Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Takwa Sebai's avatar

Agree on the arbitrary metrics, Dean. From the field side, the 1Gbps versus 700Mbps debate exposes a deeper issue: peak headline rates are the easiest number to quote and the least representative of what a user actually experiences at a given spot and time.

A lot of what gets framed as an investment gap is really a measurement gap. Operators can show coverage maps and peak-rate dashboards, but the experience that matters happens at a specific location and moment, and that is rarely the number being funded against.

Takwa Sebai's avatar

The NGMN simplicity call resonates deeply from a field engineering perspective.

The 4G-to-5G migration created a diagnostic complexity explosion: NSA vs SA, EN-DC band combinations, different Layer 3 procedures on MCG vs SCG. Field teams carry toolchains designed for single-RAT environments while the network runs multi-RAT signaling.

If MRSS follows the same fragmentation path as DSS, proving network quality at a specific location and moment will become even harder for field engineers.

The Oulu RIS study is exactly the right approach: measured in a real operating environment, not simulated. That is what 6G validation needs more of. Evidence from the field, not from the lab.

4 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?