As Open RAN steps into the commercialization stage, it is clear that the implementation stage has been driven by the ecosystem and includes solution planning and design, supply chain management, shipping logistics, component testing, RF optimization and drive testing. Radio access products have much smaller tolerances than the core network and require extensive testing before deployments. OpenRAN introduces a very foreign concept to MNOs - a “best of breed” RAN. Open RAN is that “best of breed” RAN.
Creating one is a work in progress, and this is where TIP and O-RAN Alliance and their members come in: to fulfill system integration, testing, and verification to create approved blueprints and reference designs, so operators can go out there and deploy tested, verified, “best of breed” RAN solutions. Vodafone is hoping that TIP can help steer the industry toward a more uniform approach to systems integration by creating a “central hub,” coordinated by TIP, which would allow mobile operators to share experiences. “This is one of our learnings from [TIP] trials”, said Santiago Tenorio, Head of Network Strategy & Architecture, Vodafone in a recent webinar.
AT&T has been hosting the O-RAN Alliance Plugfests and proof of concept activities to demonstrate the multi-vendor compatible configuration, performance, and fault management capabilities. The O-RAN Alliance, for its part, publishes test and interoperability specifications alongside every interface it develops and is investing in open integration labs where different vendors and operators can come together to achieve interoperability goals to create “best of breed” RAN.
TIP and O-RAN Plugfests help hardware vendors, software vendors and system integrators (SIs) to combine their integration efforts and get ready for field deployments.
Source: The Linux Foundation
While collaborative efforts continue, the success of Open RAN depends on the ecosystem’s ability to develop and execute a test and integration model. A recent paper states that many service providers believe that nearly 80 percent of the verification tasks are common across all MNOs.
In the past, the majority of contracts for integration or maintenance went to RAN suppliers, as they were specialists. As software makes network integration easier, we will see SIs that were in the past responsible for site build outs mostly out of physical components, becoming software integrators as well. Near off-the-shelf, plug-and-play compatibility with mainstream deployments, tech maturity, and adoption of Open RAN standards helps to give that power to SIs and simplify the deployments.
In the maintenance stage, a single RAN vendor is an easy solution for support and can provide maintenance based on the service SLA to do performance monitoring, field services, and lifecycle support. But in Open RAN, any time a network failure occurs, it falls back on multiple parties: from the system integrator to suppliers of different hardware and software elements. There is no one neck to choke.
Software-based RAN and CD/CI implementation allows for more rapid deployment of upgraded features, thereby allowing the operator fine tune performance features for their network and roll out advanced new features like carrier-aggregation to boost performance. A DevOps approach with CD/CI can push updates quickly to many different sites, all automated and orchestrated. Also, mobile operators will begin implementing more flexible processes and operational models to take advantage of Open RAN with a migration plan that will include changing the way RAN is being procured, new software tools, OSSs, and upskilling workforce to manage software-enabled “best of breed” RAN.
By getting reference designs and blueprints resulting from testing in the integrated Open Test and Integration Center (OTIC) environments and field trials, MNOs can gain more confidence in multi-vendor interoperability and focus their live network efforts on accelerating their Open RAN deployments by making “best of breed” RAN easier to purchase, deploy and maintain.
Mobile operator tasks in integration
At a very high level, we can say that operators perform the following important tasks.
-
Service Strategy - All operators have to focus on who they are targeting with their network, and how. This is generally the first step before the network is even launched and is also a continuous process as service providers must continuously re-evaluate their strategies.
-
A mobile network cannot exist without spectrum, so the purchase of spectrum is another important task.
-
Even before the spectrum has been purchased, operators must start evaluating vendors based on their strategy, vision and what spectrum they are likely to purchase. Once the spectrum has been purchased, they have to select vendors and purchase equipment.
-
Then there are activities we refer to as “Network Business as Usual.” These are the tasks that go on continuously. These include: leasing and/or building sites; deploying and configuring equipment; optimization & drive testing of the deployed sites; maintenance to make sure all existing sites continue to work smoothly; fault management in case of issues; and, finally, upgrades which could be related to equipment, technology, backhaul, power, etc.
-
One of the important but often-overlooked activities in a network is digital, sales & marketing. Any network has to make sure it’s appealing to different types of people, and this is where these activities play a big role.
-
Billing & Operations ensures that end users are billed correctly and consistently so there is flow of money inwards. Operations covers a very wide area including order capture, order management, customer relationship management, inventory management, smooth operation of the network, etc.
-
Finally, customer support is another key area. While many operators are transitioning from CSPs to DSPs, there is still a role for call center-based customer support services in addition to web support, support on social networks like Twitter and Facebook, chat support via SMS, app or website, etc.
It is estimated that RAN is 60% of CAPEX and OPEX and, hence, the most important cost factor to focus on in telecoms.
Going back to high-level operator tasks, many operators outsource the task of leasing and/or building sites to Towercos and Infracos. These Towercos and Infracos could be pureplay independent companies or operator-led, as is becoming common nowadays. Similarly, when it comes to many of the Network Business as Usual tasks, many operators and service providers outsource these to a Managed Services company. It is estimated that around 80% of the mobile networks worldwide use a Managed Services Provider for some tasks. In fact, some of the incumbent network equipment vendors make most of their money by offering services in this way.
There will be RU vendors, COTS server vendors, and DU and CU software vendors. If we generalize concerns, they will look similar to below.
Source: Parallel Wireless
If we look at networks today, we can roughly say that the integration cost of the system is the RAN System cost, which includes both hardware and software costs, the support costs and, finally, the services costs. When Open RAN equipment is introduced in the network, there is a separate RAN hardware and software cost, as RAN is now disaggregated and most likely has different vendors for hardware and software as well. In addition, there will be support and services cost like in the case of traditional networks. In the long term, node and network integrators may be required in the network, which can increase the cost and complexity. The incumbent network equipment vendor asks if the costs of traditional RAN networks will be lower or if the costs of Open RAN deployment in the long term will be less. While this picture provides everyone with food for thought, it does not apply to every scenario and can be misleading.
Source: Parallel Wireless
There are many cases of operators with strong in-house technical know-how, that are more than capable of managing the integration between different Open RAN components and vendors themselves. With Operators managing the integration, we believe the long-term costs would be far lower as compared to those of vendors selling proprietary kits. In addition, the operators would benefit from continuous innovation in the hardware and servers, driven by the openness in the ecosystem. There are many cases where the operator would rather outsource their business as usual activities to a managed services provider and focus on service innovation. In this case, the managed services provider would be responsible for the integration of different Open RAN kits for different vendors.
Source: Parallel Wireless
Role of managed service providers in OpenRAN integration
Managed Services Providers (MSPs) are experts in dealing with kits from various vendors. They have access to experienced people, which enables them to quickly grasp the basics of new technologies and continue providing their services without interruption. In addition, during the introduction phase, it is assumed that all vendors would be willing to provide insights about their products, thereby transferring the essential knowledge to MSP staff. Here as well, we believe the long-term costs for an operator would be far lower as compared to those of vendors selling proprietary kits and at the same time they will benefit from continuous innovation in the ecosystem.
Source: Parallel Wireless
Role of hardware and software vendors in integration
Another possible approach with Open RAN Integration is that a software or hardware vendor become responsible for integration and would work with all other Open RAN partners for the operator to deliver the Open RAN network. This approach would be cheaper and more effective for the operator, but many smaller vendors would not necessarily be willing to take this approach. It is nevertheless common, at least while introducing Open RAN into a network.
Source: Parallel Wireless
Role of integrators
The final approach, which you are likely to hear the most about, is that an Integrator manages the Open RAN network. In many cases, these integrators would be the ones submitting RFIs (request for information) and RFPs (request for proposal) and signing the contract with the operators. This would also provide them with the flexibility to change the hardware or software vendors as long as they are providing the agreed services. In this case, the long-term savings for the operator would not be as much as in earlier cases but would still be more as compared to deployment with proprietary equipment from the traditional vendors.
In conclusion, there are certainly some important considerations regarding Open RAN integration. Having worked with many different operators in different parts of the world, we do not see integration as an issue that will slow down Open RAN networks deployment or make an operator rethink their deployments.
