Connect with us

Trends

Open RAN: weighing the challenges versus the promise

Open RAN is by far one of the most discussed technology topics in the mobile industry in 2021. It features in the news on such a regular basis that one could be forgiven for forgetting the industry began talking about it in earnest more than five years ago, with the establishment of the Telecom Infra Project (TIP). Five years on, it is worth asking why progress has been so slow.

Analysis
Key obstacles to deployment
Every new technology faces challenges to its adoption and deployment. Open RAN is no different in this regard, though it is unique in how much attention it garners. Aside from concerns around technology maturity, GSMA Intelligence’s Network Transformation Survey (polling 100+ operators) highlights the following key challenges:

  • Internal ownership – Many technologies touch a diverse cross-section of teams within an operator. If the role of each team is unclear, differing priorities and activities can stall deployment and lead to wasted effort. Compared with well-known concerns around integration and return on investment (RoI), it might surprise that nearly 30% of operators highlighted this as the top obstacle to open RAN deployment. But it reflects that many still lack a coordinated and cohesive strategy for open RAN. Compounded by the disaggregated nature of open RAN (particularly when conflated with vRAN), it is entirely understandable.
  • Internal expertise – Broader operator concerns around skills gaps are well documented; without personnel with a deep, technical understanding of new technologies, successful deployment will be complicated – or will need to rely heavily on supplier partners. As with internal ownership, the fact that open RAN integrates diverse RAN components helps to explain operator thinking here. Surprisingly, smaller operators (fewer than 10 million subscribers) see this as less worrying than larger operators. This may be a major oversight, given their resources.
  • Limited open RAN ecosystem – While the top two operator obstacles to open RAN deployment are internally focused, the third focuses on the technology itself. If the ecosystem of open RAN equipment suppliers is not broad enough, operators may find themselves working with a small set of players. This runs counter to the open RAN objective of supporting supplier diversity. With a number of incumbent RAN suppliers moving slowly on open RAN, or completely opting out of supporting it, concerns about the limited open RAN ecosystem need to be taken seriously.

New technologies and architectures take time to develop, of course. However, it is also important to recognise that operators face significant obstacles in deploying open RAN solutions. As they consider whether or how to integrate open RAN into their networks, these challenges need to be carefully considered.

  • Integration – Moving from end-to-end solutions driven by a single vendor to open solutions from a variety of suppliers requires a shift in thinking on network integration. For example, who will be responsible for the performance of the entire solution, not just components? Integration concerns are often cited by operators as the key open RAN challenge. Surprisingly then, integration ranked in joint third place in terms of perceived open RAN deployment obstacles. For context, however, we can look to the survey for thoughts on open networking technologies in general. Here, integration was cited by 57% of operators as one of the top three obstacles. So while integration may not be seen as the single, greatest obstacle for open RAN, it scores highest as a top three concern among operators.
  • Uncertain RoI – With only 4% of operators highlighting uncertain RoI as the greatest open RAN deployment obstacle, there are seemingly few concerns around how (or whether) open RAN will be a wise investment. Yet, returning to the broader question of open networking technologies, 49% of operators saw RoI expectations as a top-three obstacle – whether due to expected costs or limited value in terms of new revenues or cost savings. This massive discrepancy suggests operators may be getting caught up in the promise of open RAN without fully assessing how it will support new revenues or cost savings – and over what timeframe.

Source: GSMA Intelligence Network Transformation Survey 2021

Greatest obstacle to deploying open RAN in your network? Percentage of operators

Implications

Operators Vendors

 

  • Be an open RAN realist – Operators need to take a realistic view on expectations for open RAN. Faced with vendor messaging and high-profile endorsements, it is understandable for some operators to see open RAN as inevitable and/or a relatively incremental network evolution. In reality though, any decision to embark on an open RAN strategy without fully understanding the challenges it implies would invite added costs, delays and potential performance issues, which could impact customers. In particular, challenges need to be viewed within the context of a given operator’s assets and liabilities.
  • Focus on the tech and the business – It is telling that the top two operator concerns around open RAN (internal ownership and internal expertise) focus on business or corporate rather than technology issues. This is a stark reminder that the deployment of any new technology involves more than technical innovation and R&D. It also involves internal coordination, expertise and will. However, operators should not assume that technical progress will simply sort itself out; the breadth of the ecosystem, stability of solutions and ability of open RAN to perform on a par with traditional offers all need to be in place too.
  • Hedge your bets – Despite the allure of open RAN, operators cannot (yet) ignore traditional RAN architectures. If open RAN is seen as part of a strategy for creating RAN supplier resilience, any move to fully embrace the technology to the exclusion of non-open RAN solutions would be short-sighted. Until solutions to open RAN challenges (in the near and long term) can be established – and proven in commercial networks

– operators must maintain alternative solutions ready for deployment.

  • Take a balanced approach – As with operators, vendors need to balance a focus on open RAN with a focus on traditional RAN solutions and architectures. Should technical and market challenges prove overwhelming, open RAN could lose its shine and fall out of favour. For sure, vendors that have built product portfolios and company messaging completely focused on open RAN will not have the luxury of dismissing the technology. Regardless, vendors lacking plans to support their operator customers without open RAN are taking a risk that could prove existential.
  • Don’t over-promise – Open RAN solution suppliers inflate expectations at their own peril. In the early days of any new technology, supporters will inevitably promote its value and downplay negative aspects; this is simply part of driving the technology’s visibility and garnering commercial interest. The risk though is that inflated expectations lead to disappointment where solutions cannot deliver on vendor promises, or can only deliver alongside massive efforts. Open RAN has moved past the need for visibility support. Unrealistic messaging will only do it harm.
  • Open security – Within the broader context of open networking technologies, network security is seen as the second biggest deployment obstacle. This reflects directly on open RAN. Where end-to-end supply chain security cannot be managed by a single supplier, integrators will need to take on this role, adding to the complexity of integration. The costs incurred need to be included in any open RAN deployment estimates to allow for accurate budgeting and RoI calculation.

 

Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 2024 Communications Today

error: Content is protected !!