Daily Dose of 6G

RANRAN#113 · 14–17 Sep

Spectrum sharing with NR is now a requirement

Agreed

6GR must support efficient sharing of downlink control channel resources with NR. Operators had asked for “dynamic” sharing. The plenary chose “efficient”, which leaves RAN1 room on how to do it. The concern behind the requirement is control overhead: control resource sets take about 14% of a 10 MHz FDD carrier in typical cases and up to 23% in the worst case.

Still open

Control-channel reference signals and multiplexed uplink control with sounding were both proposed by operators and not taken up.

RANRAN#113

Migration: three options, no decision

Option	What it is	Operator support
1	6G-anchored dual connectivity	18
2	5G-anchored, NSA-like	3
3	No RAN aggregation, dual core	6

Option 3 came from satellite operators including AST SpaceMobile, Skylo and EchoStar. The plenary approved only a simplified variant for study: two single registrations (5G core over NR and 6G core over 6GR), network-controlled mobility only. The target use case is VoNR voice on the 5G leg with 6G data alongside. SA2 must report on feasibility by RAN#114.

Vodafone made its support for Option 1 conditional on a lightly evolved 5G core. That ties the RAN migration decision to the SA2 architecture decision below. If nothing is agreed in December, MRSS alone is the default. The chair was not optimistic: In three months we will have exactly the same situation.

RANRAN1–RAN4 reports to RAN#113

Radio details that did land

• Higher-layer split (RAN3, RP-261644): The 6G RAN architecture shall support HLS, including CU-DU split and CP-UP separation, with 5G HLS as the baseline.
• Spectrum aggregation (RAN2, LS RP-261618): no blocking issue for non-collocated FR1+FR2 aggregation over non-ideal backhaul of up to 10 ms. RAN2 is now studying it with two independent schedulers and a multi-vendor goal.
• Modulation: 1024QAM uplink is supported for FWA. On 4096QAM, there is no consensus on the support of 4096QAM in 6G Rel-21. Constellation shaping also has no consensus, partly because companies used different simulation assumptions.
• RAN1 reports milestones on uplink channel coding (BG3), constellation shaping, higher-order modulation and 6GR SSB design.
• Device types: three reference types replace UE categories: eMBB, massive IoT and FWA. Further requests: XR (AT&T), a RedCap successor (vivo), automotive (Bosch and five carmakers) and railways.

SASA#113 · 15–18 Sep

The core architecture gets a deadline

SA2’s study reports 15 of 24 key issues resolved and about 65% complete, with three candidate architectures still on the table. Seventeen operators, including AT&T, Deutsche Telekom, NTT DOCOMO, Verizon and Vodafone, put forward three principles:

• 5G SA and the 5G core are the foundation. Reuse and evolve existing functions.
• Essential connectivity should not depend on AI Agent functionality in order to operate.
• New 6G capabilities need a demonstrated justification.

Agreed

The architecture decision must come as soon as possible and no later than SA2#178 (November 2026).

Still open

The role of AI agents in connectivity, NAS routing, and operator services beyond connectivity.

Also tabled

The SA chair proposed naming 6G reference points “H” plus a number, replacing 5G’s “N”. This would cover RAN–core, NF–NF, 5G–6G and UE–core interfaces.

SASA1 · SA3 at SA#113

Requirements and security

• SA1: 6G service requirements are about 40% done, with 70% targeted for November and approval in December. The difference between a “6G Computing Service” and a “6G AI service” is still undefined.
• SA3: the AEAD algorithms study (TR 33.771) was approved with all key issues concluded. A study on ISAC security and privacy was also approved.