Shaping Future 6G Networks. Группа авторов

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ might this mean for the long path towards 6G, currently being driven by early‐stage discussions in working groups of the ITU?

      Since 1998, 3GPP has expanded considerably, growing from an initial five “organizational partners” and six “market representation partners.” Organizational partners are different telecommunications standard development organizations (SDOs). Currently, there are seven SDOs: Association of Radio Industries and Businesses (ARIB) and Telecommunication Technology Committee (TTC) (Japan), Telecommunications Standards Development Society India (TSDSI) (India), European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) (Europe), China Communications Standards Association (CCSA) (China), Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) (USA), and Telecommunications Technology Association (TTA) (Korea) [6]. Market representation partners are groups representing industry and sector interests. There are 21 market representation partners, including the GSMA. Each of these has, in turn, many of its own members.

      Significantly, the number of market representatives has continued to grow in recent years, with new organizations that represent the specific interests of vertical industries entering the fray. Examples include 5GACIA (the 5G Alliance for Connected Industries and Automation), 5GAA (5G Automotive Association), 5G Americas, PSCE (Public Safety Communication Europe Forum), CSAE (China Society of Automotive Engineers), and others. Each of these is thus now equivalent, in status at least, with the GSMA, which has been seen as the most significant industry group for many years. No longer – which could mean new pressures emerge that disrupt the unified approach to realizing IMTs.

Finally, there are also “observer” members, which may be new national or international SDOs that are candidates for future elevation to organizational partner status. While 3GPP has accomplished much in becoming the primary organization responsible for leading mobile standardization initiatives, it is an increasingly complicated and rapidly growing body.

      Of course, on the one hand this growth speaks for the strength of the industry and the alignment that has been achieved, particularly since IMT‐Advanced was brought to fruition. On the other, it points also to an increasingly diverse spectrum of views. 3G and 4G developments were largely driven by a combination of vendor, operator, and regulator interests, with additional contributions from integrators and academia, and with the goal of realizing mobile telecommunications standards primarily for people and devices. It was a relatively simple and well‐defined community. 5G has now brought a dramatic change to this ecosystem, expanding the focus to new sectors that can benefit from wireless communications. Why, and what might it mean for 6G?

      5G is the first generation of mobile technology to have been designed, from the outset, to support multiple services. This was supported by a phased implementation. First, enhanced mobile broadband (eMBB) services were launched by many operators, using 5G spectrum but also leveraging existing core assets. eMBB services are largely dedicated to personal use, for consumer and business customers, and support the standard range of mobile capabilities (data, voice, and messaging services) but with enhanced performance.

      However, the second phase brought new services that can be run on 5G networks in parallel with eMBB – massive IoT (MIoT) and Ultra‐Reliable Low‐Latency Communications (URLLC). It is these new services that have driven the most profound changes to the mobile ecosystem.

      That is because, while eMBB could be said to be “people‐driven,” MIoT and URLLC are largely “device‐driven” [7].

      The new capabilities that 5G (Phase 2) brings are designed to service new levels of performance for connected things and processes. So, while there are undoubtedly many exciting and novel applications and services that can be enabled for people, there are expected to be many, many more for devices and applications, across multiple industries and sectors.

      Indeed, it is the new use cases enabled by MIoT and URLLC that are driving the expansion of the mobile ecosystem: new stakeholders have been attracted by the potential to use wireless connectivity to service a growing range of applications.

      Broadly speaking, these can be divided into two categories: public and private. According to consulting firm, Arthur D. Little, use cases extend to areas such as “mobility and public transport; public safety; healthcare; energy and utilities; education; education and retail; media and entertainment; and, industry and agriculture” [8].

      Within each category, an unprecedented number of use cases (when compared with previous generations of mobile technology) can be found – and will continue to be discovered, as the market matures. As a result, a growing number of new stakeholder groups have emerged to manage contributions to mobile standard evolution from interested parties.

      These have aligned over both public and private sector interests. A UK‐based software industry trade organization with more than 850 members, techUK, has noted that “the ecosystem is likely to expand rapidly” [9]. Similarly, diverse groups exist in numerous other countries. There is also a growing number of industry‐specific groups that seek to represent the interests of members from particular sectors.

As such, it seems equally likely that competing interests will emerge. Indeed, 6G is already targeted at an even broader set of use cases, based on the introduction of new features and performance capabilities. As noted, the ITU is working on a definition of these new requirements, in the shape of IMT‐2030. While this does not yet amount to 6G – and, indeed, may not [10] – this will shape new enhancements to networks and should be key considerations toward the definition of 6G. Specifically:

      to support various applications driven by devices…and devices to be developed in the future, the Network2030 infrastructure is expected to include fixed and wireless networks, cloud and space communications infrastructures… We expect virtualisation, memory and computing technologies in addition to Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML) [to] continue to impact Network2030.

      [11]

As such, the emerging requirements for IMT‐2030 – and, in all likelihood a new series of documents that will support evolution toward 6G – already embrace yet more stakeholders and technologies. A key conclusion from this is that standardization for 6G will, by necessity, involve a wider group of stakeholders participating and contributing their unique perspectives than has been seen before. For the time being, 3GPP is the first to align with IMT‐2030, as can be seen in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2 3GPP alignment with IMT‐2030.

      But, it is clearly reasonable to ask if the current standardization model, based on an increasingly diverse and expanded 3GPP, can sustain and absorb contributions from such a broad ecosystem to arrive at a single set of standards that realizes the requirements demanded in 6G – and whether it can remain the sole voice of the industry. To complicate matters further, new political pressures have emerged that may further influence this ecosystem.

3.5 Shifting Sands: Will Politics Influence Future Standardization Activities?

      The issue of dependence on high‐risk vendors has been thrown to the fore under the Trump presidency. Other countries are also beginning programs to de‐risk their networks and limit the involvement of specific vendors.

Broadly speaking, the 3G world could be defined in two camps: US‐led initiatives contributed to the evolution of CDMA2000, while 3GPP‐led initiatives saw UMTS brought to market. Since then, the evolution of mobile standards based on successive IMTs has been dominated by 3GPP, with 3GPP2 entering into hibernation. For 5G, 3GPP has been the sole standards СКАЧАТЬ