Openran and 5G: John Baker SVP, Business Development April 2020
Openran and 5G: John Baker SVP, Business Development April 2020
Openran and 5G: John Baker SVP, Business Development April 2020
John Baker
SVP, Business Development
April 2020
Copyright Mavenir 2020. mavenir.com
Introduction
What is OpenRAN
Benefits of OpenRAN
Summary
Uses software components to not only Uses best of breed components and
replicate existing core network, radio and software in architecting the network.
base station functionality, but introduce new .
capabilities as they are developed.
OpenRAN enables:
1. Vertical applications which have different network requirements in terms of
performance, capacity, latency etc. vertical applications.
2. Centralized and virtualized baseband can provide pooled virtualized network
functions that can dynamically allocate different resources through network
slicing to efficiently and effectively
3. Creation of architecture on the fly to fit the needs of the applications
• The O-RAN architecture supports both the Higher Layer Split (HLS) being specified by 3GPP
• O-RAN Alliance has adopted the previous conclusions of the xRAN Forum to standardize on a specific
decomposition of functions between the O-RU and O-DU, termed 7-2x split.
• This split can also be configured to operate in two distinct modes, termed Category A and Category B.
– “Category A” mode of operation
• the pre-coding and resource element mapping operate in the O-DU
– “Category B” mode of operation
• the pre-coding functions are moved below the split
• fronthaul interface to transport MIMO layers. In such a configuration
• “modulation compression” can be used in the DL to effectively send only the bits equivalent to the constellation
points
• resulting in the bandwidth approaching that of alternative 7-3 splits
• Using such an approach, a converged fronthaul interface can be used to support a variety of use
cases, from outdoor massive MIMO, to simple indoor transmit diversity systems.
§ The systems integrator will be responsible for integrating across the entire
solution including integrating open radios. To ensure the ecosystem thrives and
performs as required, the SI can be impartial and not aligned or associated with a
specific hardware or software vendor.
1. MNO will need to integrate Open RAN • Multiple vendors have developed their Open RAN solutions specifically to be integrated onto hardware
solutions themselves and with other software
• With multiple vendors, solution is not • Systems Integration can be done by vendors or operators with numerous Open RAN deployments in
integrated live MNO networks
• MNO will be responsible for the cost of • H/w and s/w vendors followed data center integration best practices from well established IT world
integration • MNOs deployed Open RAN find integration costs no higher than traditional single-vendor approach
• Leads to higher overall costs and • Traditional approach to deploying RAN still requires integration between different vendors – for
delayed time to market example, for OSS/BSS, EPC and RAN and there are associated service agreements with each vendor
2. High risk for network reliability • Open RAN network deployments have demonstrated ability to support large subscriber bases and
• With network elements from different meet network performance KPIs
vendors, network reliability will be • Network management tools have been developed for Open RAN, meaning that any issues can be
compromised quickly identified and resolved
• Identifying network issues more complex • Modularity will help operators audit and determine problems with their network faster.
with multiple vendor software and
hardware
Source: IGR Apr2020 https://igr-inc.com/advisory-subscription-services/research-catalog/
3. Lower overall network performance • Real Open RAN network deployments demonstrated support of large subscriber bases with network
• Network elements from multiple vendors performance KPIs met.
means overall network performance • Vodafone KPIs from Open RAN deployment in Turkey are comparable to KPIs from the legacy vendors
compromised • Software-based RAN allows for more rapid deployment of upgraded features, enabling operator to fine
• Disparate network elements cannot be tune performance features for their network and roll out advanced new features like carrier-aggregation
integrated to maximize performance to boost performance.
• DevOps approach with CD/CI can push updates quickly to many different sites, all automated and
orchestrated
4. Lower CapEx solution cost savings • Actual Open RAN network deployments by multiple MNOs have resulted in significantly lower costs –
not realized both CapEx and OpEx (40 percent according to Rakuten (Source: Qualcomm press event 03/2020)
• Use of disparate RAN vendors results in • Numerous TCO studies also prove and support similar CapEx and OpEx savings (up to 40 percent)
higher initial costs, since overall (Source: Senza Fili, Strategy Analytics)
volumes are lower than using a single • COTS h/w is generally lower cost, due to massive scale across enterprise IT, data center industries etc
RAN vendor
• Software can be developed and scaled quickly and at lower cost using modern tools and practices
such as DevOps, leading to lower operational costs.
5. Overall costs higher than traditional • Actual Open RAN network deployments by multiple MNOs have resulted in significantly lower costs –
• Even allowing for a lower cost software- both CapEx and OpEx (40% Rakuten)
based RAN solution on COTS, the • Some MNOs have stated that Open RAN integration costs have actually been lower than for the
overall deployment cost (including traditional approach
integration) will be higher Source: IGR Apr2020 https://igr-inc.com/advisory-subscription-services/research-catalog/
7. Less secure • Open RAN deployments have followed data center, private cloud, and enterprise IT integration and
• Open RAN deployments are inherently security best practices
less secure than the traditional single- • More auditable interfaces for MNOs to control of their own security vs black box from traditional vendors
vendor approach • Security is a joint responsibility across the vendors and the MNO versus a single vendor
8. Ecosystem not developed to • A wide range of specialist RAN software vendors developing and deploying solutions
support MNOs • Multiple vendors in ecosystem creating blueprints for available and well tested solutions
• No developed ecosystem of vendors to • Developed ecosystem includes Intel, Cisco, Fujitsu, MTI, VMware, Qualcomm, Airspan, NEC, Dell, Red
support the national MNO Hat, Quanta, Gigatera Communications, Xilinx, Sercomm, Supermicro and others have announced
• MNO will be responsible for installation, building or contributing to Open RAN.
maintenance and operational tasks
• The radio hardware ecosystem is rapidly developing with Telecom Infra Project (TIP) leading the
Evenstar h/w development.
9. Only suited to greenfield MNO • Multiple MNO deployments show that Open RAN can support legacy technology networks as well as
deployments new 4G LTE and 5G deployments
• Open RAN does not integrate well with the • Some of the largest MNOs are deploying Open RAN for their running legacy architecture networks
existing legacy 2G and 3G deployments
• The number of actual deployments, and
therefore the scale, is limited to greenfield
MNOs only
Source: IGR Apr2020 https://igr-inc.com/advisory-subscription-services/research-catalog/
0.48% 98.42%
LTE Call Drops HO Success Rate • Held to the same KPIs as
incumbents
50mbps 15mbps • Good KPIs and stability
DL Throughput @ UL Throughput @
15MHz 15MHz
200
Connected Users per cell
Source: Mavenir
Summary
• OpenRAN network awards, POCs and deployments are happening
worldwide
• System Integration – No Change
• Open standards and interfaces are achievable – Open to improvement
• OpenRAN ecosystem exists
• OpenRAN is Not a revolution – Needs Carrier adoption
• Moving the core to the edge enables 5G low latency services and a
profitable business plan.