nsiderations other than the regulatory require- ments Wi-Fi suffers more as LTE is more robust to co-channel interference. Both networks experience the degradation due to increased interference but LTE network can still maintain good performance. When adding additional fairness algorithm in the LTE side it is possible to reduce the impacts to the Wi-Fi network such that the degradation on the Wi-Fi network is of the same order compared to the degradation due to the interference from another Wi-Fi net- work. Thus when implementing proper fairness solution in the LTE side to control the impact Capacity with single technology Wi-Fi Single network Two networks Figure 10.9 Performance per access node with two LTE or two Wi-Fi networks on the same channel LTE Small Cell Optimization Capacity with LTE and Wi-Fi on the same 20 MHz channel Wi-Fi Separate channel Same channel Same channel and fairness algorithm in LTE eNodeB Figure 10.10 Coexistence performance between LTE and Wi-Fi to the existing Wi-Fi network performance, it does not really matter if the network causing interference is another Wi-Fi or LTE network. This shows that LTE technology can also be implemented in such a way that it not only meets the requirements of the unlicensed band operation, but can provide even extra fairness to compensate the lower interference tolerance of Wi-Fi networks. The higher capacity of LTE technology will also reduce the needed amount of nodes to what would need to be installed to serve a given amount of traffic compared to a Wi-Fi network. The coexistence performance presented in Figure 10.10 is actually the worst-case scenario. When considering on which channel to place the LAA transmission, one should at first set a priority to select a frequency which is not used by a high-power and high-activity Wi-Fi network or another LAA network. Selecting a channel which has either low activity or low level of interference from other users of the channel will allow reaching the performance equivalent to a single LTE network while also 