Je veux savoir à propos de…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 58 / Monday, March 29, 2021 / Notices components of wireless networks, including semiconductors, end user devices, and core network elements.
Does this suggest that U.S. companies are well positioned to compete in a modular market? More specifically, we seek comment and data on whether and, if so, how many U.S. companies or vendors can manufacture and/or supply Open RAN sub-components, including radios, at the scale necessary to compete both domestically and internationally with traditional network equipment vendors. How many U.S. companies have the knowledge and resources to begin manufacturing Open RAN
components and applications in the near future? What are the projected market shares of the U.S. companies at the aggregate level in the U.S. wireless network equipment market if Open RAN
were widely adopted? Are there any components or applications for which there currently are no U.S. suppliers?
Domestic Deployments. We seek comment on the current state of Open RAN deployments in the U.S. To what extent are these solutions commercially available today? While DISH has not announced a launch date, it is currently building the first nationwide cloudnative, Open RAN-based 5G broadband network. Inland Cellular, a rural mobile wireless service provider that serves more than 35,000 subscribers in Idaho and Washington, is reportedly deploying an Open RAN system that will cut per site cost by approximately 40 percent. Verizon Wireless has reportedly deployed vRAN equipment as part of its 5G network. What other U.S. companies are planning or otherwise participating in Open RAN
deployments? How close is the U.S. to being ready for large-scale deployments?
Has Open RAN delivered an integrated and truly interoperable end-to-end process in the United States yet?
Commenters should discuss previous and current efforts to deploy Open RAN
in the U.S., as well as any expected plans to deploy in the future, including information on the costs of any deployments considered. We seek comment on which mobile network operators or original equipment manufacturers are likely and not likely to adopt Open RAN. What factors are preventing, impeding, or discouraging Open RAN deployments? What steps should be taken by the Commission, other federal partners, industry, academia, or others to resolve these issues, address these concerns, and accelerate the timeline for Open RAN
deployment?
International Deployments. Similarly to the United States, several countries have stressed the importance of securing
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:20 Mar 26, 2021

Jkt 253001

their communications networks and communications supply chains. The United Kingdom has established a 5G
Supply Chain Diversification Strategy to ensure the telecom supply chain remains resilient to future trends and threats, and French suppliers are being prioritized to help the French government reduce its dependence on Huawei. Several countries believe that Open RAN can offer a solution to security issues affecting the communications network supply chain.
The German government, for example, is expected to spend 2 billion euros to reduce dependency on Huawei and to prioritize Open RAN research, development, and deployments.
In response to government policies and demand for more secure solutions, operators worldwide are developing and deploying Open RAN architectures at an increasing rate. For example, in Asia, Rakuten maintains it was one of the first companies to utilize Open RAN as part of its new fully virtualized cloud network in Japan, and Bharti Airtel and Vodafone Idea have been at the forefront of Open RAN deployments in India. In Europe, four major carriersVodafone Group Plc, Telefonica S.A., Deutsche Telekom AG, and Orange S.A.signed a Memorandum of Understanding signaling their commitment to deploy Open RAN solutions across Europe. In Africa, Vodafone has conducted early field trials, and, in July 2020, Orange announced a multi-country program to extend their current coverage with Open RAN solutions, including to the Central African Republic. In Latin America, the TIP, Instituto Nacional de Telecomunicacoes Inatel, and Telecom Italia Mobile TIM Brasil launched the Open Field program in Brazil to develop and test Open RAN solutions in the field.
As countries and operators worldwide are beginning to coalesce around the Open RAN model, we seek comment on what lessons can be learned from successful deployments, previous failed deployments, and development efforts being undertaken in other countries.
What has been learned about deploying Open RAN systems using existing generations of networks and in lowincome and rural environments? What challenges have these operators faced in developing and deploying Open RAN
systems? Is there anything about the U.S. wireless network industry, spectrum policies e.g., availability of greenfield spectrum, or geographical or other factors that present unique challenges to Open RAN deployment?
What steps can the Commission take to encourage timely and secure domestic deployments? What implications do
PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

16351

international efforts like the European Memorandum of Understanding have for U.S. leadership in this area?
B. Potential Public Interest Benefits in Promoting Development and Deployment of Open RAN
Increased Competition and Network Vendor Diversity. We seek comment generally on the effect of Open RAN on market entry, vendor diversity, and competition in the wireless network equipment industry. We seek comment on the current state of competition in the wireless network equipment industry generally and in the markets for various components and applications. In particular, we seek comment on whether and how the current market structure in the traditional RAN sector may impact or affect the deployment and adoption of Open RAN solutions. How many options are available to carriers in selecting equipment manufacturers?
How interoperable is this RAN
equipment, if at all, with other hardware and software? Is this equipment or software proprietary? What restrictions, if any, do equipment manufacturers place on wireless carriers equipment choices or options? Similarly, do equipment manufacturers place any restrictions on their upstream suppliers in terms of dealing with Open RAN
providers? What affect do such restrictions have on competition and Open RAN deployment and adoption?
What are the effects of competition in the industry, and would transitioning to Open RAN resolve, ameliorate, or worsen these issues? Specifically, would increased competition in the wireless network equipment marketplace result in lower costs for operators? Commenters advocating this position should explain why and should estimate the likely cost reductions. For instance, does Open RAN eliminate or minimize the costs associated with developing a proprietary end-to-end network or deploying and maintaining single-vendor hardware? What benefits can be gained by access to interoperable networks? On the other hand, would there be any additional costs to operators from having to use Open RAN
versus alternative technologies? For example, are there any additional costs required for integrating the Open RAN
system?
We also seek this information on the firms that supply various network components and applications of 5G
RAN networks and their market shares in each of the segments. We seek comment on the relationships between and among firms in this industry, including but not limited to supplier
E:FRFM29MRN1.SGM

29MRN1