Title

Evaluation device and method for evaluating access selection in a wireless communication system

Technical field of the invention

The present invention relates to wireless communication in general. More particularly, it relates to an evaluation device, a monitoring device, a communication system, a mobile communication device, a method for evaluating access selection, a method for providing parameters for evaluation of access selection, a computer-readable medium and a program element for evaluating access selection. In particular, it relates to tracing and evaluating access selection decisions that a decision engine of a heterogeneous access system and mobility management forms over a prolonged period of time.

Background of the invention

In wireless communication, any mobility decision, in particular the change of access technologies/systems (e.g. handover) for a user session may be linked to a change of costs of resources, for both end users (e.g. subscribers, users of a mobile communication device) and operators (e.g. communication providers) . Costs may be anything from a real monetary value, i.e. costs of connection, to a more general approach, like different resource usage like for example bandwidth, reliability, quality of service or even costs related to the type of connection like for example GSM, UMTS, HSDPA, HSUPA, WLAN and the like.

Access systems may in particularly be understood as follows: GSM may be interpreted as a "plain" cellular network. UMTS may be understood the "3G" next generation GSM, which may allow for higher data speeds, while allowing backward compatibility with GSM in the network. HSDPA and HSUPA may be interpreted as "last mile extensions" of UMTS that allow higher than UMTS transfer speeds. WLAN is the IEEE 802.11 based wireless local area networking (LAN) protocol.

It is known that decisions for intersystem network handovers, i.e. change of access systems, may be prepared according to local or global network policies, which possibly require the use of feedback loops and/or control cycles. However, it is yet unclear whether this approach may eventually converge towards a preferred solution regarding the mapping of network resources, both wired and wireless, subscriber devices or sessions .

However, the system may have no knowledge about the actual performance in terms of costs, as previously defined. In case network resources and their respective usage are measured continuously in conjunction with e.g. a number of subscribers currently online at a given time, a correlation may be possible to determine whether the relation of used resources per subscriber is improving depending on access selection policies. This approach however may not necessarily produce a meaningful performance value to either the operator or the subscriber .

There may be a need to provide a comprehensible evaluation of access technology/system switching decisions. Summary of the invention

Thus, an evaluation device for evaluating access selection, a monitoring device, a communication system, a mobile communication device, a method for evaluating access selection, a method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection, a computer-readable medium and a program element according to the independent claims are provided.

According to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention, an evaluation device for evaluating access selection is provided, comprising an evaluation unit, wherein the evaluation unit is adapted to generate a change measure based upon at least one parameter of an access service of one of at least two network nodes.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, a monitoring device is provided, comprising a first determination unit for determining a first parameter of an access service of a first network node, a second determination unit for determining a second parameter of an access service of a second network node, wherein the monitoring device is adapted to provide at least one of the first and the second parameter to an evaluation device according to the present invention.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, a communication system is provided, comprising a mobile communication device, a communication network, at least two network nodes and an evaluation device according to the present invention, wherein the at least two network nodes are connected to the communication network, wherein each network node is adapted to provide an access service to the mobile communication device and wherein the evaluation device is adapted to generate a change measure based upon at least one parameter of the access service of one of the at least two network nodes.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, a mobile communication device is provided, comprising an evaluation unit, wherein the evaluation unit is adapted to generate a change measure based upon at least one parameter of an access service of one of at least two network nodes .

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, a method for evaluating access selection is provided, comprising acquiring a first parameter of an access service of a first network node, acquiring a second parameter of an access service of a second network node and generating a change measure based upon at least one parameter of the group consisting of the first parameter, the second parameter, the delta of the first parameter and the second parameter, a bandwidth difference, a cost difference, a quality of service difference, a benefit of switching network nodes, a performance difference, an advantage measure and a delay difference.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, a method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection is provided, comprising determining a first parameter of an access service of a first network node, determining a second parameter of an access service of a second network node and providing at least one of the first and the second parameter to an evaluation device. According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, a computer-readable medium is provided in which a computer program is stored, which computer program, when being executed by a processor, is adapted to carry out at least one method according to the present invention.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, a program element is provided, which program element, when being executed by a processor, is adapted to carry out at least one method according to the present invention .

The present invention describes a method to collect information that is related to access system switches and to determine the benefit of an according change, the so-called advantage measure, change measure or change criteria.

Thus, the present invention relates to applying auditing in network based resource and handover control.

In the following, further embodiments of the present invention are described referring in particular to either an evaluation device for evaluating access selection, to a monitoring device, to a communication system, to a mobile communication device, to a method for evaluating access selection, to a method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection, to a computer-readable medium and to a program element. However, arbitrary variations and interchanges of single or multiple features between the claimed entities is conceivable and within the scope and disclosure of the present patent application.

It is also noted, that embodiments and aspects of the present invention have been described with respect to different subject-matters. In particular, some embodiments have been described with reference to apparatus type claims, whereas other embodiments have been described with reference to method type claims . However, a person skilled in the art will gather from the above and the following description that, unless notified otherwise, in addition to any combination features belonging to one type of subject-matter also any combination between features relating to different subject- matters, in particular between features of apparatus type claims and features of method type claims, is considered to be disclosed with this application.

These and other aspects of the present invention will become apparent from and elucidated with reference to the embodiments described hereinafter.

One aspect of decision making may be seen as distributing a decision making authority between an end user and the network/operator/provider. This may involve a decision making entity in the network with another one on the user side, in particular within the user equipment. Each of these decision making entities may be substantially fully capable of taking and executing (e.g. by using a remote executer) decisions regarding resources (e.g. bandwidth) and mobility (e.g. handover) management.

The decision in this context may relate to two aspects. For a given a service that is to be delivered to the user, it may has to be decided on which access system the service is to be provided and, dependent this decision, how much resource

(e.g. bandwidth) is to be allocated for this service on the access network. As a decision making entity any software, hardware, or human interface may be understood that performs this decision. This entity may be located within the network or on the user side (e.g. within the user equipment) .

As the execution of the decisions may involve changes on the network and the user equipment side, remote executers, which execute the decisions on the remote side, may be required to fully execute the decisions.

There may exist different approaches regarding the distribution of the decision making authority.

One such approach may be seen as a network decision entity having the ultimate decision authority in case there are conflicts between network and user preferences present. Following, user equipment may only exercise its decision making authority in case the network previously allowed it to do so .

A different approach may be giving the responsibility to the user entity with the network taking over the ultimate authority in its own hands only when necessary.

Shifting intelligent decision making entities to the user side however may raise several issues. First of all, it may require an increased computational load at the user equipment. Furthermore, relying on such user equipment based solutions may mean that a large number of users will have to have an according solution installed. In case of upgrades to the system, an upgrade of all user equipment based entities may be required. Furthermore, due to necessary backwards compatibility, it may occur that some user equipment may not be equipped with a user equipment based solution. When combining the aforementioned issues with a general shift of computation intense tasks from the user/equipment side to the network, a single decision entity at the network side may be seen as being preferable.

However, there may also be a need to respond to concerns regarding the network taking decisions on behalf of the user. Users may feel uneasy and may not trust a network to take direct decisions regarding network control of resources or mobility management. In order to motivate users to employ network side resource and mobility management, a clear demonstration regarding monetary and performance benefits when delegating resource and mobility management to the network may be favourable.

According to the present invention two new entities are introduced. The first entity is an evaluation device (auditor) . The evaluation device may keep track of access technologies currently available to an end user at any given time as well as the current choice, i.e. the access technology currently employed.

The evaluation device may also be responsible for configuring a monitoring entity or monitoring device, the second entity.

The monitoring device may be seen as being responsible for setting up different metres on different network components, obtaining reports from different administrative domains and to prepare the metrics for the evaluation device. By evaluating the metrics obtained from different access technologies, the evaluation device may be able to determine an advantage measure. The advantage measure may include performance benefits and/or monetary benefits related to a network decision for switching/changing access technologies.

The advantage measure may also be understood as a change measure. It may be understood as a value determining the overall benefit of a switching decision, both before and after a switching occurred. This may allow a decision whether to or not to perform a switching as well. Furthermore, the change measure may also be understood as an indication whether it is preferable to perform a switching with regard to overall benefit .

The evaluation device may either determine the benefit or the change that occurred due to a change of access technologies or may also determine a possible benefit by comparing all access technologies currently available to an end user/subscriber (e.g. all access technologies that are within communication range of the end user, thus are connectable) , generate a change measure or change decision that would yield a preferred benefit to an end user and/or service provider and subsequently initiate the switching of access technologies .

Any mobility decision in general and the change of access systems for a user session in particular may be seen as being linked to a change of costs for resources, both at the end user/subscriber end and the operator/provider end.

Both the evaluation device and the monitoring device may be employed to trace access selection decisions that a decision engine of a heterogeneous access system and mobility management may perform over a prolonged period of time, e.g. one billing period. Such an access selection decision (thus the change of an access technology) may be based on the change measure determined by the evaluation device and may be understood as a handover procedure from one access technology to a further access technology (e.g. changing network nodes, i.e. access points a mobile communication device is connected to) .

Without a monitoring device and/or an evaluation device, decisions of network based management systems may be immediately "forgotten" once they are executed. An according system, though not being really stateless, may have no "memory" or other mechanism to prove the occurrence of benefits .

Each decision in favour of one access technology or access system may also be interpreted as a decision against the use of another access technology or access system, in particular against that access technology or access system that has been used immediately before the switching. Reasons for switching an access technology or an access system may comprise:

• Limited coverage or other connectivity problems

• Bandwidth extension (using a secondary or further access system)

• Cost reduction (e.g. two access systems are available however one is inducing less cost)

• Reliability/quality of service: e.g. transfer the voice part of a multimedia stream via an access technology (e.g. GSM or UMTS) while using another access technology (e.g. WLAN) for the video part. The invention may describe a method for collecting information that may be related to access technology/access system switches and to evaluate and may determine the benefit of or the difference between these changes resulting in the advantage measure.

The advantage measure may thus also be a change measure for initiating a handover/change of access technologies/systems. In an example, the evaluation device may be a separate entity in the network of a service provider.

In a further example, the evaluation device may be residing on the end user side, e.g. being implemented within a mobile communication device of an end user as an evaluation unit (with the evaluation device and the evaluation unit being essentially identical) .

An implementation based on charging tickets only (i.e. completely a posteriori) may be used also. However, an according solution might not be able to recreate at least some of the conditions that finally lead to a decision for access change .

With the system according to the present invention, information regarding alternative wireless access technologies or systems that were available at the time of the change of access, however have been deselected, may be taken into account as well.

Thus, it may be possible to document to both the end user/subscriber and the operator/provider the benefit/positive effect of an access selection decision engine which may not be possible by pure analysis of charging records/tickets because they may not contain information on other available access technologies/systems before, at the time of or after the handover decision.

The evaluation device and/or the monitoring device may either function as a third party that users would have to be required to trust or may be part of an operator's network. In the first case, the operator network may have an incentive to give the correct measurements or reports to the monitoring device as it may get more users to employ its "network controlled service" by providing an audited service/evaluation. Service providers may also be encouraged to give the correct measurements to the monitoring device which may be seen by the end users that the according service is audit proved/evaluated.

An aspect of the invention may be seen in comparing a cost value for using a decision making entity in a network with a cost value when not using a decision making entity.

E.g. if a user set up a connection through a network, the connection may be rerouted through the network.

In one example, the decision for rerouting or for using a different access point or network node and/or for a different access service may be made by a decision making entity.

At the end of the connection, a ticket, i.e. a billing record for the complete connection may be generated. This generated ticket may be compared to a ticket, which would have been generated, if no decision engine would have been used.

In one example, the ticket may have been compared with a ticket for a connection via one static access point. The difference value may be shown to the user, e.g. on a display. In the following, further exemplary embodiments of the present invention will be described relating to an evaluation device for evaluating access selection. However, these explanations also apply to the monitoring device, to the communication system, to the mobile communication device, to both the method for evaluating access selection and the method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection, for the computer-readable medium as well as for the program element.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the at least one parameter may be one out of the group consisting of a network resource, a bandwidth, a mobility, a handover information, a reliability, a quality of service, a bandwidth usage, cost, instantaneous delay, average delay and time.

The according parameters may be preferably indicative for an individual cost of a currently used access technology or access system of one of the network nodes. The respective parameters may be acquired directly, may be provided by the monitoring device or may be determined by provided parameters within the evaluation device.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the evaluation device may be adapted to evaluate at least one parameter of each of at least two network nodes and wherein the evaluation device may be adapted to determine a delta of the parameters.

Accordingly, the evaluation device may be capable of determining either the absolute cost/benefit of a particular access technology/service by evaluating at least one parameter of each of at least two network nodes to be compared or may determine a relative benefit by comparing the absolute benefit or by determining a delta, thus a difference of parameters, e.g. by subtracting the respective parameters from one another, to acquire the relevant relative benefit.

In case that more than two network nodes are to be compared, the evaluation device may compare all absolute benefits by comparing absolute parameters or may determine multiple deltas, thus differences, between each of the more than two network nodes and subsequently compare the benefits and determine a preferred network node.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the change measure may be indicative for a changing of network nodes.

After having determined the absolute relative benefit of all relevant network nodes, the evaluation device may determine the change measure which may result in a change of network nodes, thus a change of access technologies and/or access systems .

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the evaluation device may be adapted to determine at least one delta of the group consisting of a bandwidth difference, a cost difference, a quality of service difference, a benefit of switching network nodes, a performance difference, an advantage measure and a delay difference.

These differences or deltas may indicate the game and/or positive (or negative) benefit a changing of network nodes may provide. Thus, by determining the respective information, the evaluation device may be able to determine a preferred network node to be changed to.

An according change determination may employ for example a weighted sum of benefits to arrive at a change decision preferably beneficial for the current situation of the end user and/or the network operator.

In the following exemplary embodiments of the communication system are provided. However, it is to be understood that the explanations relating to the communication system also apply to the evaluation device for evaluating access selection, to monitoring device, to the mobile communication device, to both the method for evaluating access selection and the method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection, for the computer-readable medium and for the program element.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the communication system further comprises a monitoring device, wherein the monitoring device may be adapted to determine the at least one parameter of the access service/access technology of one of the at least two network nodes and wherein the monitoring device may be adapted to provide the at least one parameter to the evaluation device.

The monitoring device may be interpreted as an interface device responsible for acquiring all relevant parameters for the evaluation device to determine the respective benefit and consequently the change measure.

The monitoring device and the evaluation device may also be understood as one single, integral device. According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the evaluation device may be connected to the communication network and/or may be part of the mobile communication device.

When being connected to the communication network, the evaluation device may provide the service of evaluation and determining the change measure to a plurality of mobile communication devices of different end users. It may thus be seen as an integral part of the communication network of the service provider.

In case the evaluation device is within the mobile communication device, it may preferably only evaluate and determine the change measure for that particular mobile communication device. Furthermore, in case the evaluation device also provides a history of the determined parameters, benefits and/or change measure, the mobile user may be able to validate the decisions of the evaluation device by analyzing and/or tracing the determined parameters, deltas, benefits and/or change measure, i.e. the respective end user is able to determine the advantage measure.

According to a further exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the communication system may consist of or may further comprise at least one device selected from the group consisting of a network database, a network decision engine, an operator network and a carrier network.

In particular, the network database and/or the network decision engine may be part of the evaluation device and/or the monitoring device. Exemplary embodiments of the present invention will be described below with reference to the following drawings.

The illustration in the drawings is schematic. In different drawings, similar or identical elements are provided with similar or identical reference numerals.

The figures are not drawn to scale, however may depict qualitative proportions .

Brief description of the drawings

Figs. Ia, b show exemplary embodiments of a communication system according to the present invention,

Fig. 2 shows a flow-chart of evaluation according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention,

Fig. 3a, b show a method for evaluating access selection and a method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention.

Detailed description

Now referring to Fig. Ia, an exemplary embodiment of a communication system according to the present invention is depicted.

The communication system 20a is divided in a user part 28 and a network provider part 27. The user part 28 essentially comprises a mobile communication device 21, which is communicatively coupled via the communication link 24 to an operator network 31.

On the operator side, exemplary four network nodes or access points 25a-d are depicted. The mobile communication device 21 is connected to the network node 25b via communication link 24.

A monitor 23 within the communication network 27 is communicatively coupled to the operator network 31 and via the operator network 31 to the network nodes 25a-d. Further, the monitor 23 is coupled to the carrier network 32 and the service (network) 33.

Monitor 23 is communicatively coupled to the evaluation device 22 and is providing parameters determined from the network nodes 25a-d, the operator network 31, the carrier network 32 and the service 33 to the evaluation device 22.

The evaluation device 22 again is communicatively coupled to the mobile communication device 21. This coupling, though depicted as a separate link in Fig. Ia, may also be a virtual link through the operator network 31 to the mobile communication device 21 via communication link 24.

The evaluation device is evaluating parameter information received from the monitor 23 and is providing an advantage measure and/or a change measure to either the mobile communication device 21 or to the communication network 27, in particular to the operator network 31.

According to the change measure, a change decision or change of network nodes 26 may be carried out. Thus, the mobile communication device 21 may connect to a different network node 25a, c, d via the communication link 24. Now referring to Fig. Ib, a similar communication system 20b is depicted with the main difference being that the evaluation device 22 resides within the mobile communication device 21, thus both being substantially a single, logical unit/device .

Now referring to Fig. 2, an exemplary flow-chart of an evaluation according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention is depicted.

Fig. 2 depicts an exemplary call flow for the devices/services according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention.

In the flow diagram, N-DB is a network database 29, which may be considered to comprise information about the services that individual users may use, thus the mobile communication device 21 of the individual user may employ and the cost of services in different access technologies/systems, in particular network nodes 1 to 3 (NNl to NN3, 25a, b,c) .

N-DE is the network decision engine 30 that decides which different access technology is to be used for the services of individual users.

While the network decision engine 30 is depicted as a separate entity in Fig. 2, it may also be understood that the network decision engine 30 may be part of the monitor 23 and/or the evaluation device 22.

In particular, the evaluation device 22 may provide information to the network decision engine 30 for it to generate the change measure and/or to perform the instructions and/or execution of a changing of network nodes. However, the functionality of the network decision engine 30 may also be provided by the evaluation device 22.

The following steps are depicted at the left side of the timeline of the evaluation device 21 in Fig. 2. 1. The evaluation device 22 obtains information about the (IP) service running on the mobile communication device 21. This may be done by implicit signalling from the mobile communication device 21 as for example in alternative Ib or through the network database 29, which has information about services running to individual users (depicted as alternative Ia) .

2. Evaluation device 22 informs the monitor 23 about the services. This information may describe the sessions that compose the services.

3. The monitor 23 may then contact the network 27, in particular a network node (or access point) 25a, to obtain measurements from NNl 25a, which services are used. To cross-check or to confirm this information, the monitor 23 may set up measurement nodes in the operator network 31 or may contact the service providing node NNl 25a. A measurement node may be an hardware entity capable of measuring the service quality/quantity destined for a user connected to a network node passing through the network in which it is located. This step may especially be relevant for a deployment scenario in which the monitor 23 and the evaluation device 22 are third parties, thus not integrally belonging to the operator network 31. 4. When the network decision engine 30 takes a decision to switch the service of the mobile communication device 21 to a different network node, here for example NN2 25b, this information is sent to the evaluation device 22, either directly from the network decision engine 30 as depicted in alternative 4a or indirectly from the mobile communication device 21 as depicted in alternative 4b.

5. The evaluation device 22 may send the new service context (access information) to the monitor 23. At this time, the evaluation device 22 knows that a change decision has been made and may start to compare parameters like for example the bandwidth usage and/or the difference in quality of service of the two different network nodes NNl 21a and NN2 21b. By comparison, a delta may be computed by tracking the information in the old, former network node NNl 25a and the new, current network node NN2 25b until either the service ends or the mobile communication device 21 is sent to yet another network node. This delta may be seen as a vector that comprises cost (like for example c in Euros), bandwidth (bw, e.g. in kbits per sec.) and average delay (d in seconds) . The delta may be computed by taking a running integral of the difference between the related vectors, also known as quality of service (QoS) vectors in the new and old network node, where i indicates a the decision number. The integration may also be implemented by taking a difference and running a running sum in a discrete manner. The calculation may be performed according to the formula

t=T _l+l

A _{ (c,bw,d) = J {Q _A p _new (c,bw,d,t)-Q _A p _id (c,bw,d,t)}dt t=T, Q may be interpreted as the utility that a user may receive, depending on the input parameters. I particular, any function that may capture a relation between the utility/benefit and the input parameters may be employed. The respective relations may for example be as follows:

• Q increases with decreasing costs

• Q increases with increasing bandwidth • Q increases with decreasing time

The input parameters referred to may not be seen as being exhaustive. Any parameter that may affect the utility or benefit of a user from employing a service that changes with a handover may be added, as long as it may be measured by a monitor node.

6. The monitor 23 may start monitoring the network node NN2 25b while still measuring relevant parameters, e.g. over a quality of service in the old network node NNl 25a.

In the following, two scenario/cases are conceivable.

Scenario/case A: Session ends

7. "Session ending" is sent to the evaluation device 22 either indirectly via the network database 29

(alternative 7a) or directly by the mobile communication device 21 (alternative 7b) .

8. The evaluation device 22 requests bandwidth usage, quality of service delta and/or other relevant information/parameters from the monitor 23 to compute a final "measure of advantage" for the user. Considering N handovers have been performed, the measure of advantage may be determined by the formula

i=\

This formula may be understood as an aggregated sum of advantage measures for each handover.

Negative values for cost (c) and delay (d) may be preferential for the user, whereas the bandwidth (bw) component or parameter should be positive to be advantageous .

9. The monitor 23 may provide information to the evaluation device 22.

Scenario/case B: Session continues

10. When the network decision engine 30 takes a decision to shift the service to network node NN3 25c, this information is sent to the evaluation device 22 either directly from the network decision engine 30 comparable to alternative 4a (here: alternative 10a) or indirectly from the mobile communication device 21 as in alternative 4b (here: alternative 10b) . In another example, the evaluation device 22 may retrieve the information from the decision engine.

11. The evaluation device 22 sends a new service description to the monitor 23. The evaluation device 22 may also request bandwidth usage and quality of service delta and/or other relevant information from the monitor 23 to determine a temporary "measure of advantage" or change evaluation value/measure for the user. This temporary measure of advantage is summed up until the mobile communication device 21 does not have any more services, at which point the sum may substantially be seen as the (final) "measure of advantage".

12. The monitor 23 starts monitoring the new network node NN3 25c, while still measuring relevant parameters such as overall quality of service of the old network node(s) NNl 25a and/or NN2 25b.

13. The monitor 23 provides bandwidth usage and quality of service delta to the evaluation device 22. Scenario B continues until the user doesn't have any more services running, i.e. Scenario A occurs.

Now referring to Fig. 3a, a method for evaluating access selection is depicted.

Method 35 for evaluating access selection comprises

Step 36 of acquiring a first parameter of an access service of a first network node Step 37 of acquiring a second parameter of an access service of a second network node, and

Step 38 of generating a change measure based upon at least one parameter of the group consisting of the first parameter, the second parameter, the delta of the first parameter and the second parameter, a bandwidth difference, a cost difference, a quality of service difference, a benefit of switching network nodes, a performance difference, an advantage measure and a delay difference. Now referring to Fig. 3b, a method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection to an evaluation device is depicted.

The method 40 for providing parameters for evaluating access selection comprises

Step 36 of determining a first parameter of an access service of a first network node,

Step 37 of determining a second parameter of an access service of a second network node, and Step 38 of providing at least one of the first and the second parameter to an evaluation device.

It should be noted that the term "comprising" does not exclude other elements or steps and that "a" or "an" does not exclude a plurality. Also, elements described in association with different embodiments may be combined.

It should also be noted, that reference signs in the claims shall not be construed as limiting the scope of the claims.

A computer-readable medium may be a floppy disk, a CD ROM, a DVD, a harddisk, a USB (Universal Serial Bus) start device, a RAM (Read Access Memory) , a ROM (Read Only Memory) and an EPROM (Erasable Programmable Read Only Memory) .

A computer-readable medium may also be a data communication network, e.g. the internet, which allows downloading a program code . Reference numerals

20a, b Communication system

21 Mobile communication device 22 Evaluation device/unit

23 Monitoring device

24 Communication link 25a-d Network nodes

26 Change of network nodes 27 Communication network (provider side)

28 User part/side of communication network

29 Network database

30 Network decision engine

31 Operator network 32 Carrier network

33 Service

35 Method for evaluating access selection

36 Step 1 of Method 35

37 Step 2 of Method 35 38 Step 3 of Method 35

40 Method for providing parameters for evaluating access selection

41 Step 1 of Method 40

42 Step 2 of Method 40 43 Step 3 of Method 40