The O-RAN Alliance released a paper recently – “Use Case Analysis on mmWave Antenna Distribution (mWAD)”. While the topic in detail may be of interest only to certain specialists at this stage, there are some interesting conclusions we can draw from the paper and its approach. Some of these conclusions are technical but we can also start making inferences about the state of the industry.

The Analysis

For context, the research topic is important for 5G as much as for the next generation. While 5G mmWave adoption at the macro level has been slow, the authors point out that this is because the characteristics of the frequency (relatively short range and poor penetration of objects) don’t lend themselves to this kind of deployment without ruinously expensive infrastructure costs.

However, mmWave does have an advantage insofar as it can take advantage of huge amounts of contiguous spectrum, while being better at propagation than the sub-THz frequencies that have been proposed for future systems. The authors argue, therefore, that there are scenarios where mmWave would be a good method to create high-capacity coverage, but mainly by extending the capabilities of a base station through a distributed antenna system, as we have seen for in-building solutions in 4G and 5G. The authors propose that scenarios such as using a distributed mmWave 5G/6G may be good methods to deliver large amounts of data across a relatively wide area in a more cost-efficient manner, for example to deliver fixed wireless access or to support robots or cobots in factory or warehouse situations.

(Coincidentally, there may be anecdotal evidence within the current 5G environment to bear out an interest. In a talk last week, the CEO of computer vision company fogsphere discussed the rise of 4K video systems  as a way to monitor and encourage health and safety compliance on building sites, in factories and warehouses, on oil rigs and more. They find that deploying a private 5G network to operate and manage the system is often the simplest solution to their needs for real-time tracking and analysis, which then enables the company to use the 5G for additional purposes).

As a result, the O-RAN Alliance authors “analysed 170 6G use cases from 4 global documents, categorised
them into 29 integrated use cases, and extracted 31 requirements. A deeper requirement analysis was conducted for use cases where the application of mWAD is anticipated, and a gap analysis was performed in comparison with 5G technologies.”

Sourcery

So far, so good. We have here, essentially, an exploration of how we might deliver mmWave services for less overall cost, why we might want to do so and some of the ways we need to get there. It’s hard to argue with that.

Let’s look at where the use cases listed came from, though:

• NGMN,“6G Use Cases and analysis”
• Hexa-X, “Expanded 6G vision, use cases and societal values”
• Next G Alliance “6G Applications and Use Cases” 
• B5G Promotion Consortium White paper “Beyond 5G White paper –Message to the 2030s”

On one hand, these are impeccable – a selection of good documents from different parts of the world. Just a few things to think about, though…

Firstly, all of these sources date back to 2022. That’s not a long time per se, but the conversation around the evolution from 5G to 6G has come on quite a bit since then. There has been a growing position from operators (which the NGMN has conveyed well) that whatever the future holds it cannot require major up-front infrastructure investments or spectrum purchases based on speculative returns, as we have seen in the past. For most operators that is simply not sustainable as a business. Instead they are looking for a ‘graceful evolution’ from 5G that doesn’t leave them with yet another set of legacy systems to maintain. It would be… odd… if that hasn’t changed some of the thinking about what to achieve, when or how.

Secondly, the perspective of the sources will naturally affect the kind of conversations and ideas they are generating. We have one global body convening telecoms service providers and three groups that aim to align regional R&D, government, and telecoms industries. The EU, the USA and Japan have all seen governments setting out some strong priorities for digital evolution and they have put funding in place for R&D. This is great news in one way, but it means that many of the conversations about 6G have been generated by an R&D and government push rather than pull factors from the market.

Use-Case-Algia

“If, for a disease, many cures are proposed… it means there is no cure,” comments Gayev in Chekov’s “The Cherry Orchard.”

In the case of 6G, we are being faced with an incredible 170 use cases and 29 sets of use cases. This, in itself, should give us pause; and in that pause let’s think about paperclips.

It is possible to go down an internet rabbit hole by Googling “use cases for a paperclip” (trust us!), but that has no bearing on what paperclips were designed for. It has no bearing on how they are sold or packaged. Ultimately, the power to clean dirt out of a keyboard has little bearing on the business case for manufacturing paperclips. If somebody asks “What is a paperclip for?” the answer is “It’s for clipping paper together”.

Can we do that with 6G at this point? I’m not sure we can. And if we can’t do that, what purposes are we designing it for?

There is a reasonable argument that we should be thinking of 6G as a general purpose technology, so we don’t need to worry about which use cases become popular. Well, yes and no. The internet was designed as a way to share data and, especially after the development of hyperlinks, it does this in an intuitive manner. We might not have known what data would be shared or with who, but it had, essentially, one purpose and therefore was designed for that. It has created many business cases depending on what data is shared where and how, but has one use case.

As things currently stand, “6G” has plenty of possible use cases and requirements to meet. That suggests that:

• We should probably think about the term “6G” as one for a very broad suite of different technologies and capabilities, not all of which will be deployed in any given place or time. Less a unitary concept and more something closer to a term like “the Roman army.” What was the use case for that? It entirely depended on the context and the individual elements deployed.
• We should probably also start thinking less about use cases for 6G writ large and more about how we filter down potential use cases for particular elements to get to the real heart of them.
• Distributed mmWave systems clearly have their potential, but they also need a context, a business model and a business case to drive the initial use. For that, we should probably be talking more to the potential end-users and less to each other.

After that – as with paperclips, or as with a private 5G system to manage health and safety – users may find other ways to benefit from what they’ve got.

Image by Bruno on Pixabay.