The news is filled with stories about carriers opting for equipment that allows them to open their radio access networks (RAN) to use multiple manufacturers, known as Open RAN. The strategy allows them to break away from the model of using a single vendor for its proprietary end-to-end system, increasing competition and innovation and lowering costs.
Sounds simple. But, as Monica Paolini, Principal Analyst, notes in a Sensa Fili Deep Dive, different organizations have their definitions of the term Open RAN. Depending on the definition, Open RAN can either be characterized as a hopeless cause or a godsend, according to a report: The Open RAN ecosystem gathers steam: The future of the RAN is open.
“Strictly speaking, Open RAN is a RAN that uses an open interface – the Open Fronthaul interface defined by the O-RAN Alliance and based on the 3GPP NR 7.2 split – to connect the RU and DU,” Paolini wrote. “By using an open interface, operators can disaggregate the network and, if they so choose, have a multi-vendor RAN.” That definition does not deliver the full benefits that Open RAN promises, according to Paolini.
The Telecom Infra Project (TIP), a global community of companies and organizations, takes a more comprehensive view to developing, testing and deploying open, disaggregated, standards-based networks. TIP’s definition of OpenRAN uses open interfaces between remote units, centralized units, distributed units and RAN intelligent controllers, with vendor-neutral hardware and software. Multiple architectures can also be used, including an all-integrated RAN and several split RAN scenarios.
Paolini notes that there is an even wider definition of Open RAN, which requires multi-vendor networks, improved security, plug-and-play interoperability, a virtualized and cloud-native architecture, and the use of commercial off-the-shelf hardware.
“This [wider] definition of Open RAN is so restrictive that it makes it extremely challenging or impossible for operators to adopt,” Paolini wrote. “In most cases, it is Open RAN detractors that endorse this definition to prove that Open RAN will never work on scale – or at least in the short-to-medium term.”
Paolini takes a nuanced approach to defining Open RAN, noting that the benefit operators seem to value the most is flexibility. “In line with this, the concept of Open RAN should reflect the same flexibility and allow for a wide range of Open RAN implementations, among which operators can choose,” she wrote.
By J. Sharpe Smith, Inside Towers Technology Editor
Reader Interactions