Networking Forums

Networking Forums > Wireless Networking > Wireless Internet > Why we use different access schemes/technologies for up link anddownlink

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Why we use different access schemes/technologies for up link anddownlink

 
 
Er. Ashwini Patankar
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      01-22-2009, 04:10 AM
Hi Every One,

I am confused regarding these different access schemes for up link and
downlink or more precisely different access schemes in forward and
reverse channel of UMTS / LTE(you can generalise my question).

As far as I am getting, say we use OFDMA for downlink (Base Station to
Mobile Terminal) and SC-FDMA (Mobile Terminal to Base Station), the
main reason is that if a user (MT) is sending any request say he send
www.google.com then he what actually he is doing is sending just few
kbs of data but in return he will get data more then he send that is
why the download data rate should be high, thats why we use different
access schemes.

But still many things are unclear like, okay we are using OFDMA for
higher data rate but what about a video call the user will make? there
also he will need high data rate because of real time constraints then
why Sc - FDMA and not OFDMA for that????



Thanks and Regards
Ashwini
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Do Encryption Schemes Sometimes Not Work? smackedass Wireless Networks 2 06-26-2007 02:33 PM
networking technologies Gary Wessle Linux Networking 1 01-07-2007 01:40 AM
Wifi & Power Schemes miziolek@gazeta.pl Wireless Internet 0 03-20-2006 08:21 PM
Get paid while you surf schemes - what happened to them ? amstereofan Broadband 1 12-09-2003 05:43 PM
:: Internet Telephony and SIP Technologies Bulk ONE Broadband 0 10-29-2003 07:02 PM



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11