6,294
edits
Assessment of Open Ran: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
Although COTs hardware is cheap to acquire and enables faster deployments, it can result in higher OPEX costs. This is because, unlike proprietary solutions, COTs hardware is not optimized. As such, they end up consuming a lot of power. But the industry is now moving towards alternative solutions which use optimized silicon<ref>https://senzafili.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/SenzaFili_DD_ORAN_Ecosystem.pdf page.12</ref>. | Although COTs hardware is cheap to acquire and enables faster deployments, it can result in higher OPEX costs. This is because, unlike proprietary solutions, COTs hardware is not optimized. As such, they end up consuming a lot of power. But the industry is now moving towards alternative solutions which use optimized silicon<ref>https://senzafili.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/SenzaFili_DD_ORAN_Ecosystem.pdf page.12</ref>. | ||
=== 4. | === 4. '''''Open Ran performance has not been fully proven''''' === | ||
Open Ran players such as Rakuten and Dish have yet to prove whether Open Ran is better than the traditional Ran<ref>https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/pt/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/TEE/The-Open-Future-of-Radio-Access-Networks.pdf page.10</ref>. It's one way to forecast and another way to achieve. | Open Ran players such as Rakuten and Dish have yet to prove whether Open Ran is better than the traditional Ran<ref>https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/pt/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/TEE/The-Open-Future-of-Radio-Access-Networks.pdf page.10</ref>. It's one way to forecast and another way to achieve. | ||