Re: [6gip] 6G

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alex,

Thank you for this mail and all subsequent ones in the thread.

I think the content could make a good draft writing down these things in
one document helps us a lot.
So we encourage people to consider that seriously.

I read Lars comments. They rightly indicate that as we get more greedy on
these requirements, we are going to hit the physical limits like speed of
light that we can not change.

Dirk & Behcet

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 2:38 AM Alexandre Petrescu <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> Le 13/01/2021 à 17:24, Kaippallimalil John a écrit :
> > Hi, I share this view as well, and the QUIC example is a good one.
> >
> > Work on 5G still has a long way to go, and there is no clear view or
> > agreement on use cases /requirements for 6G. It may be hard to
> > define protocols or solutions for a problem that is not well
> > understood.
>
> In that sense, it might be appropriate to work on use-cases and
> requirements for 6G.
>
> It might be set that the bandwidth is 500Gbit/s and that RTT latency on
> the air 1 micro-second.
>
> What are the new use-cases that use that?  The tele-portation realistic
> 3D multi-party interacting holograms of humans using wand kinds of
> evolved smartphones, transparent high resolution glasses, gloves, masks
> and non-intrusive exo-squeletons with multi-sense instantaneous feedback
> over very long distance might be such a use-case.
>
> That is for the end user.
>
> For the core network, one should consider the future 6G networks to be
> access networks, mainly the wireless radio part.  The core network that
> plugs into 6G should be a same flat Ethernet-based network that is
> plugged into ADSL, fiber-to-the-home and space-terrestrial networks.  No
> tunnels, no 3GPP-specific protocols in the core.  As much as there wont
> be an all-optical networks that home network designs would like there
> wont be an an all-space network and no all-6G network either.
>
> What are the implications on IP protocols?  The addressing space of IPv6
> might be sufficient, but maybe more intelligent control taking more
> bandwidth could be useful.  Maybe better accommodating mobility of
> users, of groups of users, and of satelites.  Maybe better accomodating
> of QoS.
>
> What are the implications on other IETF protocols?
>
> What are the current tendencies in the 6MAN and V6OPS WGs of IETF about
> the evolution of IP protocols?  There are some activities about IP and
> 1hop protocols, some discussion around the 64bit boundary that I am
> aware of.  There are others.  Would they be good for the tele-portation
> use-case satisfying end users, and for the re-pluggable core network?
>
> Alex
>
> >
> > Best Regards, John
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message----- From: 6gip <[e-mail]> On
> > Behalf Of Flinck, Hannu (Nokia - FI/Espoo) Sent: Wednesday, January
> > 13, 2021 9:58 AM To: Alexandre Petrescu
> > <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] Subject: Re: [6gip] 6G
> > in 3GPP?
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > Neither I know any, nor my colleagues any 3GPP documents about 6G.
> >
> > 3GPP is currently at mid-way with 5G. There will still be a number
> > of releases left for 5G  to come. In fact, I assume that now when 5G
> > is pushing towards new verticals (mIoT, industry, vehicular, etc.)
> > there will be new requirements for protocol work needed for 5G. For
> > example, consider the discussion about multi-path support for QUIC
> > in QUIC wg. Similar requests are likely to come.
> >
> > Therefore, I am on the opinion that 6G work, even 6G related
> > protocol research work in the IRTF, should wait for use cases (and
> > radio extensions) that 5G is not able to respond.
> >
> >
> > Best regards Hannu
> >
> > -----Original Message----- From: Alexandre Petrescu
> > <[e-mail]> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021
> > 10:40 AM To: Flinck, Hannu (Nokia - FI/Espoo)
> > <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] Subject: Re: 6G in
> > 3GPP?
> >
> > Me too I would like to ask I would like whether someone knows of a
> > document on the 3gpp.org site that has the term '6G' in it?
> >
> > Le 12/01/2021 à 17:55, Flinck, Hannu (Nokia - FI/Espoo) a écrit :
> >> Hello Alexandre
> >>
> >> In your slides you claim the 6G is discussed in Rel 17. Can you
> >> tell in which document or WG?
> >>
> >> I am involved quite a bit in 3GPP as well as in 6G research and I
> >> am not aware of any of such discussion.
> >>
> >> Without a reference I must consider that statement be
> >> misinformation.
> >>
> >> Best regards
> >>
> >> Hannu
> >
> > Thanks for having gone through the slides; the slides tried to
> > summarize the discussions on the email list at that time.
> >
> > It might be that a potential reationship between 3GPP and 6G to be a
> > stretch.
> >
> > I might bear responsibility of having misread the emails, or read
> > them too quickly, when drawing a conclusion that 3GPP might work on
> > 6G, and writing that down.  Sorry for misunderstanding.
> >
> > We had some mention on this list of an NGMN alliance (Next
> > Generation Mobile Networks) which initiated a task force on 6G;
> > elsewhere, NGMN is ack'ed as a contributor to 3GPP by a wikipedia
> > article.  That might make it that 3GPP might have some work on 6G.
> >
> > It might be that some discussions between usual contributors to 3GPP
> > might have mentioned 6G even though there might be no document on
> > 3gpp.org that reads '6G'.  For my part, I do not know what document
> > is Rel 17 more precisely, but I suspect I could find Rel 17 on
> > 3gpp.org.
> >
> > It might be that other industry alliances (e.g. 5GAA) could be
> > outright opposed to work on things deemed "6G".  It might be that
> > such opposition is supported by other funding bodies.  I do not know
> > why the opposition, but that is the way it is.
> >
> > If, for some reason, 3GPP considers the talk of 6G to be too early,
> > and why not potentially disruptive to the ongoing work of 5G, then
> > that is a 3GPP problem to solve.  That would not be the only problem
> > they should address.  I suspect a ling standing problem is even the
> > name "3G" in a 3GPP working on something else than 3G (e.g. 3GPP
> > working on 4G or 5G).
> >
> > I want to tell also that there might be other problems of 5G, on
> > which 3GPP works, and which deserve attention.
> >
> > Such problems could be solved by working on something new, like 6G.
> >
> > It is a speculation from my part.
> >
> > I would like to ask others whether someone knows of a document on
> > the 3gpp.org site that has the term '6G' in it?
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > -- 6gip mailing list [e-mail]
> >
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2F6gip&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cjohn.kaippallimalil%40futurewei.com%7C7fdd86f62b8a4531b7a308d8b7dc249f%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637461503443285528%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&amp;sdata=fYapnHc1H75JcGA2Y6KRUXxD1%2B4VFcsyYmaBkf%2BkQOE%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >
>
> --
> 6gip mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6gip
>