Will the telecom industry embark on another costly wireless upgrade? Telecom consultant and author William Webb thinks so and warns that it risks repeating what happened with 5G.
William Webb
William Webb published the book The 5G Myth in 2016. In it, he warned that the then-emerging 5G standard would prove costly and fail to deliver on the bold promises made for the emerging wireless technology.
Webb sees history repeating itself with 6G, the next wireless standard generation. In his latest book, The 6G Manifesto, he reflects on the emerging standard and outlines what the industry and its most significant stakeholder - the telecom operators - could do instead.
Developing a new generation wireless standard every decade has proved beneficial, says Webb. However, the underlying benefits with each generation has diminished to the degree that, with 5G, it is questionable whether the latest generation was needed.
Wireless generations
There was no first-generation (1G) cellular standard. Instead, there was a mishmash of analogue cellular standards that were regional and manufacturer-specific.
The second-generation (2G) wireless standard brought technological alignment and, with it, economies of scale. Then, the 3G and the 4G standards advanced the wireless radio’s air interface. 5G was the first time the air interface didn’t change; an essential ingredient of generational change was no longer needed.
The issue now is that the wireless industry is used to new generations. But if the benefits being delivered are diminishing, who exactly is this huge undertaking serving? asks Webb. With 5G, certainly not the operators. The operators have invested heavily in rolling out 5G and may eventually see a return but that is far from their experience to date.
The wireless industry is unique in adopting a generation approach. There are no such generations for cars, aeroplanes, computers, and the internet, says Webb: “Ok, the internet went from IPv4 to IPv6, but that was an update, as and when needed.” With 5G, there was no apparent need for a new generation, he says. It wasn’t as if networks were failing, or there was a fundamental security issue. or that 4G suffered from a lack of bandwidth.
Instead, 5G was driven by academics and equipment vendors. “They postulated what some of the new applications might be,” says Webb. “Some of them were crazy guesses, the most obvious being remote surgery.” That implied a need for faster wireless links and more bandwidth. Extra bandwidth meant higher and wider radio frequency bands which came at a cost for the operators. Higher radio spectrum - above 3GHz - means greater radio signal attenuation requiring smaller-area radio cells and a greater network investment for the operators.
The industry has been working on 6G for several years. Yet, it is still early to discuss the likely outcome. Webb outlines three possible approaches for 6G: HetNets, 5G-on-steroids, and 6G in the form of software updates only.
HetNets
Webb is a proponent for operators collaborating on heterogenous networks (HetNets).
He says the idea originated with 3G but has never been adopted. The concept requires service providers to collaborate to combine disparate networks — cellular, WiFi, and satellite — to improve connectivity and coverage and ultimately improve the end-user experience.
“Perhaps this is the time to do it,” says Webb, even if he is not optimistic: operators have never backed the idea because they favour their own networks.
In the book The 6G Manifesto, Webb explores the HetNets concept, how it could be implemented and the approach’s benefits. The implementation could also be done primarily in software, which the operators favour for 6G (see below).
“They would need to remove a few things like authentication and native provisioning of voice from their networks,” says Webb. There would also need to be some form of coordinator, essentially a database-switch that could run in the cloud.
5G on steroids
The approach adopted for 5G is an application-driven approach, whereby academics and equipment vendors identified applications and their requirements and developed the necessary technologies. Such an approach for 6G, says Webb, is yet more 5G on steroids. 6G will be faster than 5G, require higher frequency spectrum and be designed to address more sectors, each with their own requirements.
“The operators understand their economics, of course, and are closer to their customers,” says Webb. It is the operators not the manufacturers that should be driving 6G.
6G as software
The third approach is for 6G to be the first cellular generation that involves software only to avoid substantial and costly hardware upgrades.
Webb says the operators have not suggested what exactly these software upgrades would do, more that after their costly 5G network upgrades, they want to avoid another cycle of expensive network investment.
Backing a software approach allows operators to avoid being seen as dragging their feet. Rather, they could point to the existing industry organisation, the GSMA, and its releases that occur every 18 months that enhance the current generation and are largely software-based. This could become the new model in future.
5G could have been avoided and simply been an upgrade to 4.5G, says Webb. With periodic releases and software updates 6G could be avoided.
But the operators need to be more vocal. However, there is no consensus among operators globally. China will deploy 6G, whatever its form. But, warns Webb, if the operators don't step up, 6G will be forced on them. "Hence my call to arms in the book, which says to the operators: 'If you want an outcome that is different to 5G, you need to step up'."
A manifesto
Webb argues that the pressure and expectation from 6G wireless are so great that the likely outcome is that it will repeat what happened with 5G.
The logic that 6G is not needed and its needs served with software upgrades will not be enough to halt the momentum driving 6G. 6G will thus not help the operators reverse their fortunes and generate new growth. This is not good news given that service providers already operate in a utility market while facing fierce competition.
"If you look at most utilities - gas, electricity, water - you end up with a monopoly network supplier and then perhaps some competition around the edges," says Webb. "Telecoms is now a utility in that each mobile operator is delivering something that towards every consumer looks indistinguishable."
It is not good news too for the equipment vendors. Vendors may drive 6G and get one more generation of equipment sales but it is just delaying the inevitable.
Webb believes the telcos' revenues will remain the same, resulting in a somewhat profitable businesses: "They're making more profit than utilities but less than technology companies."
Webb's book ends with a manifesto for 6G.
Mobile technology underpins modern life, and having an always-present connectivity is increasingly important yet must also be affordable to all. He calls for operators to drive 6G standards and for governments to regulate in a way that benefits citizens' connectivity services.
Users have not benefitted from 5G. If that is to change with 6G, there needs to be a clear voice that makes a wireless world better for everyone.
Further Information:
The significance of 6G, click here