Re: [6gip] continueing the discussion on B5G

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 07/01/2021 à 20:14, Frank Fitzek a écrit :
> Sorry
> 
> SA = Stand Alone (Real 5G networks) NSA = Non Stand Alone 5G air
> interface with 4G networks
> 
> 
> Most operators used NSA solution to get 5G to the mobile. So if the 
> limitation is the EPC (or the connection to the EPC) , then it has 
> nothing to do with 5G access.

Thanks for the explanation.

I would expect, by feeling, that latencies in the core network based on
Ethernet are hugely lower than latencies in the air.  In that sense, the
difference NSA vs SA might not impact the feeling of the end user
comparing 5G to 4G or 4G+.

Basically, it is sufficient to download some large file from youtube and
highest definition (4K?) and try it first with a 4G text above the 5
bars showing signal quality and then with the 5G text instead.  In
theory one should be impressed by the download speed on 5G.

If the person is not impressed, I'd put the fault on the air interface,
not on the core network, be it NSA or SA.

But these are just intuitions, I dont know for sure.

MAybe we should wait for more reports.

I do not know what the New York Times reporter used for testing.  I
remember vaguely he said something about youtube but not sure.  Even if
he googled 'speed test' the results would still be relevant, because I
still think the dominant slowing factor is the air interface.

If one looks at the Internet from the smartphone perspective of latency
then the air interface is a huge bubble and the whole wired Internet is
a small dot.  If one looks at the same Internet from a router
manufacturer's perspective of bandwidth then the Internet is a huge
cloud covering the entire slide and the smartphone is a tiny mobile dot
at the edge of the cloud.

Alex

> 
> FF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 07/01/2021 20:09, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Le 07/01/2021 à 20:05, Frank Fitzek a écrit :
>>> Happy New Year !
>>> 
>>> Are there already 5G SA networks? Or better on which networks did
>>> the author test the data rate? SA and NSA makes a huge
>>> difference.
>> 
>> SA?  Security Association? NSA?  National Security Agency?
>> 
>> I will gladly consider the SA/NSA distinction with the SFR and Free
>>  deployments I know here where I live.
>> 
>> But I dont know what it means.
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>>> FF
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 07/01/2021 19:02, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I recently read an article in the New York Times where the
>>>> writer tested a few 5G smartphones on some cellular networks
>>>> and some places in USA.
>>>> 
>>>> He said that 5G bandwidth looked higher than 4G+ to him in some
>>>>  places but he felt that better in open areas rather than
>>>> indoors. It was not significantly higher, just a little bit
>>>> higher.
>>>> 
>>>> I think what 5G needs is these intelligent reflecting surfaces
>>>> which might help increase coverage in a more energy-efficient
>>>> manner, maybe less risky for health, and avoid somehow in some
>>>> cases societal opposition.
>>>> 
>>>> We cant dream about hundred Gbit/s bandwidths for IP on 6G if
>>>> the increase from 4G to 5G bandwidths is not at leastten times
>>>> more.
>>>> 
>>>> If 4G is 50Mbit/s and 5G is 100Mbit/s then we cant expect 6G to
>>>> be 100GBit/s.
>>>> 
>>>> Le 03/12/2020 à 12:32, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
>>>>> 3. use of meta surfaces (aka Intelligent Reflecting
>>>>> Surfaces). This is a feature newly proposed in 6G that was
>>>>> never mentioned in earlier generations, but it is a natural
>>>>> tool in the bag of the radio inclined designer.  If range is
>>>>> not enough then put a reflecing surface there to extend the
>>>>> range.  New in 6G is that these surfaces seem to be more 
>>>>> intelligent at PHY layer - it's not just a piece of concrete
>>>>> (like a mirror) but some nano electronics are put on it to
>>>>> reflect in a more intelligent way.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> Frank H.P. Fitzek Professor Deutsche Telekom Chair of
>>> Communication Networks Institute of Communication Technology 
>>> Technische Universität Dresden
>>> 
>>> mobile: [phone] phone:  [phone] fax:    +49
>>> 351 463 37163
>>> 
>>> web:    cn.ifn.et.tu-dresden.de
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 5G Lab Germany - Coordinator - 5Glab.de CeTI - Speaker -
>>> ceti.tu-dresden.de Smart System Hub - Speaker -
>>> smart-systems-hub.de
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> --
> 
> Frank H.P. Fitzek Professor Deutsche Telekom Chair of Communication
> Networks Institute of Communication Technology Technische Universität
> Dresden
> 
> mobile: [phone] phone:  [phone] fax:    +49 351
> 463 37163
> 
> web:	cn.ifn.et.tu-dresden.de
> 
> 
> 
> 5G Lab Germany - Coordinator - 5Glab.de CeTI - Speaker -
> ceti.tu-dresden.de Smart System Hub - Speaker - smart-systems-hub.de
> 
>