverage extension to terrestrial networks.
In addition, satellites are capable of supporting
broadband services when operating over Ka-band.
Over 50 Mb/s data rates and even up to several
hundred megabits per second on the downlink can
be achieved in this case [7], enabling alternative
high-capacity backhaul and multicasting techniques
for the network.
Cellular-Compatible Terrestrial-Satellite Ter-
minals: One important element of hardware
support for LEO networks is the dedicated TST
connecting the users and satellites. Each TST
employs mechanically steerable parabolic reflec-
tor antennas or electronically steerable phased
array antennas [4], allowing for flexible hando-
vers between active satellites via highly directive
tracing. Through delicate antenna designs, the
TST can support not only the Ka-band satellite
communications, but also multiple access tech-
nologies over C-band, including WiFi, 3G, and
LTE. Easy to install on a roof or a vehicle due
to its miniaturized antennas, each TST functions
IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019
as a 200-m-coverage small cell with integrated Compared to the ter-
Ka-band backhaul to cooperate with its partner restrial APs, each LEO
mobile operators supporting more users. satellite operates at an
Low Propagation Latency: Due to the low altitude between 500
orbit altitude of LEO satellites compared to the
medium Earth orbit (MEO) and geosynchronous and 2000km, covering
Earth orbit (GEO) satellites, the one-directional an area of over one
travel delay is significantly reduced to less than million square kilome-
14 ms. Users can experience round- trip delay ters. For those under-
of less than 50 ms, which is commensurate with served users either
that of terrestrial links. Moreover, benefiting from
the ultra-dense network topology, each TST has in remote areas or
more choices of the preferred satellite with which suffering access failure
to associate. It tends to communicate over the in dense networks, LEO
shortest TST-satellite links available to it, and thus, satellite networks offer
the propagation delay of the access network can them new opportuni-
be further reduced compared to traditional LEO
satellite systems. ties to access the Inter-
Multi-Connectivity: Different from traditional net, allowing a radio
satellite networks, multiple LEO satellites may fly coverage extension to
over the area of interest simultaneously due to terrestrial networks.
the dense LEO constellation. By arranging the
satellites in a planar or vertical manner, more
than one satellites can cover the same area of
interest. Given the antenna arrays of each TST,
the concept of multi-connectivity can then be
introduced such that each TST can connect to
multiple satellites simultaneously. In this way,
the resilience to frequent satellite handovers is
enhanced; that is, as long as one TST-satellite
link is active, this TST can still communicate via
the satellite networks. The network reliability can
thus be improved.
Low Production Cost: The average manufac-
turing cost of each LEO satellite can be largely
minimized due to the small size of satellites and
the pipeline production, making LEO constellation
projects more practical.
Network Architecture for
LEO-Based 5G-Satellite Integration
In this section, we first introduce the general net-
work architecture within which the LEO satellite
networks can work in conjunction with terrestrial
networks. Three different types of global commu-
nication services supported by such a network
architecture are then illustrated.
General Network Architectures
Before discussing the network architectures, we
first present two access modes of the satellite net-
works over different operating spectrum bands.
As shown in Fig. 1, both C-band (below 6 GHz)
and a high-frequency band (above 6 GHz) are
considered, requiring different access terminals.
For the C-band, users can directly transmit to the
satellite with low data rates. In contrast, for the
high-frequency band (e.g., the Ka-band), user
devices do not support direct communications,
and each user needs to access the network via
the TST as an AP. In both cases, the LEO satellite
forwards the received data to the base station
(BS) or the Earth gateway station (EGS), which is
connected to the core network.
For the above 6 GHz case, a general network
architecture is proposed as shown in Fig. 2. A
macro BS and a large number of small cells are
deployed to serve the uplink ground users. Each
small cell assists the macrocell to offload the traffic
63

UE eNB Core network
(a)
UE Terrestrial-satellite eNB Core network
terminal
(b)
FIGURE 1. Two access modes for 5G satellite access networks: a) satellite
below 6 GHz; b) satellite above 6 GHz.
and is backhauled via either a wired or wireless
connection. Therefore, each user can access the
network via one of the following three cells:
• The macrocell with large backhaul capacity sup-
ported by fiber links from the macro BS directly
to the core network
• The TSC with very limited backhaul capacity
connected to the core network via multihop
backhaul links
• The LSC with large backhaul capacity support-
ed by the Ka-band transmission
For the below 6 GHz case, we adopt a similar
heterogeneous architecture as well except that the
users upload to the satellite directly at a low data
rate, and there are no TSTs [8].
Global Communication Services via
LEO-Based Satellite Access Networks
Based on the above network architectures, we
now introduce the use cases and divide them
into three types by following the Third Genera-
tion Partnership Project’s (3GPP’s) classifications
[2]. Each type depicts the network from a differ-
ent perspective of service demand, but the cor-
responding use cases are not exclusive of each
other.
Service Continuity: As mentioned above,
the ultra-dense topology of satellites guaran-
tees seamless network access for users. Dif-
ferent from the traditional terrestrial networks
where the BSs are deployed in highly populated
areas, the deployment of an LEO satellite con-
stellation is geographically equalitarian. Thus,
network access is available to users outside the
radio coverage of a terrestrial network. Based
on the combination of both population-centric
and geography-centric topology in the integrated
network, service continuity addresses the oppor-
tunity for those users who cannot be well served
while moving between one terrestrial network
and another. Typical users include moving land
mobiles (cars, trains, etc.), and airborne and mar-
itime platforms (airplanes, ships, etc.).
Service Ubiquity: Service ubiquity empha-
sizes that the SAN can provide services to those
unserved or underserved users suffering from a
lack of terrestrial infrastructure or radio resourc-
es. Some use cases include the Internet of Things
(IoT) for agriculture and environment measuring
[2], safety-critical emergency networks, and home
64
access in both remote areas and hotspots. Specifi-
cally, for IoT applications, the below 6 GHz access
mode can be implemented well in remote areas
with little interference over C-band to other users.
The above 6 GHz access mode can be designed to
work in highly populated areas such that co-chan-
nel interference to traditional terrestrial users can
be avoided.
Service Scalability: Unlike traditional networks,
integrated networks enable large coverage corre-
sponding to thousands of cells, thereby support-
ing both broadcasting/multicasting services via the
satellites and user-specific services via the TSCs.
This is especially efficient for offloading traffic from
terrestrial networks by either multicasting during
peak hours or broadcasting non-time-sensitive data
when the propagation delay is tolerable.
Key Technologies in
LEO-Based Satellite Access Networks
In this section, we describe the key technologies
in SANs needed to support the different services
introduced above. On designing the integrated
network, we expect the implementation of satel-
lite communications for the long term with pre-
existing terrestrial communications. Therefore,
advanced technologies are required to be tailored
for both terrestrial and satellite communications
to ensure seamless integration of such a hetero-
geneous network. In the following we discuss in
detail various techniques.
Diversity Techniques
We discuss two types of diversity for the SAN:
access diversity, created by the integration of sat-
ellite and terrestrial networks; and spatial diversity,
achieved via the antenna arrays of TSTs and the
dense topology of LEO satellites.
Access Diversity: For an uplink network as
shown in Fig. 2, each user can access the network
via one of the three techniques mentioned previ-
ously, that is, associating with a macrocell, a TSC,
or an LSC. Moreover, based on the dual connectiv-
ity introduced in 3GPP Release 12, a user can also
split its data flow among multiple cells to improve
its throughput. Although the interference manage-
ment becomes more complicated as the number
of APs increases, the transmission capacity can be
enhanced, benefiting from the selection diversity
of APs. User association is desired to optimize the
access diversity.
Similarly, for the downlink case, each user can
also receive from multiple cells (i.e., both TSCs and
LSCs) such that signal detection based on the com-
bined received signals can be performed.
Spatial Diversity: Traditionally, this is obtained
via the multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) tech-
nique in a rich scattering terrestrial environment.
However, different from the classical MIMO case,
it is not straightforward to directly exploit MIMO in
a high frequency band such as Ka-band since the
line-of-sight (LoS) links dominate the satellite-TST
communications, leading to a rank-deficient MIMO
channel matrix [9]. Instead, two possible sources of
spatial diversity are introduced below.
Multiple LEO Satellites Serving as Multiple
Inputs: This refers to the case in which multiple
satellites located in different orbits communicate
with a TST equipped with arrayed antennas. Inde-
IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019

Earth
gateway
station
Traditional
small cell
Macro BS
FIGURE 2.. System model of an ultra-dense 5G LEO-satellite access network.
pendent channel fading of the incoming signals
can then be guaranteed. Moreover, the rain attenu-
ation over different antenna elements is considered
as a source of spatial diversity and is thus mitigated.
Supported by the ultra-dense topology of satellites,
the spatial diversity technique lays the foundation
for multi-connectivity for the TSTs.
Note that an important issue of this scheme
comes from different propagation delays
induced by various altitudes of satellites. For the
TST, it receives signals from multiple satellites
asynchronously. A practical solution is to adopt a
matched filter at the receiver to detect the delay
offset. The filtrated data can then be sent to a
timing aligner for further processing via a signal
converter [10].
Multiple Spot Beams of Each LEO Satel-
lite: One approach to utilize the spatial domain
resources at the satellite side is to generate mul-
tiple spot beams via multi-beam antennas. As
planned by SpaceX [4], a series of spot beams
is independently deployed by each satellite such
that the serving area1 with respect to each spot
beam is fully steerable and not overlapping with
other spot beams.
However, to achieve efficient frequency reuse
among these spot beams, the beam widening
behavior should be addressed carefully. This is a
common phenomenon involving beams widening
incrementally when steering away from the satel-
lite-TST direction. The size of the serving area cov-
ered by each spot beam then increases and will be
enhanced due to the curvature of the Earth surface,
thereby inducing inter-beam interference. To solve
this issue practically, we can avoid such beamwidth
variations by setting an antenna on-and-off switch
such that the interference can be reduced at cer-
tain steering angles.
Interference Management
To support various reliable services for users,
interference management is crucial to fully utilize
the limited frequency and power resources in the
integrated network. Due to the entanglement of
IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019
To support various
Terrestrial-satellite
terminal (TST) reliable services for
Small cell access users, interference man-
point (SAP)
agement is crucial to
Backhaul over Ku-band
fully utilize the limited
Cellular uplink
frequency and power
Interference over Ku-
band resources in the inte-
Ground user grated network. Due
Satellite-to-EGS link to the entanglement
of the terrestrial and
satellite interfaces, the
sources of interference
are more complicated
TST-enabled
than in terrestrial
Small cell networks.
the terrestrial and satellite interfaces, the sources
of interference are more complicated than in ter-
restrial networks, as outlined below.
Interference over Cross-Cell Links: This is the
co-channel interference received by the users from
neighboring cells. When LSCs and TSCs share the
same frequency resource pool, the network aims
to reduce the interference via joint user associa-
tion.
Interference over Unlicensed Band: This is the
interference caused by the users associating with
LSCs to other preexisting users (e.g., WiFi devices).
This occurs when the satellite networks occupy an
unlicensed band for terrestrial access, requiring a
sensing-based coexistence protocol for interfer-
ence management.
Interference over Inter-Satellite Links: This is
induced by the side-lobe leakage of antennas at
either the TST side or the satellite side. Rapid orbit-
ing and multi-connectivity of LEO satellites render
the interference management even more nontrivial
compared to the terrestrial case. To mitigate the
interference, TST-satellite selection and precoding
vector design are performed, and the angular sensi-
tivity2 needs to be considered.
Interference over Cross-System Links: This is
the interference between different satellite systems.
One potential solution to this problem is to con-
struct a cross-layer system such that the GEO satel-
lites can have control over other low orbit systems.
Note that the satellite, TST links, and TST user
links are directly connected by the backhaul capac-
ity constraint over each TST. Therefore, the interfer-
ence from the satellite segment not only influences
the TST-satellite association and resource alloca- 1Typically, each spot beam
tion, but also has an effect on the user association can cover an area of 1060
km radius.
strategy, requiring a joint scheduling and resource
allocation scheme. 2 A necessary angular separa-
tion is required when two sat-
Cognitive Radio ellites communicate with one
TST over the same subchan-
In a CR system, a group of unlicensed users (i.e.,
nel. Otherwise, these two
secondary users) sense the unoccupied spectrum satellites appear “in line” from
of licensed users (i.e., primary users) and share the view of the TST, thereby
with them in an opportunistic manner to tackle leading to transmission failure.
65
 Potential key techniques
Diversity techniques
Cognitive radio
mmWave
Broadcasting/multicasting
FSO-based inter-satellite
communications
Full duplex transmission
Interference management
NOMA
TABLE 1. Applicability of key techniques to support multiple services.
3 For each cell, the sum rate
of associated users should be
no larger than the backhaul
capacity of this cell. For the
LSC, the backhaul capacity is
determined by the LSC-satel-
lite links.
66
Service continuity Service ubiquity Service scalability
ü ü ü LEO-Based Satellite Access Networks
ü tion scenarios in the SAN based on the general
ü potential solutions are also discussed.
ü ü
ü ü ü shown in Fig. 2 where the satellite network off-
ü ü
ü ü ü play complementary roles. The LSCs can achieve
ü ü
the spectrum scarcity issue. Being a flexible spec-
trum access technique, CR can well adapt to the
integrated network such that the LEO satellite sys-
tem acts as a secondary system and harmoniously
coexists with the terrestrial and/or geostationary
systems (i.e., primary systems).
For the 6 GHz network architecture in Fig. 2,
different perspectives of the system performance
can be optimized via CR depending on the spec-
trum management modes.
Dedicated Spectrum for the LEO Satellite Sys-
tems: Apart from gaining through dedicated spec-
trum, the achievable capacity of satellite-TST links
can be further improved by TSTs serving as the
secondary users to access the spectrum of GEO/
MEO or other existing satellite systems.
Shared Spectrum among Multiple Satellite
Systems: The network can achieve more stable
coexistence performance by setting priorities on
different systems.
Unlicensed Spectrum Access in the TST-User
Segment: Interference to existing WiFi users can
be significantly reduced when the LSC users act
as secondary users to WiFi users. By designing the
unlicensed spectrum sensing protocol for the users,
balanced usage of the shared spectrum between
different types of users can be reached.
All of the above cases pose a prerequisite that
the TSTs and LEO satellites are capable of search-
ing for vacant spectrum and inferring the users’
demand in a context-aware environment.
For the below 6 GHz case in Fig. 1a, the CR
technique works well for those delay-tolerant appli-
cations in IoT such that the sensors can directly
upload to the satellites as secondary users while
the quality of service for terrestrial primary users
can be guaranteed.
Other Potential Technologies
Besides the above representative techniques,
other technologies can also be utilized to
enhance the service quality of the SAN. Typical
ones include satellite broadcasting/multicasting,
full-duplex transmission, non-orthogonal multiple
access (NOMA) [11], millimeter-wave (mmWave)
communications in the user-TST segment, and
free-space optical (FSO)-based inter-satellite com-
munications. The applicability of all mentioned
techniques to support different types of services is
summarized in Table 1.
Extensive Applications in
In this section, we explore three typical applica-
network architecture above. Open problems and
Data Offloading in Satellite Access Networks
We consider the basic uplink integrated network
loads the data traffic from the terrestrial network
via its high-capacity backhaul. For data offload-
ing, the satellite and terrestrial communications
a relatively high backhaul capacity due to the
wideband communications above 6 GHz and
the mitigation of multi-path effects. However, the
propagation delay is much larger than that in the
terrestrial case. In contrast, although the propa-
gation delay can be negligable in the TSCs, the
backhaul capacity is not always satisfactory due
to complicated communication environments.
Based on such characteristics, we need to design
different user association strategies with respect
to the traffic load of users for context-aware appli-
cations.
Performance Metrics: Two performance met-
rics can be considered in such a network, that is,
the sum rate of all users and the maximum delay
(including both propagation and transmission
delay) over all cells, respectively. As mentioned
previously, interference management via user asso-
ciation, TST-satellite selection, and resource alloca-
tion is required to improve the above metrics.
Access Control: Unlike traditional networks,
two different access control modes can be adopt-
ed as illustrated below, requiring the design of dif-
ferent scheduling schemes.
Cooperative Operators: When the satellite
operator (e.g., OneWeb or SpaceX) cooperates
with a traditional terrestrial operator (e.g., AT&T or
Verizon), users can access the TST via shared spec-
trum of the terrestrial operators. Centralized access
control over the user association and subchannel
allocation can be performed at the macro BS or
the EGS.
Competitive Operators: When the satellite
operator competes with the terrestrial operator
for terrestrial access (i.e., the user-TST communica-
tions), it either utilizes unlicensed spectrum or leas-
es licensed spectrum from the terrestrial operator.
A game-theoretic framework can be constructed
for access control in both licensed and unlicensed
cases where users select different operators based
on their pricing mechanisms.
Performance Evaluation of the Cooperative
Case: For the case of cooperative operators, we
evaluate the sum rate of the system and the user
scheduling strategy. We consider a multi-cell ter-
restrial-satellite network shown in Fig. 2 consist-
ing of 1 macrocell, 25 TSCs, 25 LSCs, and 8 LEO
satellites. The centralized access controller (either
the macro BS or the EGS) aims to maximize the
sum rates of all users by jointly optimizing the user
association (i.e., determining which traditional or
LEO-based small cell each user accesses) and sub-
channel allocation over the C-band spectrum for all
cells. However, due to the existence of backhaul
constraints,3 this is also coupled with the backhaul
IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019
capacity maximization over the Ka-band spectrum
1200
where the LSC-satellite association, subchannel,
and power allocation are jointly optimized.
The above coupled optimization problem is 1100
NP-hard due to the non-convex objective function
and binary variables. We solve it by utilizing the 1000
Lagrangian decomposition theory and develop- Proposed integrated scheme

Sum rate (Mbps)

ing sub-optimal matching algorithms. Simulated 900 TTH scheme
performance results are obtained using MATLAB NITS scheme
Monte Carlo simulation. Most simulation parame- 800
ters are set based on the 3GPP specifications [2,
7] and the SpaceX technical report [4]. Specifically, 700
we set the coordinates of satellites based on the
simulation tool called “satellite tool kit” such that
600
the heights of satellites vary from 600 to 1200 km.
More technical details can be found in our journal
paper [12]. 500
Two schemes are considered for comparison.
Traditional Terrestrial Heterogeneous (TTH) 400
Network: All M small cells are TSCs traditionally 100 150 200 250 300
backhauled via wireless or wired links with limited 2
User density (persons/km )
capacity.
(a)
Non-Integrated Terrestrial-Satellite (NITS)
Scheme: This is the sum of the outcomes (i.e., data 0.7
Propotion of users accessing the LEO-based small cells
rates) from two independent networks: User density = 93.3/km 2
• The traditional terrestrial network where all User density = 178.3/km2
0.6
users access M’ TSCs
• The LEO satellite network where all users access
M — M’ LSCs 0.5
Figure 3a shows the sum rate of all users vs. user
density obtained by different schemes. It can be 0.4
observed that the performance of our proposed inte-
grated scheme is much better than that of the above
0.3
two schemes. For the TTH scheme, this is because in
our proposed scheme, satellite networks can provide
a larger backhaul capacity than the TTH networks. 0.2
Therefore, more users can successfully access the
network, resulting in a higher sum rate. For the NITS 0.1
scheme, when only terrestrial or satellite networks
serve all users, the network access is very likely to be
0
saturated due to limited C-band frequency resources. 200 800 1400 2000 2600
In contrast, we consider joint user scheduling in the Data amount generated by each user (bytes/s)
integrated terrestrial-satellite network where the TSCs
(b)
and LSCs help each other offload part of the data
traffic when the link quality is satisfactory. Each user FIGURE 3. a) Sum rate of all users vs. user density; b) proportion of users
can thus achieve higher sum rate when accessing accessing the LSCs vs. amount of data generated by each user.
the network due to more efficient usage of resourc-
es via the interference management. Therefore, the
sum rate achieved by the proposed scheme is even are scheduled to access the LSCs instead of the
higher than the sum of outcomes of the two inde- TSCs. However, not all users will access the LSCs
pendent networks mentioned in the NITS scheme. even with high data generation rates, reflecting the
Figure 3b evaluates the user scheduling strat- influence of the link quality on the user association
egy varying with different data generation rates strategy.
of users. Two major factors dominate the strategy
design by influencing the terrestrial transmission Data Routing in Multi-Layer Satellite Access Networks
delay, that is, the link quality of the user-BS com- Considering the propagation delay of LEO sat-
munications links and the data generation rate of ellites and the limited frequency resources, it is
each user. From the figure, the proportion of users not practical to construct the communication link
accessing the LSCs grows with the data genera- between each LEO satellite and the EGS, espe-
tion rate of each user. The reason is that the data cially in an ultra-dense network. Therefore, to
traffic at each TSC becomes larger when the data perform network control over satellites, it is nec-
generated by each user increases, bringing large essary to consider routing via inter-satellite com-
transmission delay for backhaul. In contrast, the munications.
backhaul transmission delay of LSC-satellite links is As shown in Fig. 4a, a number of LEO satellites
much smaller than that of the TSCs due to high-ca- fly over the area of interest with altitudes rang- 4 Note that the propagation
pacity backhaul links. Therefore, the influence of ing from 600 km to 1200 km, forming a dynamic delay can be incorporated
the propagation delay at the LSCs becomes smaller multi-layer network. Different from the tradition- into the equivalent back-
haul capacity of each LSC.
compared to the transmission delay at the TSCs. al multi-layer satellite networks where the MEO The total delay can thus be
When the total delay4 of accessing the LSC is and GEO satellites are considered as static, the reflected by the data rate of
smaller than that of accessing the TSC, more users frequent relative motions among all LEO satellites each user.

IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019 67


Infrastructure
layer
Earth gateway
Control layer
station
Cloud
server
Application layer
(a)
Multicast
Backhaul group
link Inter-
satellite link
Service
Provider
Cache
Backhaul
link
(b)
FIGURE 4. a) System model of data routing in the multi-layer SAN; b) system
model of data caching in multicast SAN.
make it even more challenging to perform the net-
work control and routing algorithm design.
To deal with the unstable topology, a hybrid
centralized/distributed routing scheme can be sup-
ported by the software defined network framework
[13]. In remote areas, each satellite can distributive-
ly determine its routing path based on the quality
and valid duration of inter-satellite links. For hotspot
areas, a joint routing algorithm can be performed
on neighboring satellites by the centralized control-
ler (i.e., the cloud server in Fig. 4a). Such coordina-
tion between the application layer and the control
layer also provides more flexibility to handle hand-
overs between multiple physical interfaces.
Moreover, given various operational constraints
of each satellite node (e.g., power budget, frequen-
cy resource budget, and the subset of available
communication links) [14], the routing scheme
design is actually coupled with the resource alloca-
tion through the above constraints. A joint routing
and resource utilization scheme needs to be con-
sidered such that the total delay can be minimized
among different traffic flows. Other metrics such
as fairness and energy efficiency can also be con-
sidered in this context. A prior study [14] focusing
on the routing-aware contact plan design can be
found in the literature.
Data Caching in Multicast Satellite Access Networks
We consider a downlink two-layer context-aware
integrated network shown in Fig. 4b where mul-
tiple users require files from the service provider
through the Internet. Traditionally, due to the limit-
ed backhaul capacity of TSCs, it is hard for users to
download a large amount of real-time content from
the TSCs. The service provider needs to cache the
files in the TSCs in advance, which is periodically
updated based on users’ demand [15].
68
Benefiting from the high-capacity backhaul
links, LEO satellites can be considered as an
alternative to cache the files. Specifically, for the
files not cached in small cells, the service provid-
er selects one or more satellites to multicast the
required content to a number of TSTs, and the
TSTs then forward the content to users via either
licensed or unlicensed spectrum. For those services
requiring a large amount of data such as multi-
media streaming, satellite-based multicast cache
reduces the transmission delay compared to the
terrestrial backhaul and covers a much larger area.
The dense topology of satellites greatly improves
the cache capacity and offers technical support to
group-centric services. The inter-satellite co-channel
interference can also be reduced, and the occu-
pied spectrum band is largely saved.
Unlike the traditional multicast cache schemes
where either a single satellite or a single BS-user
layer is considered, caching in both BS-user and
TST-satellite layers needs to be designed, and the
access diversity gain introduced by the ultra-dense
topology should be optimized. Based on the pop-
ularity and delay requirement of files, the service
provider needs to determine which files to cache in
which layer and which cell/satellite. A caching pro-
tocol is also necessary to figure out how each user’s
request is answered based on the caching profiles.
Conclusions
In this article, we have considered ultra-dense
LEO satellite access networks in which seamless
and high-capacity global communication services
can be supported by integrating with traditional
terrestrial networks. A basic network architecture
has been proposed where the users can access
the network via both satellite and terrestrial com-
munications. Based on the proposed network
architecture, we have introduced different types
of mobile services supported by it. Some key
technologies have been investigated in view of
their potential to be deployed in satellite access
networks, including diversity techniques, interfer-
ence management, CR, and so on. These tech-
niques must adjust to the characteristics of the
integrated network such as its ultra-dense topolo-
gy and the LoS-dominated satellite links. Extensive
application scenarios along with open problems
have also been discussed, such as data offloading,
multi-layer data routing, and multicast caching.
For future work, our proposed architecture can
be integrated together with or be used on top of
other MEO/GEO satellite systems, where MEO/
GEO satellites can be used as the long distance
backhaul of LEO satellite networks. Key research
problems will be the formation of spatial networks
and the network routing of hierarchical satellite net-
works. The considered techniques and scenarios
can also be extended to other space networks, for
example, high-altitude platform systems, since they
share some common features such as high mobility
and wide coverage. Potential research directions
include integrated traffic modeling, adaptive spec-
trum sharing scheme design, and energy-efficient
cross-platform protocol design.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported in part by the Nation-
al Natural Science Foundation of China under
grant number 61625101, and in part by the U.S.
IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019
National Science Foundation under Grants CCF-
093970 and CCF-1513915.
References
[1] C. Wang et al., “Cellular Architecture and Key Technologies
for 5G Wireless Communication Networks,” IEEE Commun.
Mag., vol. 52, no. 2, Feb. 2014, pp. 122–30.
[2] 3GPP TR 22.822, “Study on Using Satellite Access in 5G
(Stage 1),” Release 16, Feb. 2018. 16
[3] FCC, “OneWeb Non-Geostationary Satellite System (Attach-
ment A),” 2016.
[4] FCC, “SpaceX Non-Geostationary Satellite System (Attach-
ment A),” 2016.
[5] A. Guidotti et al., “Satellite-Enabled LTE Systems in LEO Con-
stellations,” Proc. IEEE ICC Wksps., Paris, France, May 2017.
[6] A. Mohammed et al., “The Role of High-Altitude Platforms
(HAPs) in the Global Wireless Connectivity,” Proc. IEEE, vol.
99, no. 11, Nov. 2011, pp. 1939–3.
[7] 3GPP TR 38.811, “Study on New Radio (NR) to Support
Non Terrestrial Networks,” Release 15, Dec. 2017.
[8] M. Sanctis et al., “Satellite Communications Supporting Inter-
net of Remote Things,” IEEE Internet of Things J., vol. 3, no.
1, Feb. 2016, pp. 113–23.
[9] P. Petropoulou et al., “Radio Propagation Channel Measure-
ments for Multiantenna Satellite Communication Systems: A
Survey,” IEEE Antennas and Propagation Mag., vol. 56, no.6,
Dec. 2014.
[10] F. Yamashita et al., “Broadband Multiple Satellite MIMO
System,” Proc. IEEE VTC-Fall., Dallas, TX, Sept. 2005, pp.
2632–36.
[11] B. Di, L. Song, Y. Li, and G. Li, “Non-Orthogonal Multiple
Access for High-Reliable and Low-Latency V2X Communica-
tions in 5G Systems,” IEEE JSAC, vol. 35, no. 10, Oct. 2017,
pp. 2383–97.
[12] B. Di et al., “Ultra-Dense LEO: Integrating Terrestrial-Sat-
ellite Networks into 5G and Beyond for Data Offloading,”
IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 18. no. 1, Jan. 2019, pp.
47–62.
[13] P. Du et al., “Multipath TCP in SDN-Enabled LEO Satellite
Networks,” Proc. IEEE MILCOM, Baltimore, MD, Nov. 2016.
[14] J. Fraire, P. Madoery, and J. Finochietto, “Routing-Aware
Fair Contact Plan Design for Predictable Delay Tolerant
Networks,” Elsevier Ad-Hoc Networks, vol. 25, Feb. 2015,
pp. 303–13.
[15] X. Wang et al., “Cache in the Air: Exploiting Content Cach-
ing and Delivery Techniques for 5G Systems,” IEEE Com-
mun. Mag., vol. 52, no. 2, Feb. 2014, pp. 131–39.
Biographies
B oya D i [S’17] is a Ph.D. student in the School of Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science, Peking University, China.
She received her B.S. degree in electronic engineering from
Peking University in 2014. Her current research interests include
satellite networks, vehicular networks, non-orthogonal multiple
access, and 5G wireless networks. She has also served as a TPC
member for IEEE GLOBECOM 2016 and 2018, and IEEE ICC
2016 and 2018.
Lingyang Song [S’03, M’06, SM’12, F’19] received his Ph.D.
degree from the University of York, United Kingdom, in 2007,
IEEE Wireless Communications • April 2019
where he received the K. M. Stott Prize for excellent research. For future work, our
He worked as a research fellow at the University of Oslo, Nor-
way, until joining Philips Research UK in March 2008. In May proposed architecture
2009, he joined the School of Electronics Engineering and can be integrated
Computer Science, Peking University, and is now a Boya Distin-
guished Professor. His main research interests include wireless together with or be
communication and networks, signal processing, and machine used on top of other
learning. He was the recipient of the IEEE Leonard G. Abraham
Prize in 2016 and the IEEE Asia Pacific (AP) Young Researcher MEO/GEO satellite
Award in 2012. He has been an IEEE Distinguished Lecturer systems, where MEO/
since 2015.
GEO satellites can
Y onghui L i [M’04, SM’09, F’19] received his Ph.D. degree be used as the long
in November 2002 from Beijing University of Aeronautics
and Astronautics. From 1999 to 2003, he was affiliated with distance backhaul of
Linkair Communication Inc, where he held a position of proj- LEO satellite networks.
ect manager with responsibility for the design of physical layer
solutions for the LAS-CDMA system. Since 2003, he has been Key research problems
with the Centre of Excellence in Telecommunications, Univer- will be the formation
sity of Sydney, Australia. He is now a professor in the School
of Electrical and Information Engineering, University of Sydney. of spatial networks and
He was the recipient of the Australian Queen Elizabeth II Fel- the network routing
lowship in 2008 and the Australian Future Fellowship in 2012.
His current research interests are in the area of wireless com- of hierarchical satellite
munications, with a particular focus on MIMO, millimeter-wave networks.
communications, machine-to-machine communications, cod-
ing techniques, and cooperative communications. He holds a
number of patents granted and pending in these fields. He is
now an Editor for IEEE Transactions on Communications and
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology. He was also the
Guest Editor of the IEEE JSAC Special Issue on Millimeter Wave
Communications for Future Mobile Networks. He received
best paper awards from IEEE ICC 2014, IEEE PIMRC 2017, and
IEEE Wireless Days 2014.
H. Vincent Poor [S’72, M’77, SM’82, F’87] received his Ph.D.
degree in EECS from Princeton University in 1977. From 1977
until 1990, he was on the faculty of the University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign. Since 1990 he has been on the faculty
at Princeton, where he is currently the Michael Henry Strater
University Professor of Electrical Engineering. During 2006 to
2016, he served as Dean of Princeton’s School of Engineering
and Applied Science. He has also held visiting appointments at
several other universities, including most recently at the Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley and Cambridge University. His
research interests are in the areas of information theory and
signal processing, and their applications in wireless networks,
energy systems, and related fields. Among his publications
in these areas is the recent book Information Theoretic Secu-
rity and Privacy of Information Systems (Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, 2017). He is a member of the National Academy
of Engineering and the National Academy of Sciences, and
is a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences,
the Royal Society, and other national and international acad-
emies. He received the Marconi and Armstrong Awards of
the IEEE Communications Society in 2007 and 2009, respec-
tively. Recent recognition of his work includes the 2017 IEEE
Alexander Graham Bell Medal, Honorary Professorships at
Peking University and Tsinghua University, both conferred in
2017, and a D.Sc. honoris causa from Syracuse University, also
awarded in 2017.
69