Showing posts with label 3GPP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 3GPP. Show all posts

Thursday, April 9, 2026

3GPP Release 19 Description and Summary of Work Items

As the journey towards 3GPP Release 20 and 6G (3GPP Rel-21) continues to gather pace, the recently concluded Release 19 comes with a clearer view of what the next phase of 5G evolution, often referred to as 5G-Advanced, will look like in practice. One of the most useful artefacts in this process is the recently published technical report 3GPP TR 21.919, which offers a consolidated snapshot of the features and work items currently shaping this release.

Rather than focusing on detailed specifications, this report takes a step back and provides accessible summaries of the agreed work items. Each summary is intended to answer two simple but important questions: what problem is being addressed, and what impact the feature will have on the overall system. This makes the document particularly valuable not only for specialists deeply involved in standardisation work, but also for a broader audience trying to keep track of where the industry is heading.

It is worth noting that this is still very much a work in progress (50% complete). At the time of publication, just over 60 summaries have been included, with many more expected in future updates. Even so, the current version already highlights the sheer breadth of activity in Release 19, spanning everything from energy efficiency and non-terrestrial networks to AI, immersive services, and advanced radio capabilities.

In this post, I will not attempt to reinterpret or condense the summaries themselves. Instead, I am sharing the full list of topics covered in the report below, which provides a useful index into the areas that 3GPP worked on as part of Release 19.

It should be noted that the technical report (TR) presents the "initial state" of the Features introduced in Release 19, i.e. as they are by the time of publication of this document. Each Feature is subject to be later modified or enhanced, over several years, by the means of Change Requests (CRs). To further outline a feature at a given time, it is recommended to retrieve all the CRs which relate to the given Feature, as explained in its Reference section. 

Below is the list of all topics covered in this report. Some of the topics may be missing a summary, which will be added later in the later updates.  

5 Rel-19 Energy Efficiency, Energy Saving
5.1   Enhancements of Network energy savings for NR
5.2   Low-power wake-up signal and receiver for NR (LP-WUS/WUR)
5.3   Energy Efficiency as Service Criteria

6   Rel-19 Satellite (5GSAT), NTN, UAS, Aerial
6.1   Satellite access Phase 3
6.1.1   Security Aspects of 5G Satellite Access Phase 3
6.1.2   Charging aspects of satellite access Phase 3
6.2   Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) for NR Phase 3
6.3   Enhancements for Air-to-ground network for NR
6.4   Inter-RAT mode mobility support from E-UTRAN TN to NR NTN
6.5   Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) for Internet of Things (IoT) Phase 3 (for LTE)
6.6   Introduction of IoT-NTN TDD mode
6.7   Enhanced requirements and test methodology for NR NTN and IoT NTN
6.8   On-demand broadcast of GNSS assistance data
6.9   Uncrewed Aerial System Phase 3
6.10   Support for PWS in Satellite E-UTRAN and Satellite NG-RAN
6.11   Introduction of BDS (BeiDou Navigation Satellite System) B2b Signal in A-GNSS for LTE and NR
6.12   Introduction of A-GNSS support for NavIC (Navigation with Indian Constellation) L1 SPS (Standard Positioning Service) in NR & LTE
6.13   Management Aspects of Rel-18's NTN Phase 2
6.14   Lower Selection-priority for PLMN Selection
6.15   New LTE band for 5G broadcast for region 3 utilizing a geosynchronous satellite
6.16   Satellite band-related items
6.16.1   Introduction of Ku bands for NR NTN
6.16.2   Introduction of additional operating NR bands for HAPS (High Altitude Platform Station)
6.16.3   Introduction of another NR NTN S-band (MSS band 2000-2020 MHz UL and 2180-2200 MHz DL)
6.16.4   New NR NTN bands to support Extended L-band and combined MSS L-band and Extended L-band ranges
6.16.5   Introduction of another IoT-NTN S-band (MSS band 2000-2020 MHz UL and 2180-2200 MHz DL)

7   Rel-19 Internet of Things (IoT) and Reduced Capability (RedCap) UE
7.1   NR power class 2 RedCap (Reduced Capability) UE in FR1
7.2   NAS layer overhead reduction for data transfer using CP CIoT
7.3   Management Aspects of RedCap features

8   Ambient power-enabled Internet of Things (IoT)
8.1   Ambient power-enabled Internet of Things (IoT) (SA and CT)
8.1.1   Charging for Ambient power-enabled Internet of Things
8.1.2   Security Aspects of Ambient IoT Services in 5G for Isolated Private Networks
8.2   Solutions for Ambient IoT (Internet of Things) in NR

9   Rel-19 Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML)
9.1   AI/ML Model Transfer Phase 2
9.2   Core Network Enhanced Support for Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML)
9.3   Application enablement for AI/ML services
9.4   Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML) for NR air interface
9.5   Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML) for NR air interface
9.6   Enhancements for Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML) for NG-RAN
9.7   AI/ML Management Phase 2
9.8   Protocol for AI Data Collection from UPF

10   Rel-19 Verticals and Non Public Network
10.1   Rel-19 Enhancements of 3GPP Northbound and Application Layer Interfaces and APIs
10.2   SEAL DD (Data Delivery) Phase 2
10.3   Common Application Programming Interface (API) Framework (CAPIF) Phase 3
10.4   Enhanced OAM for management service exposure to external consumers through CAPIF
10.5   Non-Public Network (NPN) security considerations
10.6   Security for PLMN hosting a NPN
10.7   Interconnect of SNPN
10.8   ProSe support in NPN

11   Rel-19 communications services
11.1   Media Messaging Enhancements
11.2   Terminal Audio quality performance and Test methods for Immersive Audio Services, Phase 2
11.3   EVS Codec Extension for Immersive Voice and Audio Services, Phase 2
11.4   5GMSG Service phase 3
11.5   Video Operating Points - Harmonization and Stereo MV-HEVC
11.6   Advanced Media Delivery
11.7   5G Real-time Transport Protocol Configurations, Phase 2
11.8   Next Generation Real time Communication services Phase 2
11.8.1   System architecture for Next Generation Real time Communication services Phase 2
11.8.2   Security support for the Next Generation Real Time Communication services Phase 2
11.8.3   Application enablement aspects for MMTel

12   Rel-19 XR (eXtended Reality), Augmented Reality (AR), Metaverse, Edge Computing
12.1   Localized Mobile Metaverse Services
12.2   Extended Reality and Media
12.3   XR (eXtended Reality) for NR Phase 3
12.4   Avatar Communications in AR Calls
12.5   Split rendering over IMS
12.6   Enhancement of support for Edge Computing in 5G Core network - Phase 3
12.7   Edge Computing for Industrial Scenarios
12.8   Edge Computing Considering the Operational Needs of Service Hosting Environment
12.9   Architecture for enabling Edge Applications Phase 3

13   Rel-19 High Power UEs (HPUE)
13.1   Rel-19 High power UE (power class 1.5 or 2) for NR intra-band CA or NR inter-band CA/DC band combinations with/without NR Supplementary Uplink (UL)
13.2   Rel-19 High power UE (power class 1.5 and 2) for NR FR1 TDD/FDD single band for handheld/FWA UEs, and high power UE operation (power class 1) for FWVM (fixed-wireless/vehicle-mounted) use cases in a single NR band
13.3   Introduction of Power Class 2 and UE 40MHz Channel Bandwidth in NR band n28
13.4   Rel-19 High power UE (power class 1.5 or 2) for DC combinations of LTE band(s) and NR band(s)
13.5   Rel-19 High power UE (power class 2) and high power operation (power class 1) for fixed-wireless/vehicle-mounted use cases in a single LTE band

14   Rel-19 RAN topology
14.1   5G NR Femto
14.2   Additional topological enhancements for NR
14.3   Vehicle Mounted Relays Phase 2

15   Rel-19 Sidelink, Proximity
15.1   NR sidelink multi-hop relay
15.2   UE-to-UE multi-hop relay
15.3   NR Sidelink: Intra-band Carrier Aggregation in ITS band
15.4   Charging Aspects of Ranging and Sidelink Positioning
15.5   Multi-path relay
15.6   Proximity-based Services in 5GS Phase 3

16   NR and LTE Dual Connectivity (DC)
16.1   UE RF enhancements for NR FR1/FR2 and EN-DC, Phase 4
16.2   Support of intra-band non-collocated EN-DC/NR-CA deployment Phase2: new receiver type(s)
16.3   Rel-19 downlink interruption for NR and EN-DC band combinations at dynamic Tx Switching in Uplink
16.4   Rel-19 DC of x LTE band(s), y NR band(s) (1<=x<6, 1<=y<6, x+y<=6) and single or two NR Supplementary Uplink (SUL) bands
16.5   Simultaneous Rx/Tx band combinations for NR CA/DC, NR SUL and LTE/NR DC in Rel-19
16.6   UE Conformance - Rel-19 NR CA and DC; and NR and LTE DC Configurations

17   Rel-19 Other NR and LTE Radio
17.1   Adding channel bandwidth(s) support to existing NR bands and CA/ENDC combinations in REL-19
17.2   Data collection for SON (Self-Organising Networks)/MDT (Minimization of Drive Tests) in NR standalone and MR-DC (Multi-Radio Dual Connectivity) Phase 4

18   Rel-19 NR Radio
18.1   NR mobility enhancements Phase 4
18.2   Evolution of NR duplex operation: Sub-band full duplex (SBFD)
18.3   NR Radio Resource Management (RRM) Phase 5
18.4   Multi-carrier enhancements for NR Phase 3
18.5   NR demodulation performance Phase 5
18.6   NR MIMO Phase 5
18.7   FR1 TRP, TRS and MIMO OTA testing enhancement Phase 3
18.8   Rel-19 NR CA/DC for x bands DL with y bands UL (x<7, y<3) and SUL/CA band combinations with a single SUL or two SUL cells
18.9   Low band carrier aggregation via switching
18.10  NR channel BW less than 5MHz for FR1 Phase 2
18.11  mmWave in NR: UE spurious emissions and EESS (Earth Exploration Satellite Service) protection
18.12  NR base station (BS) RF requirement evolution for FR1/FR2 and testing
18.13  UE Conformance - New Rel-19 NR licensed bands and extension of existing NR bands
18.14  Other band-related items
18.14.1   7MHz Channel Bandwidth for n26 and n5
18.14.2   Introduction of the NR FDD 1.4 GHz band
18.14.3   Introduction of NR bands n87 and n88
18.14.4   Introduction of NR band n68
18.14.5   Additional NR bands for NR features in Rel-19
18.15  Study on spatial channel model for demodulation performance requirements for NR

19   Rel-19 LTE Radio
19.1   LTE-based 5G Broadcast Phase 2
19.2   Rel-19 LTE-Advanced Carrier Aggregation for x bands (1<=x<= 6) DL with y bands (y=1, 2) UL
19.3   Band-related items
19.3.1   New bands for LTE based 5G terrestrial broadcast for early deployments
19.3.2   Introduction of LTE FDD band in 1800–1830 MHz for Canada

20   Rel-19 Mission Critical, eCall, Emergency
20.1   Enhanced Mission Critical Architecture
20.2   Enhanced Mission Critical Location Management
20.3   Alignment of eCall over IMS with CEN
20.4   UE Conformance - Alignment of eCall over IMS with CEN
20.5   Multiple Location Procedure for Emergency LCS Routing
20.6   Multimedia Priority Service (MPS) for Messaging services
20.7   Mission Critical (MC) services for generic support on Isolated Operation for Public Safety (IOPS) mode of operation
20.8   Sharing of administrative configuration between interconnected MC service systems
20.9   Future Railway Mobile Communication System (FRMCS) Phase 5
20.10   Mission critical security enhancements for release 19
20.11   Protocol enhancements for Mission Critical Services

21   Rel-19 Network Slicing
21.1   Network Controlled Network Slice Selection

22   Rel-19 Service-Based Architecture (SBA)
22.1   UPF enhancement for Exposure And SBA Phase 2
22.2   Automatic Certificate Management Environment (ACME) for the Service Based Architecture (SBA)
22.3   Reducing Information Exposure over SBI
22.4   Service Based Interface Protocol Improvements Release 19

23   Rel-19 QoS and Policy
23.1   Rel-19 Enhancements of UE Policy
23.2   Rel-19 Enhancements of Session Management (SM) Policy
23.3   Minimize the Number of Policy Associations
23.4   Spending Limits for UE Policies in Roaming scenario
23.5   Enhancing Parameter Provisioning with static UE IP address and UP security policy
23.6   Providing per-subscriber VLAN instructions from UDM and DN-AAA
23.7   QoS monitoring enhancement

24   Rel-19 multi-access
24.1   Upper layer traffic steering and switching over dual 3GPP access
24.2   Multi-Access (ATSSS_Ph4)
24.3   ATSSS Rule Provisioning via 3GPP access connected to EPC
24.4   Local traffic routing for multi-access UE

25   Other topics
25.1   Deferred 5GC-MT-LR Procedure for Periodic Location Events based NRPPa Periodic Measurement Reports
25.2   Subscription control for reference time distribution in EPS
25.3   Rel-19 IMS:
25.3.1   PS Data Off for IMS Data Channel Service
25.3.2   IMS Disaster Prevention and Restoration Enhancement
25.3.3   IMS Stage-3 IETF Protocol Alignment
25.4   Identifying non-3GPP Devices Connecting behind a UE or 5G-RG
25.5   Integrated Sensing and Communication
25.6   Rel-19 Application Data Analytics Enablement Service
25.7   Interworking of Non-3GPP Digital Terrestrial Broadcast Networks with 5GS Multicast Broadcast Services
25.8   Minimization of Service Interruption During Core Network Failure Phase 2
25.9   Measurement Data Collection
25.10  Enhanced application layer support for location services
25.11  NF discovery and selection by target PLMN
25.12  MSISDN verification operation support to Nnef_UEId Service
25.13  Rel-19 Enhancements of Network Automation Enablers
25.14  Enhancement of controlling RAT utilization
25.15  CT Aspects for IP Domain usage
25.16  Indirect Network Sharing
25.17  Management of Network Sharing Phase 3
25.18  Roaming Value-Added Services
25.19  Monitoring of signalling traffic in 5G
25.20  Roaming traffic offloading via session breakout in HPLMN
25.21  Stage-3 5GS NAS protocol development 18
25.22  Stage-3 SAE Protocol Development
25.23  Harmonization of test case definitions for cross-RAT usability
25.24  Data management regarding subscriptions and reporting
25.25  PRU Usage Extension supported by Core Network

26   Rel-19 miscellaneous Security
26.1   Security Assurance Specification for maintenance of 5G features
26.2   5G Security Assurance Specification (SCAS) for the Unified Data Repository (UDR)
26.3   5G Security Assurance Specification (SCAS) for the Short Message Service Function (SMSF)
26.4   Addition of 256-bit security Algorithms
26.5   Addition of Milenage-256 algorithm
26.6   Roaming and interconnect authorization aspects in indirect communication
26.7   Public key distribution and Issuer claim verification of the Access Token
26.8   3GPP profiles for cryptographic algorithms and security protocols
26.9   Mobility over non-3GPP access to avoid full primary authentication
26.10  LI Handling of Protected Services
26.11  Lawful Interception Rel-19
26.12  Lawful Interception Guidance Rel-19
26.13  Specification of example algorithm for alternative f5* (f5**) function

27   Rel-19 miscellaneous OAM&charging
27.1   Charging aspects for Multi-Operator Core Network (MOCN) Network Sharing
27.2   Service Based Management Architecture enhancement phase 3
27.3   Management Data Analytics phase 3
27.4   Intent driven management services for mobile network phase 3
27.5   Management of planned configurations
27.6   Management aspects of Network Digital Twins
27.7   Closed Control Loop Management
27.8   Data management phase 2
27.9   5G performance measurements and KPIs phase 4
27.10  5G Advanced NRM features phase 3
27.11  Subscriber and Equipment Trace and QoE collection management
27.12  Management of IAB nodes
27.13  Enhancement of Management Aspects Related of NWDAF Phase 2
27.14  CHF Segmentation
27.15  Subscriber Data Migration

You can download the latest version of the specs from here.

Related Post: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 26, 2026

3GPP Study on Modernization of Specification Format and Procedures for 6G (6GSM)

The development of each new mobile generation is not only about new technologies and capabilities. It also requires evolution in the way standards themselves are created, maintained and consumed. As work on 6G gradually begins to take shape, the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) has started examining whether the tools and processes used to write its specifications are still fit for purpose.

One of the first steps in this direction is the study titled Study on Modernization of Specification Format and Procedures for 6G (6GSM), documented in TR 21.802. The study looks at how the current approach to specification development works, the limitations that are becoming more visible as specifications grow larger and more complex, and the possible directions for modernising the process as the industry prepares for the 6G era.

3GPP specifications form the backbone of the mobile industry. They define how networks, devices and services interoperate across the globe. However, the way these specifications are produced has largely remained unchanged for many years. Today, most specifications are created and maintained using document based workflows centred around Microsoft Word and DOCX files. Delegates submit Change Requests that modify the text of these documents, and editors manually merge the approved changes into updated specification versions. This approach has served the industry well for decades because it is familiar, widely supported and easy for participants to understand.

The study recognises that the current workflow has several strengths. The document format provides a consistent structure across thousands of specifications. Contributors can edit content directly using familiar WYSIWYG tools, review tracked changes, include diagrams and tables, and collaborate during meetings by editing documents in real time on shared screens. These capabilities have helped large groups of experts work together efficiently during standardisation meetings.

At the same time, as specifications grow larger and more complex, the limitations of the current approach are becoming more visible. One of the most obvious challenges is the heavy reliance on manual processes. Change Requests must be merged into specifications by editors, which can introduce delays before updated versions are published. When multiple Change Requests modify the same sections of a document, identifying conflicts or inconsistencies can be difficult.

Scale is another factor. Many technical specifications now run into hundreds or even thousands of pages. Opening, searching or editing such large DOCX files can become slow and occasionally unstable. Large tables, embedded diagrams and complex formatting further increase file sizes and processing overhead.

Understanding how a feature evolves across specification versions can also be difficult for readers and implementers. Engineers often need to trace how a particular capability has changed between releases, but linking the final specification text back to the relevant Change Requests or understanding the context behind changes is not always straightforward.

The document format itself also presents challenges for automated processing. Extracting structured information from DOCX files requires significant preprocessing because textual content is mixed with binary elements such as images and embedded objects. This makes it harder for tools to analyse specifications or automate parts of the development workflow.

Navigation across specifications is another area where improvements could help. Many features are defined across multiple technical specifications produced by different working groups. Following references between documents or understanding how procedures interact across specifications can take time and effort, especially for engineers who are new to the standards.

To address these challenges, the study explores a number of alternative specification formats that could be considered for future work. Options such as OpenDocument, AsciiDoc, Markdown and LaTeX are discussed, along with more structured or restricted DOCX based approaches. Some proposals also consider hybrid models where different formats could coexist while maintaining a single authoritative source.

Text based markup formats such as Markdown or AsciiDoc are particularly interesting because they separate content from presentation. This structure can make version control and automated processing easier. These formats are widely used in software development environments and integrate well with modern collaboration tools that track changes and manage contributions from multiple participants.

LaTeX is another potential option, particularly for documents that require complex technical formatting or mathematical expressions. Meanwhile, restricted DOCX approaches attempt to preserve compatibility with existing workflows while enforcing stricter formatting rules to reduce complexity and improve consistency.

Beyond the document format itself, the study also looks at broader improvements to the way specifications are developed and maintained. One important idea is the use of modern version control systems such as Git. These systems are widely used in software development and allow contributors to track changes in detail, manage parallel development branches and merge updates in a more controlled manner. Applying similar workflows to standards development could improve traceability and help identify conflicts earlier.

The study also highlights the potential for automated validation tools that could check Change Requests for formatting errors, missing references or structural inconsistencies before they are submitted. Such tools could reduce the editorial workload while improving the overall quality and consistency of specifications.

Another possible direction is the use of machine readable formats for structured elements within specifications. Interfaces, protocol definitions or data models could be stored separately in structured files and then referenced or generated automatically within the main specification. This approach could reduce duplication and make it easier for implementers to reuse information directly in development environments.

The modernisation study does not recommend a single solution at this stage. Instead, it provides a detailed analysis of the current situation and explores possible directions for future work. Any transition will need to balance the benefits of new tools and formats with the practical realities of the existing ecosystem. The 3GPP community relies on a large set of established workflows, tools and expertise, and maintaining accessibility for all participants will be important.

As the industry moves towards 6G, the scale and complexity of specifications will continue to grow. Ensuring that the processes used to create and manage these specifications evolve alongside the technologies themselves will be essential. In that sense, modernising specification formats and procedures may become an important step in preparing the standards ecosystem for the next generation of mobile innovation.

If you want to learn more about this, check out:

  • 6G Specification Modernization discussions from Nokia & Ericsson here.
  • Ongoing 6GSM Workshop discussions here.
  • 3GPP TR 21.802: Study on modernization of specification format and procedures for 6G here.

Related Posts: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, November 4, 2025

AIoT and A-IoT

Our industry loves acronyms. In fact, sometimes it feels as if half our job is simply keeping up with them, while the other half is explaining them to everyone else. A recent example I saw referenced D2D for satellites, but expanded it as Device to Device instead of Direct to Device. Today, two similar acronyms are gaining momentum and are likely to become far more mainstream: AIoT and A-IoT.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT) are two of the key technological pillars of the modern digital world. IoT connects billions of devices, from sensors and cameras to industrial machinery, all producing vast amounts of useful data. AI enables these devices and systems to learn from this data, recognise patterns, predict outcomes, and act autonomously.

When these technologies come together, we get the Artificial Intelligence of Things, or AIoT. In simple terms, AIoT allows connected devices to analyse the data they generate and make decisions without always relying on central systems.

The intelligence in AIoT can sit in different places. Cloud based AI offers extensive processing power and the ability to leverage wider datasets. Edge AI processes data closer to where it is generated, enabling faster and more context aware decision making while reducing bandwidth use and protecting data privacy. Increasingly, lightweight machine learning models allow intelligence directly on devices themselves, enabling instant reactions without constant network access. This evolution transforms IoT devices from passive data collectors into proactive decision makers.

The benefits are significant. AIoT increases automation, improves efficiency, enhances reliability, and enables predictive maintenance, energy optimisation, autonomous navigation, and smarter logistics. It also supports sustainability initiatives, for instance by improving energy and water use monitoring or enabling more intelligent control of municipal utilities. In short, AIoT forms a key part of the digital transformation strategies emerging across industries.

To get a better sense of how AIoT could shape our everyday lives, I have embedded a couple of older Ericsson videos below that imagine a future where intelligence is seamlessly built into everything.

For anyone interested in going deeper into this topic, Transforma Insights and Supermicro have good explainers. While 3GPP continues to work on AI, ML and IoT, AIoT as a concept is largely implementation driven rather than a standardised feature in itself.

In contrast, 3GPP is actively defining a different acronym: A-IoT, short for Ambient IoT.

Ambient IoT represents a major shift in connected device design. Instead of relying on batteries or frequent charging, Ambient IoT devices operate using energy harvested from their surroundings. This can include radio signals, light, heat, or motion. The technology supports both passive operation, where devices backscatter incoming RF signals, and active operation, where they harvest enough power to generate and transmit signals independently.

Unlike traditional IoT devices, Ambient IoT units are extremely low power, low cost, and very simple in design. They have a shorter range and lower data throughput than conventional wireless technologies, but they excel in scenarios where massive numbers of tiny, battery-free sensors can be deployed and left to operate with minimal maintenance.

This makes Ambient IoT well suited to applications such as environmental sensing, supply chain tracking, inventory monitoring, smart agriculture, and intelligent labelling. It also opens opportunities in consumer environments, from smart packaging to indoor positioning. With the right network support, these devices can operate indefinitely, enabling sustainable, large-scale sensing networks.

Ambient IoT is already included in 5G Advanced Release 19. For those interested in learning more, 3GPP has a detailed overview, Oppo has produced an excellent white paper, and LG Uplus has published a forward looking document exploring Ambient IoT in the context of 6G.

Both AIoT and Ambient IoT represent the next phase of connected intelligence. AIoT pushes computation and decision making closer to where data originates, while Ambient IoT removes power barriers and enables pervasive, maintenance-free connectivity. Together, they will support systems that are scalable, energy efficient and context aware.

As these technologies mature, we can expect a world where devices are not only always connected, but also constantly learning, adapting, and operating independently with minimal energy demands. The future of connectivity lies in this balance between intelligence and efficiency, and both AIoT and Ambient IoT will play a crucial role in shaping it.

Related Posts: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, October 16, 2025

Evolving Communication Security Towards 6G at the ETSI Security Conference 2025

The annual ETSI Security Conference returned to the French Riviera from 6 to 9 October, once again bringing together the global cybersecurity community in the beautiful surroundings of ETSI headquarters. Over 250 participants from industry, government agencies, academia, global standards bodies, and open-source communities attended, making it one of the most engaging editions to date. The four-day event featured keynotes, panel discussions, technical sessions, poster presentations and live demonstrations, offering a holistic view of today’s security challenges and tomorrow’s opportunities.

The opening day provided a broad overview of the global cybersecurity landscape, setting the tone for the week ahead. Discussions highlighted emerging trends such as the growing influence of artificial intelligence and the rapid evolution of regulatory frameworks, including the European Commission’s Cyber Resilience Act. The sessions underscored the importance of collaboration between policymakers, researchers, and standards organisations. The afternoon focused on the cyber skills gap, a recurring theme across many sectors, stressing the need for education and training to build a security-aware workforce capable of safeguarding future digital systems. Standards were identified as key enablers in bridging policy and implementation, helping to transform regulatory intent into operational resilience.

The second day examined the paradox between AI as both a risk and a defence mechanism in cybersecurity. Experts discussed how AI-driven systems can expose new vulnerabilities if developed without strong security foundations, while also offering powerful tools for detection and response. Another session addressed fraud reduction and the convergence of security strategies to protect both networks and end users. A major highlight was the discussion on the global uptake of ETSI’s consumer IoT security standard, ETSI EN 303 645. Representatives from Germany, the UK, Singapore and Japan shared national experiences implementing consumer labelling schemes based on this standard, confirming its status as a globally recognised baseline for IoT security.

The third day was dedicated to the evolution of communication technologies and the emerging security landscape as the world moves towards 6G. Chaired by Dario Sabella from xFlow Research, the morning session explored how the journey from 5G Advanced to 6G requires a fresh approach to network security. The day began with an update from Alain Sultan of ETSI on the ongoing work within 3GPP SA3, focusing on strengthening frameworks for new architectures and deployment models. Bengt Salin from Ericsson outlined what should be considered in shaping security for 6G, emphasising that the next generation must be secure by design, not by adaptation. Nauman Khan from STC analysed the threat landscape surrounding 5G MEC and private networks, noting that as edge computing becomes more widespread, it introduces new vulnerabilities but also provides insights that can guide 6G security frameworks. Leyi Zhang from ZTE then presented on Secure Space-Air-Ground Integrated Networks, a concept uniting terrestrial, aerial, and satellite systems to provide ubiquitous connectivity. Ensuring trust, authentication, and data protection across such a heterogeneous environment presents one of the greatest challenges for 6G.

A panel discussion moderated by Dario Sabella brought together the morning’s speakers to reflect on security priorities toward 6G. The consensus was clear: while 6G is still in the early stages of standardisation, security must not be an afterthought. Lessons from 5G—particularly regarding openness, complexity, and trust—must inform the architecture and design principles of 6G from the outset. The afternoon sessions continued with broader discussions about digital sovereignty, fragmentation, and whether the internet is moving toward a “splinternet”. The day concluded with a deep dive into post-quantum cryptography, where real-world implementations provided valuable lessons for securing the next era of communication systems.

The final day of the conference shifted attention to geopolitics, cyber resilience, and the role of standards in shaping strategic responses to global challenges. Speakers explored how critical infrastructure security is increasingly influenced by geopolitical dynamics and how coordinated international standards can help mitigate risks. The Cyber Resilience Act remained a focal point, with experts emphasising the urgency of developing the 19 associated ETSI standards to support implementation. Harmonising global labelling schemes based on ETSI EN 303 645 was identified as an immediate priority, while in the longer term, education—both for future generations and C-level executives—was seen as essential to strengthen awareness of how standards underpin sovereignty, innovation, and competitiveness.

The 2025 edition of the ETSI Security Conference reaffirmed ETSI’s position as a central hub for cybersecurity dialogue and collaboration. From 5G and IoT to post-quantum cryptography and 6G, it showcased how security is now integral to every layer of the digital ecosystem. As the journey toward IMT-2030 continues, the message from Sophia Antipolis was clear: proactive, standards-based collaboration is the foundation of a secure connected future.

You can see the detailed agenda here. The presentations from the conference are all available here.

Related Posts: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, October 9, 2025

Seamless UE Context Recovery (SUECR) in 3GPP Release 18

3GPP Release 18 introduces a wide range of enhancements across the 5G system, from energy efficiency and XR optimisation to AI-powered features. Among these developments is a practical but important addition known as Seamless User Equipment Context Recovery (SUECR), designed to handle situations where a device temporarily goes offline.

When a device such as a smartphone or IoT unit undergoes an operating system upgrade, a modem reset or a software update, it may become unavailable for a period of time. If this happens without informing the network, the operator’s core functions and connected application servers may continue to treat the device as available. This can result in wasted signalling, unnecessary retries and disruptions to critical operations that depend on the device’s availability.

SUECR provides a solution by allowing the device to notify the network of an unavailability period, which is a defined window of time during which it cannot communicate. Both the device and the core network retain important session and mobility information so that once the device returns, service can continue smoothly without unnecessary procedures.

The feature works in two ways depending on the device’s ability to store context information. If the device can preserve its mobility and session management contexts in non-volatile memory or on the SIM, it executes a registration procedure before going offline. The unavailability period is included in this request, and the Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) records the duration and recognises the device as unreachable until it re-registers. If an application function has subscribed to receive updates on device availability, the AMF also forwards this information so that application servers can adapt accordingly. If the device cannot save its context, it instead executes a deregistration procedure to notify the AMF of its unavailability, with similar treatment by the network until the device performs its next registration.

Once the update or reset is complete, the device re-registers with the network and resumes normal service. If the planned downtime is delayed, cancelled or extended, the device repeats the procedure to keep the network and applications accurately informed. This ensures that network functions and application servers no longer waste resources attempting to reach devices that are temporarily offline.

By introducing SUECR, Release 18 strengthens service reliability and efficiency. It prevents unnecessary signalling and enables critical applications to maintain accurate awareness of device availability. The figure above, from NTT Docomo’s Technical Journal, illustrates how the unavailability period is managed depending on whether the registration or deregistration procedure is used.

Seamless User Equipment Context Recovery may appear as a small enhancement in the context of all the new Rel-18 features, but it addresses an important gap in 5G operations. As networks continue to evolve towards automation and support for mission-critical services, this function will play a key role in making device management more predictable and dependable.

Related Posts: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, August 21, 2025

Understanding L1/L2 Triggered Mobility (LTM) Procedure in 3GPP Release 18

In an earlier post we looked at the 3GPP Release 18 Description and Summary of Work Items. One of the key areas was Further NR mobility enhancements, where a new feature called L1/L2-triggered mobility (LTM) has been introduced. This procedure aims to reduce mobility latency and improve handover performance in 5G-Advanced.

Mobility has always been one of the most important areas in cellular networks. The ability of a user equipment (UE) to move between cells without losing service is essential for reliability and performance. Traditional handover procedures in 4G and 5G rely on Layer 3 (L3) signalling, which is robust but can result in high signalling overhead and connection interruption times of 50 to 90 milliseconds. While most consumer services can tolerate this, advanced use cases with strict latency demands cannot.

3GPP Release 18 takes a significant step forward by introducing the L1/L2 Triggered Mobility (LTM) procedure. Instead of relying only on L3 signalling, LTM shifts much of the handover process down to Layer 1 (physical) and Layer 2 (MAC), making it both faster and more efficient. The goal is to reduce interruption to around 20 to 30 milliseconds, a level that can better support applications in ultra-reliable low latency communication, extended reality and mobility automation.

The principle behind LTM is straightforward. The UE is preconfigured with candidate target cells by the network. These configurations can be provided in two ways: either as a common reference with small delta updates for each candidate or as complete configurations. Keeping the configuration of multiple candidates allows the UE to switch more quickly without requiring another round of reconfiguration after each move.

Measurements are then performed at lower layers. The UE reports reference signal measurements and time and phase information to the network. Medium Access Control (MAC) control elements are used to activate or deactivate target cell states, including transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states. This ensures the UE is already aware of beam directions and reference signals in the target cells before the actual switch.

A particularly important innovation in LTM is the concept of pre-synchronisation. Both downlink and uplink pre-synchronisation can take place while the UE is still connected to the serving cell. For downlink, the network instructs the UE to align with a candidate cell’s beams. For uplink, the UE can transmit a random-access preamble towards a target cell, and the network calculates a timing advance (TA) value. This TA is stored and delivered only at the moment of execution, allowing the UE to avoid a new random access procedure. In cases where TA is already known or equal to the serving cell, the handover becomes RACH-less, eliminating a significant source of delay.

The final step is the LTM cell switch command. This MAC control element carries the chosen target configuration, TA value and TCI state indication. Since synchronisation has already been achieved, the UE can break the old connection and resume data transfer almost immediately in the new cell.

Compared to earlier attempts such as Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) handover, which required maintaining two simultaneous connections and faced practical limitations, LTM offers a more scalable solution. It can be applied across frequency ranges, including higher bands above 7 GHz where beamforming is critical, and it works for both intra-DU and inter-DU mobility within a gNB.

The Release 18 specification restricts LTM to intra-gNB mobility, but work has already begun in Release 19 to expand it further. Future enhancements are expected to cover inter-gNB mobility and to refine measurement reporting for even greater efficiency.

Looking beyond 5G Advanced, new concepts are being explored for 6G. At the Brooklyn 6G Summit 2024, MediaTek introduced the idea of L1/L2 Triggered Predictive Mobility (LTPM), where predictive intelligence could play a role in mobility decisions. While this is still at an early research stage, it points to how mobility management will continue to evolve.

For now, the introduction of LTM marks a practical and important milestone. By reducing handover latency significantly, it brings the network closer to meeting the demanding requirements of next generation services while maintaining efficiency in signalling and resource use.

Related Posts: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Friday, August 8, 2025

Is 6G Our Last Chance to Make Antennas Great Again?

At the CW TEC 2025 conference hosted by Cambridge Wireless, veteran wireless engineer Moray Rumney delivered a presentation that challenged the direction the mobile industry has taken. With decades of experience and a sharp eye for what matters, he highlighted a growing and largely ignored problem: the steady decline in the efficiency of antennas in mobile devices.

The evolution of mobile technology has delivered remarkable achievements. From the early days of GSM to the promises of 5G and the ambition of 6G, the industry has continually pushed for higher speeds, more features and greater spectral efficiency. Yet along the way, something essential has been lost. While much of the focus has been on network-side innovation and baseband complexity, the performance of the user device antenna has deteriorated to the point where it is now undermining the potential benefits of these advancements.

According to Moray, antenna performance in smartphones has declined by around 15 decibels since the transition from external antennas in 2G to today’s smartphones. That level of loss has a profound impact. A poor antenna reduces both transmitted and received signal strength. On the uplink side, this means users need to push more power to the network, which drains battery life faster. On the downlink, it forces the network to compensate with stronger transmissions, increasing inter-cell interference and lowering cell-edge throughput. Ultimately, this undermines the overall efficiency and quality of mobile networks. Cell edge performance and indoor coverage is much degraded.

The root of the problem lies in modern smartphone design priorities. Over the years, devices have become slimmer, more stylish and packed with more features. In this pursuit of sleekness, antennas have been compromised. External antennas gave way to internal ones, squeezed into tight spaces surrounded by metal and glass. The visual appeal of the phone has taken precedence over its radio performance. On a technical level, the explosion in the number of supported bands and the increased use of multi-antenna transceivers optimized for high performance in excellent conditions, has reduced the available space for each antenna, reducing the antenna gain accordingly.

This issue was particularly pronounced during the LTE era, where the standards bodies failed to define any radiated performance requirements. Handset performance is based  on conducted power, which can appear satisfactory in laboratory conditions. However, once the signal passes through the device's real antenna, the result is often a significant loss. Real-world radiated performance does not match lab conducted measurements.

One of Moray's more memorable illustrations compared the situation to a tube of toothpaste. The conducted performance, which all devices meet, is like a full tube of toothpaste, but with years passing before radiated requirements were finally defined for a few bands in 5G, products with inferior radiated performance were released to the market, which put downward pressure on the radiated requirements that were finally agreed – like squeezing out all the toothpaste. What is left today is a small residue of what used to be. Once compromised, it is extremely difficult to reverse this trend.

He also pointed out a structural problem in how mobile standards are developed. The focus is disproportionately placed on baseband processing and theoretical possibilities, rather than on end-user experience and what actually gets deployed. As new generations arrive, more complexity is added, yet basic aspects like antenna efficiency are overlooked. Testing practices further entrench the problem, as the use of a 50-ohm connector during lab testing limits the scope for real antenna improvements, preventing designers from achieving optimal matching and performance.

Despite all the talk of 6G and beyond, the reality on the ground is less impressive. The UK currently ranks 59th in global mobile speed tests. This is not because of a lack of advanced standards or spectrum, but because of poor deployment decisions and device-related issues like inefficient antennas. It is not a technology gap but a failure to focus on basics that truly matter to users.

Moray argued that significant progress could be made without waiting for 6G. Regulatory bodies could introduce minimum standards for antenna performance, as was once attempted in Denmark. Device certification could include antenna efficiency ratings, encouraging manufacturers to prioritise performance. Networks could enforce stricter indoor coverage targets, and pricing models could be rethought to reduce the strain caused by low-value, high-volume traffic.

He also called attention to battery life, another casualty of inefficient antennas and poor design decisions. Users now routinely carry power banks to get through the day. This is hardly a sign of progress, especially considering the environmental impact of producing and charging these extra devices.

In conclusion, while the industry continues to chase ambitious visions for future generations of mobile technology, there is an urgent need to fix the basics. Antennas are not an exciting topic, but they are fundamental. Without efficient antennas, all the investment in infrastructure, spectrum and software optimisation is wasted. It is time for the industry to refocus, reassess and revalue the importance of the one component every user relies on, but rarely sees.

It really is time to make antennas great again.

Moray’s presentation is embedded below and is available to download from here.

Related Posts: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, July 1, 2025

The Evolution of 3GPP 5G Network Slice and Service Types (SSTs)

The concept of network slicing has been one of the standout features in 5G (no pun intended). It allows operators to offer logically isolated networks over shared infrastructure, each tailored for specific applications or services. These slices are identified using a combination of the Slice/Service Type (SST) and an optional Slice Differentiator (SD), together forming what is called a Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI).

To ensure global interoperability and support for roaming scenarios, 3GPP standardises a set of SST values. These are intended to provide common ground across public land mobile networks for the most prevalent slice types. Over the course of different 3GPP releases, the list of standardised SST values has grown to reflect emerging use cases and evolving requirements.

The foundation was laid in Release 15, where the first three SST values were introduced. SST 1 represents enhanced Mobile Broadband (eMBB), suitable for high throughput services like video streaming, large file downloads and augmented reality. SST 2 refers to Ultra-Reliable and Low-Latency Communications (URLLC), designed for time-sensitive applications such as factory automation, remote surgery and smart grids. SST 3 is for Massive Internet of Things (mIoT - earlier referred to as mMTC), tailored for large-scale deployments of low-power sensors in use cases such as smart metering and logistics.

The first major extension came with Release 16, which introduced SST 4 for Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) services. This slice type addresses the requirements of connected vehicles, particularly in terms of ultra low latency, high reliability and localised communication. It was the first time a vertical-specific slice type was defined.

With Release 17, the slicing framework was extended further to include SST 5, defined for High-Performance Machine-Type Communications (HMTC). This slice is aimed at industrial automation and use cases that require highly deterministic and reliable communication patterns between machines. It enhances the original URLLC profile by refining it for industrial-grade requirements.

Recognising the growing importance of immersive services, Release 18 added SST 6, defined for High Data Rate and Low Latency Communications (HDLLC). This slice targets extended reality, cloud gaming and other applications that simultaneously demand low delay and high bandwidth. It goes beyond what enhanced Mobile Broadband or URLLC individually offer by addressing the combination of both extremes. The documentation refers to this as being suitable for extended reality and media services, underlining the increasing focus on immersive technologies and their networking needs.

Finally, Release 19 introduced SST 7 for Guaranteed Bit Rate Streaming Services (GBRSS). This new slice supports services where continuous, guaranteed throughput is essential. It is particularly relevant for live broadcasting, high-definition streaming, or virtual presence applications where quality cannot degrade over time.

This gradual and deliberate expansion of standardised SSTs highlights how 5G is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Instead, it is a dynamic platform that adapts to the needs of different industries. As use cases grow more sophisticated and diverse, having standardised slice types helps ensure compatibility, simplify device and network configuration, and promote innovation.

It is also worth noting that these SST values are not mandatory for every operator to implement. A network can choose to support a subset based on its service strategy. For example, a public network may prioritise SSTs 1 and 3, while a private industrial deployment might focus on SST 5 or 7.

With slicing increasingly central to how 5G will be "monetised" and deployed, expect this list to keep growing in future releases. Each new SST tells a story about where the telecoms ecosystem is heading.

Related Posts: 

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, April 11, 2025

Understanding ETSI’s Industry Specification Groups (ISGs) and Why They Matter

The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) is a leading standards development organisation (SDO) recognised for producing globally applicable standards for ICT, including fixed, mobile, radio, converged, broadcast, and internet technologies. Based in Europe but with worldwide influence, ETSI provides an open and inclusive environment for industry players to collaborate on the development of future technologies.

A recent overview presentation of ETSI by Jan Ellsberger, ETSI's Director General, is available on the 3GPP website here.

ETSI's Industry Specification Groups (ISGs) are collaborative groups formed within ETSI to address emerging and often pre-standardisation topics in a flexible, fast, and open manner. They provide a platform for industry players, including companies, research organisations, and other stakeholders, to work together on technical specifications outside the constraints of formal standardisation processes.

Key Features of ISGs include:

  • Focus on innovation: ISGs often tackle new or rapidly evolving technologies, such as Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV), Quantum Key Distribution (QKD), and AI.
  • Open participation: Participation is open to ETSI members and non-members, although non-members pay a fee.
  • Faster timelines: ISGs are designed to deliver results quickly, often within 12–24 months, making them well-suited for fast-moving domains.
  • Flexible structure: They are less formal than ETSI Technical Committees, which allows more agile collaboration.

ISGs produce documents such as:

  • Group Specifications (GS) – technical specifications that can later be taken up by formal standardisation bodies.
  • Group Reports (GR) – informative reports including use cases, frameworks, or recommendations.

ISGs help shape the direction of future standards and industry practices by offering an open, collaborative environment for technical consensus. They often bridge the gap between research and standardisation.

Dr Howard Benn, a mobile industry veteran with contributions spanning from GSM to 5G, has created a short video on ETSI’s ISGs, embedded below:

Related Posts:

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, April 1, 2025

5G-Advanced Store and Forward (S&F): Enabling Resilient IoT Communications via Satellite

Introduction

As the deployment of 5G networks continues to expand globally, the industry is already looking ahead to enhance capabilities through 5G-Advanced features. Among these innovations is the "Store and Forward" (S&F) functionality for Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN), which represents a significant advancement for IoT applications utilizing satellite connectivity. This feature, specified in 3GPP Release 19, addresses one of the key challenges in satellite communications: maintaining service continuity during intermittent feeder link connectivity.

What is Store and Forward?

Store and Forward (S&F) satellite operation is designed to provide communication services for User Equipment (UE) under satellite coverage without requiring a simultaneous active feeder link connection to the ground segment. This capability is particularly relevant for delay-tolerant IoT services utilizing Non-Geostationary Orbit (NGSO) satellites.

In simple terms, S&F enables satellites to:

  • Collect data from IoT devices when they're in range
  • Store this data onboard the satellite
  • Forward the data to ground stations only when a connection becomes available

This approach fundamentally differs from traditional satellite operations, which require end-to-end connectivity at the moment of transmission.

Source: 3GPP TR 22.865: Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects; Study on satellite access Phase 3;

Normal Operation vs. Store and Forward

To understand the significance of S&F, it's important to contrast it with the "normal/default satellite operation" mode:

Normal/Default Satellite Operation

In the traditional model, signalling and data traffic exchange between a UE with satellite access and the ground network requires both service and feeder links to be active simultaneously. This creates a continuous end-to-end connectivity path between the UE, satellite, and ground network.

Store and Forward Operation

Under S&F operation, the end-to-end exchange of signalling/data traffic is handled as a two-step process that doesn't need to occur concurrently:

  • Step A: Signalling/data exchange between the UE and satellite takes place even without the satellite being connected to the ground network. The satellite operates the service link without an active feeder link connection, collecting and storing data from IoT devices.
  • Step B: Later, when connectivity between the satellite and ground network is established, the stored communications are transmitted to the ground network.

This approach bears similarities to existing store-and-forward services like SMS, where end-to-end connectivity between endpoints isn't required simultaneously.

Source: Ericsson Blog

Technical Requirements for Store and Forward

The implementation of S&F relies heavily on regenerative satellite payloads, as opposed to transparent payloads. Here's why this distinction matters:

Regenerative Payload Advantages

A regenerative payload with an onboard gNB (next-generation NodeB) offers several critical capabilities:

  • Onboard Processing: The ability to process and store data directly on the satellite
  • Reduced Dependency: Less reliance on continuous ground segment connectivity
  • Enhanced Resilience: The NTN can function even if the feeder link is temporarily severed
  • Performance Improvements: Significant reductions in roundtrip time for all procedures between the gNB and UE

For S&F functionality, all or part of the core network functions must be placed on the satellite together with the gNB. This architectural change enables a new level of autonomous operation for satellite networks.

Applications for IoT

The Store and Forward capability is especially suited for delay-tolerant or non-real-time IoT applications. Examples include:

  • Environmental Monitoring: Collecting sensor data from remote locations
  • Asset Tracking: Monitoring the status of assets in transit through areas with limited ground infrastructure
  • Agricultural Sensing: Gathering data from widely distributed sensors in rural areas
  • Maritime and Offshore IoT: Supporting connected devices at sea where direct connectivity to ground networks is inconsistent

These use cases benefit from S&F's ability to ensure data is eventually delivered without requiring constant connectivity, which is particularly valuable for battery-powered IoT devices that need to conserve energy.

Relationship to Delay-Tolerant Networking

The concept of Store and Forward is well-established in delay-tolerant networking (DTN) and disruption-tolerant networking domains. These networking paradigms are designed to work in challenged environments where conventional protocols may fail due to long delays or frequent disruptions.

In the 3GPP context, S&F can be compared to SMS service, which doesn't require end-to-end connectivity between endpoints but only between the endpoints and the Short Message Service Centre (SMSC), which acts as an intermediate node handling storage and forwarding.

Future Implications

The introduction of S&F functionality represents an important step toward what Ericsson has called "data centers in the sky." By placing not just radio access network functions but also core network capabilities in space, we're moving toward satellite networks that can operate with greater autonomy and resilience.

This development also aligns with broader industry efforts to create truly global coverage through integrated ground and space networks. Combined with inter-satellite links (ISL), S&F enables more flexible and resilient network architectures that can maintain service even when individual links are unavailable.

Conclusion

Store and Forward represents a significant advancement in 5G-Advanced satellite communications, particularly for IoT applications. By decoupling the timing requirements between service link and feeder link communications, S&F enables more resilient, energy-efficient, and cost-effective deployment of IoT devices in remote or challenging environments.

As 3GPP Release 19 specifications continue to develop, we can expect to see this capability integrated into commercial satellite IoT offerings, expanding the reach of 5G networks to truly global coverage. While initially targeted at IoT applications, the architectural principles of S&F could eventually extend to other services, bringing us closer to ubiquitous connectivity across terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks.

Related Posts

Posted by Zahid Ghadialy at 7:35 AM Leave a comment...0 comments so far
Labels: , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)