NSG for Xiaomi on MTK did not fit, I do not see LTE info at all. I was advisedCellmapperbut shows LTE frequency. If you believe him, in Omsk Megaphone also works on Band 3.

LTE operator details

Fly (Tattelecom)
B3 1800 - 10 MHz Carrier 1876
B38 TDD 2600 - 20 MHz Carrier 37900

Presentation of the creation of the network LTA1800

Mts
B1 2100 - 5 MHz Carrier 425 / support 256QAM /
B3 1800 - 10 MHz Carrier 1726 / support 256QAM / 15 MHz Carrier 1725 / support 256QAM /
B7 2600 - 10 MHz Carrier 3200 / support 256QAM /
B38 TDD 2600 - 20 MHz Carrier 38100 / support 256QAM /

AggregationCA_3_7 CA_7_3 10 + 5 MHz 5 + 10 MHz 10 + 10 MHz Press release
CA_3_38 - 10 + 20 MHz
CA_3_7_38 10 + 10 + 20 MHz


Beeline

B8 900 - 5 MHz carrier 3617 / support 256QAM /
B3 1800 - 5-10 MHz Carrier 1299 / support 256QAM / 15 MHz Carrier 1275 / support 256QAM /
B7 2600 - 10 MHz Carrier 3300 / support 256QAM /

AggregationCA_3_7 CA_7_3 5 + 10 MHz 10 + 5 MHz 10 + 10 MHz

Megaphone (Yota)
B3 1800 - 10 MHz Carrier 1425 / support 256QAM /
B7 2600 - 15-20 MHz Carriers 2850,3048 / support 256QAM /
AggregationCA_7_7 20 + 20 MHz CA_7_3 20+10
CA_3_7_7 20 + 20 + 10 MHz


Tele 2

B20 800 5 MHz carrier 6175 / support 256QAM /
B3 1800 10 MHz Carrier 1575 / support 256QAM /
B7 2600 10 MHz Carrier 3400 / support 256QAM /
AggregationCA_3_7 CA_7_3 10 + 10 MHz


If you have something to add write to qms correct

Post has been editedash16 - 16.05.20, 19:51

Peter (only in the city - in LO in a different way)











Post has been editedandrew.woronkov - 22.05.19, 09:19

Must be a CA_7_7 aggregation.

rust3028,
So, there (2x20) megahertz

zikasak
Is not a fact. Someone wrote that somewhere in the region there was an aggregation CA_7_7 15 + 15.

ash16,
Yes, officially it is not there yet, but it is running on some BS ...


B3 can be added.

The topic is still "in its infancy," I suggest:

1. To denote CA combinations, use industry-accepted designations — for example, CA_3_7 or CA_7_7_3. I think, however, that “absolutely canonical, from the standard” notations like CA_3A_7A or CA_7C_3A should not be used because of the unobvious (on an unprepared view) their association with the number of aggregated carriers. That is, if by the designation "CA_7_7_3" it is immediately obvious that this is a combination of 3CA, then by "CA_7C_3A" - not immediately.

2. To consider logically "symmetric" combinations separately. For example, CA_3_7 and CA_7_3, CA_7_3_7, and CA_7_7_3. Theoretical "symmetry" does not at all mean equivalence in a real network.

3. When mentioning intra-band aggregation, always specify whether it is a question of aggregation of adjacent (contiguous) or non-adjacent (non-contiguous) bands. Or, alternatively, specify the specific channels (EARFCN) of the carriers used — then "adjacency / non-contiguity" can be easily calculated.
For example, Megaphone in Moscow uses in B7 adjacent carriers on channels 2850 and 3048.

4. Distinguish between cases where aggregated components can be received only from the same BS, and when their source can (or should be) different stations. That is, to distinguish the inter-site CA from the "normal", intra-site.

5. Specify the most efficient modulation scheme supported for each carrier (in each band). For today, there will be enough information on downlink. Actually, for the vast majority of networks currently operating, this will be 64QAM or 256QAM.

Post has been editedvvevvevve - 28.04.17, 22:34

In the district centers and adjacent territories of the Kaluga region (including in the south, where until recently there were no LTE networks at all), the most recently launched MTS networks operating in B3 on channel 1750 with a 5 MHz band and 256QAM capabilities were noticed.

To complete the picture in Moscow, let me remind you that since the beginning of February, LTE MTS networks have been operating at a number of underground stations (underground): channel B3, channel 1802, 20 MHz, 64QAM.
The number of stations covered, according to my observations, is increasing.

This is all great, but quite difficult. Not everyone has the time, opportunity and understanding of how to monitor everything. Or even the equipment does not allow to see all these parameters. For example, my Samsung does not show the modulation type, someone has a device that does not support aggregation, well, etc.
It seems to me that it is better to have at least some minimal information on the region than to not have any at all. Of course, if someone will provide as complete data as described above, this is highly appreciated.

I agree. Yes, and write it easier.

I don’t really understand what it gives us, and how to track it for everyone. For example, I personally saw how the same sectors of MTS were aggregated first as CA_3_7, and then as CA_7_3. What depended on did not understand.

And who else can have adjacent lanes except for Megaphone? I think no one else. No such resources.

That I myself do not know how to distinguish. It seems as soon asTele2 statedThat tested this technology first in Russia. But in Moscow, it is still not there.

As I wrote, the netmonitor in my Samsung does not show this.

Post has been editedyanixxx - 29.04.17, 00:34

Personally, I first saw the B3 20 MHz at the MTS back in September 2015, when the Kotelniki opened. First, only at the station itself, and after a couple of months, and at two neighboring Zhulebino and Lermontovsky Avenue.
References:
20 MHz in Kotelniki
20 MHz in Zhulebino

Post has been editedyanixxx - 28.04.17, 23:53

Such a question: Yota exactly uses the megaphone B3? So far, all the conclusions of diagnostic utilities that have been encountered contained only B7, although I could be wrong ...

For sure. Here is the search result for networks in LTE Band 3 only mode.

sandwern,
For sure. But the priority is for B7, which is very common in mega.

Shl. It seems that in some (very small) regions, mega gives iota access to the B20, but only because there is no other.

I wonder how this is implemented? In the code 250-11 or 250-02 ...

yanixxx,
I would not be surprised that in 250-02. When I was sitting on an iota, my devices (vindofony) unsuccessfully tried to connect to LTE 250-02, if 250-11 is missing. After a lot of time (like, more than half a year) after I left them, they still reported to the media that they fixed the problems that arise because of this, but I’ve more to them with my foot. So did not check as now.

Post has been editedzikasak - 29.04.17, 22:50

So you can say that intra-band aggregation can not be anyone, except Megaphone.
But in some regions, some operators may have adjacent lanes in B3. Still, the "full width" B3 is 75 MHz, and even if you divide it between the three operators equally, you get more than 20 MHz for each. And if initially there was a division into “four” - 3 federal operators and one regional, then after buying the latter, the federal one may well be about 40 MHz. "One piece" or in the form of non-adjacent strips - then how it will develop ...
In addition, no one forces Megaphone to use adjacent lanes. Yes, if they are 20 MHz wide each, then it will not work out differently. But if the bands are narrower, it can be different.

This question - is not as vacuous as it may seem at first glance. Different hardware supports different types (in this aspect) aggregation. In other words, "adjacent" aggregation - the most "simple", it supports most of the hardware Cat.6 and above (and even some Cat.4 device, taking into account of the total bandwidth limitations). And the most complicated case - it (inband) aggregation of non-contiguous bands of different widths. It does not support not only the majority of subscriber equipment, but also on some BS models.

You do mention the NSG as a program to observe the whole thing. In it, and you can see it. Or in QXDM, for example. Yes, this all works only for equipment on the Kwalkcomm platforms. But if we are talking about the description of the parameters of the networks, then you can probably find the device on such a platform, even if there is no such thing at hand.

In Moscow, the inter-site "can" Megaphone during 3CA operation: carriers in B7 from one base, carriers in B3 on the other.

This does not mean that such information is not needed or useless. In the end, we are all interested in data transfer speed. And this is the parameter that directly determines this speed. Again, if you do not have a Cat.11 or higher device on Qualcomm, then someone has one. And the "place" for the modulation scheme in the network description can be provided in any case.
In Moscow networks, I can say that MTS for carriers in B3, B7 and B38 now almost always supports 256QAM, I can’t say anything about a carrier in B20.
Megafon has 256QAM support not seen yet.

vvevvevve,
I do not argue that all this is interesting and probably important, but personally I do not possess such information. If someone provides a full info on the region with all these wishes (which I doubt very much), then we’ll be happy to add it to the header.

I mention. But I do not have a single room yet. Maybe in the future will appear.

No problem. Will infa - will add.

This should be reported to Eldarczyk) And then he planned on S8 as much as 430 Mb / s, considering that the limit in the Moscow Megafon network is 450 Mb / s. At the same time without providing any screenshots naturally. Dude apparently does not know that 430 is even above their limit, because 20 + 20 + 15 at 64QAM is 412 Mb / s as I understand it.

From here:
http: //www.mobile-revi...alaxy-s8-plus.shtml#s8

Post has been editedyanixxx - 30.04.17, 00:37