5G Radio Access above 6 GHz
Mehrdad Shariat1, David M. Gutierrez-Estevez1, Arnesh Vijay2, Krystian Safjan2, Patrik Rugeland3, Icaro da Silva3,
Javier Lorca4, Joerg Widmer5, Maria Fresia6, Yilin Li7, Isabelle Siaud8
1
Samsung Electronics R&D Institute UK, 2Nokia Bell Labs, 3Ericsson AB, 4Telefonica I+D, 5IMDEA Networks,
6
Intel Deutschland GmbH, 7Huawei Technologies Dusseldorf GmbH, 8Orange
Abstract— Designing and developing a millimetre-wave
(mmWave) based mobile Radio Access Technology (RAT) in the
6-100 GHz frequency range is a fundamental component in the
standardization of the new 5G radio interface, recently kicked off
by 3GPP. Such component, herein called the new mmWave RAT,
will not only enable extreme mobile broadband (eMBB) services,
but also support UHD/3D streaming, offer immersive
applications and ultra-responsive cloud services to provide an
outstanding Quality of Experience (QoE) to the mobile users. The
main objective of this paper is to develop the network
architectural elements and functions that will enable tight
integration of mmWave technology into the overall 5G radio
access network (RAN). A broad range of topics addressing
mobile architecture and network functionalities will be covered―
starting with the architectural facets of network slicing, multiconnectivity and cells clustering, to more functional elements of
initial access, mobility, radio resource management (RRM) and
self-backhauling. The intention of the concepts presented here is
to lay foundation for future studies towards the first commercial
implementation of the mmWave RAT above 6 GHz.
Keywords—mmWave, architecture, multi-connectivity, network
slicing, cells clustering

I.

INTRODUCTION

There has been a significant growth in the volume of
mobile data traffic in recent years and this trend is expected to
continue, reaching at least 6500 Peta Bytes/month by 2017,
corresponding to a 7-fold increase over 2013 [1]. This is due
to the proliferation of smart phones and other mobile devices
that support a wide range of newly deployed broadband
applications and services. In 5G, eMBB services [2] will play
an important role, however, with more challenging
requirements such as very high peak data rates (in the order of
10 Gbps) in certain eMBB scenarios [3] and, at least, 50 Mbps
everywhere including urban, suburban and rural areas served
by the mmWave [3]. It is also envisioned that 5G should
support a new range of services, such as ultra-reliable machine
applications, which may require very low latencies (in the
order of 1 ms) and ultra-reliable connectivity to serve
applications such as traffic safety, infrastructure protection or
emerging industrial Internet applications. In order to meet
these requirements, a new RAT is also being studied by 3GPP
[4], where it is assumed that it should operate at frequencies
up to 100 GHz. In order to reach these goals, there is a
consensus in the mobile industry [2], [5] that mmWave

technology must be an essential component of that new 5G
RAN, not only as a capacity enhancer for low frequency
deployments in macro and/or localized hotspots, but to enable
robust connectivity for users connected only to the mmWave
RAT without any support from a RAT operating below 6
GHz. This could either be mmWave networks deployed
independently from low frequency RATs or more likely codeployed with only partial overlapping coverage (e.g. indoor
deployment) where the low frequency support cannot be
obtained in the entire area. In mmWave bands, the high carrier
frequency and large bandwidth, in addition to the maintenance
of fragile links in high frequencies for mobile users, influence
the system concept and technological components. To support
a diverse set of services, scenarios and frequency bands, the
5G systems will comprise a combination of technologies,
requiring the mmWave technology to integrate in an interoperable manner.
To enable the integration of mmWave within the new 5G
RAN, it will be important to facilitate the integration at the
lowest layer possible in the protocol stack, instead of relying
on higher layers for inter-RAT communication. This is
important in order to enable fast resource management, User
Plane aggregation and to exploit multi-connectivity solutions.
In this paper, we develop initial concepts on network
architectural elements and functions that will enable tight
integration of mmWave technology with other 5G system
components. The outlined solutions provide robust interoperability between mmWave carriers and other 5G frequency
carriers (including also upcoming carrier(s) by the evolution of
LTE-A), thereby providing an 'edge-less' user experience.
Furthermore, it is anticipated that mmWave technology can
enable other aspects in future 5G systems. For this, our work
investigates possibilities for mmWave-based wireless backhaul
dimensioning along the radio access part. Hence, flexible and
scalable network deployments can be enabled to reduce
network costs and to increase their adaptability to dynamic
conditions.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows:
Section II presents requirements and challenges of mmWave
networks, covering 5G use cases (UCs) and spectrum
requirements, channel characterization, radio interface
constraints and limitations and further extends into discussing
the RAN design challenges. Section III presents the proposed
RAN architecture, covering various topics of network slicing,
multi-connectivity, multi-layer and multi-RAT management,

This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: [M. Shariat, et al., "5G Radio Access above
6 GHz." Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies, vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 1160-1167,
2016], which has been published in final form at [10.1002/ett.3076]. This article may be used for noncommercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.

mmWave access point (AP) clustering, network dimensioning
and backhauling. In Section IV, important RAN functionalities
are presented, covering the subject of initial access, mobility
management, Medium Access Control (MAC) / RRM aspects,
and self-backhauling. Finally, conclusions are drawn in Section
V.
II.

REQUIREMENTS AND CHALLENGES

A. 5G Use Cases and Spectrum Requirements
Several 5G UCs have been identified in different regulatory
bodies, standardization fora and research programmes (e.g., 5G
PPP projects) where there are ongoing efforts to harmonize
them. Some of the most important UCs which may benefit
from the mmWave technologies, either on the access, backhaul,
or both, are outlined in Fig. 1 [6]. In the wide spectrum range
from 6 to 100 GHz different bands are suitable for different use
cases. Use cases such as tactile internet or robotic control will
be preferably served in lower part of 6-100 GHz spectrum
whereas high end of this range will be used for use cases from
eMBB family - such as cloud service or immersive 5G early
experience.

Fig.1 Key mmWave use cases [6]

These UCs set stringent requirements on the networks, e.g.
support for peak data rates of 10 Gbps, reduced latency in the
order of 5 ms (end-to-end) for interactive applications and a
highly improved and consistent QoE to users, regardless of the
UE location or mobility.
The support of a wide contiguous bandwidth is a key factor
in most of the aforementioned UCs. Therefore, multiple
spectrum band options need to be explored in the so-called
mmWave spectrum in the 6-100 GHz range. Each band has its
own unique features including radio propagation
characteristics, contiguity, as well as co-primary allocations. In
particular, some key factors including capacity, coverage,
mobility, and device complexity can be explored to
characterize each candidate band. As an example, mmWave in
the low GHz range (6-30 GHz) can generally provide better
coverage at a lower device complexity (due to the low
directivity gain required, thus simplifying the antenna design).
However, limitation on the availability of contiguous vacant
spectrum may be a limiting factor on the provision of capacity.
On the other hand, in the mid to high GHz range (above 30
GHz), a wider vacant spectrum is available―but higher
directivity and beam-forming gain is required to compensate
for the higher path loss, increasing the device complexity and

also impacting the mobility management and/or system access
procedures due to fine beam tracking requirements.
B. Channel Characterization
The propagation characteristics in the mmWave bands
significantly differ from the characteristics below 6 GHz,
which heavily impacts RAN design. Apart from the fact that
the path loss scales with frequency, radio propagation moves
more towards the behaviour of optical signals with lower
diffraction, and increasingly relies upon line of sight (LOS)
path or strong reflections rather than diffuse components. At
lower base station heights and higher frequencies, the direct
path or strong multi-path components are more likely to be
blocked―with the effect that the signal power can drop
significantly, rapidly and unpredictably. Blockage can be
induced by trees and street furniture, traffic or people.
Furthermore, at higher frequencies, even small differences in
angle and path length between the LOS and reflected paths can
cause strong spatial fading up to a breakpoint distance.
Great efforts have been made and are currently in progress
to develop comprehensive advanced propagation and channel
models within the entire frequency range from 6 to 100 GHz
for various 5G deployment scenarios [7]. The proposed initial
channel model is in line with the 3GPP-3D model, and an
open source platform for simulations has been made available
in form of the QuaDRiGa implementation [8], covering the
frequency range from 10 to 80 GHz. Also additional
requirements and extensions to the existing models have been
identified as being potentially crucial in order to accurately
support the mmWave frequency range [7]. In this direction,
extensive measurement campaigns have been conducted and
are in full progress involving advanced mmWave channel
sounder setups with multi-frequency (up to four bands in
parallel) and ultra-wideband capabilities (up to 4 GHz
bandwidth). Evaluation results of the first campaigns have
been described for the scenarios of urban micro-cellular street
canyon, open square, outdoor to indoor, office, shopping mall
and airport.
C. Radio interface constraints and limitations
The use of mmWave technologies imposes specific
challenges to the radio interface (RI), compared to sub-6 GHz
frequencies. Link budget constraints resulting from higher
isotropic free-space loss needs to be compensated by higher
antenna gains via directional transmission. Fortunately, such
high frequencies allow smaller antenna elements, enabling the
deployment of the large antenna arrays required for high-gain
beamforming. In terms of transceiver architectures, the
standard solution will likely support both analog and digital
architectures. However, in practice, the directional
transmission may need to rely on hybrid transceiver
architectures (with both analog and digital processing) to save
on hardware cost and power consumption. The mmWave RI
also requires high resolution and fast Analog to Digital (ADC)
and Digital to Analog (DAC) converters to provide the high
data rates envisioned in the GHz range. Directional
transmissions can change the effective channel characteristics,

e.g. interference characteristics, leading to different
requirements and design principles for RI development.
Furthermore, critical Radio Frequency (RF) / hardware
impairments that increase with carrier frequency must be taken
into account, such as phase noise, In-phase / Quadrature (I/Q)imbalance, sampling jitter, sampling frequency offset, carrier
frequency offset and power amplifier (PA) non-linearity. Such
impairments can lead to increased Error Vector Magnitude
(EVM) and reduced spectral efficiency. In addition,
asymmetric antenna and RF configurations in uplink (UL) and
downlink (DL) also affect RI design, considering the fact that
UL coverage will be constrained by much lower TX power at
the user equipment (UE).
D. RAN Design Challenges
Several key challenges are involved in the design of a RAN
which includes a mmWave RAT. Some challenges are related
to the flexibility and configurability required in future
networks to support a versatile set of services and business
models by expanding emerging concepts like network slicing
to the RAN level. Other challenges arise from specific
characteristics in the mmWave bands (e.g. directional and
outage prone transmissions), requiring a redesign of some
RAN architectural aspects (multi-connectivity, multi-layer and
multi-RAT management, AP clustering, and network
dimensioning) as well as functional aspects (initial access,
mobility management, RRM and self-backhauling).
In the following sections, we will explore in more details
how these challenges can be addressed and what are the
enabling technologies from architectural and functional
perspective.
III. RAN ARCHITECTURE
The 5G RAN architecture design has been studied in several
research projects [3] and is currently studied for
standardization by 3GPP [4]. The architecture is assumed to
use LTE as a baseline. In this section, we explore some of the
modifications and extensions to LTE that are required to
address the 5G use cases.
A. Impact of Network slicing on 5G RAN design
Network slicing is an important part of the vision for the
overall 5G architecture [2] that addresses the deployment of
multiple logical networks as independent business operations
on a common physical infrastructure. The ultimate goal would
be to provide “network slices on an as-a service basis” and to
meet the wide range of use cases that the 2020 time frame will
demand for different industries [10].
A slice is seen by a slice customer as an independent
network. However, in contrast to deploying an independent
network infrastructure, each slice will be realized together
with other slices on a common infrastructure (also referred to
as “virtual network”), including assets such as hardware,
software or radio resources. As the propagation conditions of
the mmWave are expected to vary frequently as described in
Section II.B, it will be important to avoid assigning dedicated
radio resources to specific slices in order to seamlessly release

unused radio resources and to share available resources with
other slices. In this way, the infrastructure and asset utilization
will be much more cost and energy-efficient.
The concept of network slicing has initially been proposed
for the 5G core network (CN) [10]. However, the notion has
been recently applied end-to-end and it is possible that RAN
may need specific functionality to support multiple slices or
even partitioning of resources for different network slices [11].
To implement the functionality required for network slicing,
there are several baseline assumptions that can be made on the
architecture and RAN design.
•

Sharing: Most of the network resources in the RAN
architecture are shared by multiple slices by default;

•

Differentiation: The 5G RAN enables mechanisms for
per-slice traffic differentiation;

•

Visibility: The 5G RAN should have the necessary
visibility to apply slice differentiation;

•

Protection: The 5G RAN should provide protection
mechanisms to minimize inter-slice effects;

•

Management: The 5G RAN should provide the support
for slice-specific network management.

B. Multi-connectivity
Multi-connectivity is a key component to fulfil 5G
requirements on data-rate, latency, reliability, and availability.
In particular, the channel characteristics and inherent fragility
of the mmWave links will require redundant and
complementary coverage to ensure reliable connectivity. The
term multi-connectivity can accommodate a broad range of
techniques all of which provide a given UE with radio
resources from two or more radio links.
Inter-frequency multi-connectivity refers to the case where
a UE is connected to two interfaces on different carrier
frequencies, either from a single RAT or from two different
RATs (including bands where the evolution of LTE-A might
be deployed). In contrast, intra-frequency multi-connectivity
refers to transmissions on the same frequency, e.g.
Coordinated Multipoint (CoMP) schemes.
Depending on the deployment and use case requirements,
different options may be selected based on a trade-off between
throughput, reliability or latency, on the one hand, and
signalling overhead and complexity on the other hand. The
options for inter-frequency multi-connectivity can either be
based on carrier aggregation (CA) specified by 3GPP from
LTE Rel-10 [12] or based on dual connectivity (DC) specified
by 3GPP from LTE Rel-12 [13].
For CA the traffic is split at the MAC layer which requires
tight time synchronization between the carriers. This restricts
the use to either carriers from a single node or to deployments
where the nodes have inter-site connections with very low
latencies (e.g. via fibre or between collocated nodes) and
where the numerologies are aligned (if the nodes belong to
different RATs).

For DC, the traffic is split at or above the Packet Data
Convergence Protocol (PDCP) layer where one of the nodes is
the Master eNB (MeNB) controlling the data split and the
other is the Secondary eNB (SeNB) which relays the traffic.
This allows for a much more relaxed time synchronization,
which simplifies inter-site and inter-RAT DC. It is envisioned
to enhance the DC (i.e. eDC) by allowing traffic to split in
both MeNB and SeNB without relocating MeNB. Various
considered service flows (SFs), i.e. Master Cell Group (MCG)
SF and Secondary Cell Group (SCG) SF as well as SF Splits
at Master 5G-NB (M5G-NB) and Secondary 5G-NB (S5GNB) are shown in Fig. 2. Additionally, it will be possible to
split the traffic between more than two eNBs, simultaneously.
S1*

S1*
X2*
PDCP

PDCP

RLC

RLC

RLC

RLC

PDCP

PDCP

RLC

RLC

MAC

MAC

MeNB

SeNB

MCG SF
SCG SF
M5G-NB split SF
S5G-NB split SF

Fig. 2 Radio protocol architecture for 5G enhanced dual

connectivity
Multi-connectivity could include only the user plane, only
the control plane or both depending on the requirements and
the capacity, reliability, and latency of each link. Furthermore,
it is important to assess which technique is preferable in
different scenarios.
C. Multi-layer and Multi-RAT management
To achieve multi-layer and multi-RAT integration, the
logical functions required for switching between different
RATs can be abstracted at different layers. The proposed
generic model may consider several layers for integration.

also be denoted as “multi-layer abstraction” linked to NGMN
5G concepts.
The abstraction layer-1 performs transmission mode
switching via exploiting MAC mechanisms in existing
protocols. This is achieved by integrating new link adaptation
metrics (using the same communication channel) to forward
the decision [14].
The abstraction layer-2 considers a L2.5 layer managing
several air interfaces when control cannot be shared between
them. This solution is an extension of the I-MAC concept [15]
by integrating multiple criteria in the multi-RAT management.
The abstraction layer-3 exploits IP network protocols to
switch from one interface, slice or network, to another. This
level of abstraction can also be utilized for Control / User
(C/U) plane splitting between different RATs (e.g. WiFi vs.
cellular) in order to perform offloading in small cells.
D. mmWave AP clustering
mmWave APs will likely be deployed very densely in
many scenarios. mmWave links can break easily and may
need to be re-established quickly. Therefore, clustering of
mmWave APs is crucial to deal with this inherent network
dynamics. A cluster is defined as a group of APs in the
vicinity of a UE, capable of serving that UE. The APs
included in the cluster can be configured by the network and
subsequently reconfigured when the UE moves. To coordinate
the mobility within a cluster, one of the APs can be designated
as the cluster head (CH) which is connected to the CN through
S1* interface (as an enhanced version of current S1 interface)
[3]. The CH is also connected to all other APs in the cluster.
Depending on the topology of the network and the capacity
and latency of the backhaul links, the network position and
role of the CH may vary.
The network structure for a cluster with sufficiently welldimensioned backhaul can be made quite similar to that of
CoMP. All the intelligence is located in a central node (the
CH) which is responsible for all control and user plane
protocol handling, including how the mmWave beams are
tracked at different APs. The CH decides which APs serve the
UE or which APs stay in stand-by mode.
For non-ideal backhaul or wireless (self-) backhauling, the
CH location depends on the topology of the cluster. Besides
the coordination on intra-cluster mmWave beam switching,
the CH handles the majority of data sent to and received from
the UE. In order for the CH to coordinate the inter-AP
switching in a fast and efficient manner, it is assumed that
there is only one hop between the CH and the APs in the
cluster.

Fig. 3 Multi-layer multi-RAT management architecture
Fig. 3 illustrates the multi-layer multi-RAT concept where
three layers are envisioned to perform RAT switching in a
unified structure. This multi-layer multi-RAT architecture can

E. Network dimensioning and backhauling
An important facet which can influence the RAN of 5G is
the subject of backhauling. An improved version of wired and
wireless backhauling or a combination of the two can be
deployed in future mobile systems. The specific requirements
from the RAN, together with the planned deployment

scenarios, determine the design requirements for the selected
backhaul type. Early 5G scenario requires means for
incremental deployment, as initially the density of 5G base
stations with dedicated backhauling is limited. A useful
technique which can possibly be beneficial in future systems is
self-backhauling.
Self-backhauling refers to a set of solutions where
coverage/capacity extension is applied to a network/
infrastructure by means of APs utilizing the same radio
resources used by the UEs to access the network, as shown in
Fig. 4. Self-backhauling provides an efficient way to combat
infrastructure constraints especially in dense network
deployment where access to fibre may be limited to only some
APs. However, over time as the fixed infrastructure will
become more available, the self-backhauling will gradually
evolve.
Core
Network
Self-Backhauled Node

Node with
dedicated backhaul

Fig. 4 Concept of self-backhauling

When specifically considering self-backhauling in
mmWave frequencies, they can bring about great benefits for
future radio systems, but in-parallel can encompass a unique
set of challenges. The problem lies in the inherent
directionality property of mmWave bands, which can result in
frequent link blockage and subsequent spotty coverage due to
street furniture and objects present in the surrounding
environment. Focusing on this issue, some ways to tackle can
be:

•

•

•

From a physical layer perspective, developing advanced
channel estimation and beamforming algorithms can
assist in exploiting non-LOS paths that make use of
reflections from the surrounding environment.
When considering the MAC and network layer, tighter
integration and coordination will be necessary between
the adjacent mmWave APs to form dynamic beam
clusters to circumvent obstacles in line-of-sight paths.
Here, it becomes imperative to support efficient
backhauling solutions between the adjacent mmWave
access points and those of other technologies. For this,
wireless mesh backhaul topology can be quite advantages
when compared to initial colossal cost incurred when
deploying wired (e.g. fiber) solutions.
Lastly, the multi-hop backhauling condition can be an
interesting solution for moving hotspots, which can offer
dynamic paths towards the core network via intermediate
mmWave APs in its vicinity.

A key challenge is that each network hop adds to the
latency whilst reducing the overall capacity. Therefore, in
order to design a multi-hop system without compromising the
end-to-end latency requirements, techniques such as fast
scheduling cycles and rapid rerouting are crucial. More details
on self-backhauling functionalities will be covered in the next
section.
IV.

RAN FUNCTIONALITIES

In this section we explore RAN functionalities to enable the
mmWave RAT to operate at frequencies above 6 GHz.
A. Initial access
The initial access to the mmWave RAT is a critical
element and needs to be designed for both standalone and nonstandalone deployments as the coverage of the mmWave RAT
may only be partially overlapping with the coverage of RATs
below 6 GHz, (e.g. with indoor deployments).
The initial access can be separated into three tasks which
need to be possible to perform both in the standalone and nonstandalone scenario:
•

Downlink timing/frequency synchronization,

•

System information acquisition, and

•

Uplink timing synchronization (if required).

The performance of the applied initial access scheme
directly impacts the user experience. One of the performancecritical challenges is to achieve beam alignment within a short
time interval during the initial access phase, for example, by
exploiting available a-priori information on the preferred
transmission direction at both ends of the link. If the UE is
already connected to a low frequency RAT (e.g. LTE-A) the
initial access could be more efficient if some of the
functionalities were performed by the low frequency RAT
compared cases where there is no low-frequency coverage.
To enable coverage detection, the mmWave AP is assumed
to transmit some synchronization signals (SSs) at particular
time-frequency resources with a certain periodicity in order for
the UE to obtain the cell identity (ID). To achieve fast
mmWave small cell detection, the low frequency RAT can
further transmit a signal to the UE, containing information
about the frequency and cell IDs of the mmWave small cells
within its coverage area. With this signaling, the UE does not
need to perform an exhaustive search over the whole small cell
ID space, but it only tries to detect the signaled cell IDs. As a
consequence, the UE power consumption for downlink
synchronization can be significantly reduced.
The coverage of the system information determines the
coverage of the cell. Some of the system information
components are changing fast on the basis of one or several
mmWave RAT frames but other system information parts may
vary relatively slow. For this reason, it can be energy efficient
to convey some of the slowly varying system information by
exploiting an existing low frequency RAT.

Uplink (UL) synchronization needs to be achieved prior to
any UL packet transmission to ensure that all the co-scheduled
UEs’ UL signals arrive at the eNB around the same time
within the cyclic prefix (CP) duration. The radio resources for
the preamble transmission are typically signaled in the system
information and, as mentioned above, such system information
can be signaled by the low frequency RAT if the UE is
anyway monitoring those frequencies.
B. Mobility management
Efficient mobility management in the mmWave RAT is
required for a seamless service experience for users on the
move. As the mmWave RAT supports multi-connectivity
(between different mmWave nodes or inter-RAT between
mmWave RAT and LTE-A), the mobility management should
support the required coordination between the nodes even
when the transport network to which they are connected is
capacity-limited or adds up latency.
As outlined earlier, mmWave AP clustering is instrumental
to support mobility in a mmWave RAT. Intra-AP beam
switching from one beam to another within a cluster can be
supported by UE measurement feedback and direct
communication between UE and AP on the beam switch.
In case of inter-AP beam switching, the report will be
forwarded to the CH from the current serving AP. The CH
will request the target AP for beam switching. If positive
feedback is received from the target AP, the UE will be
eventually informed (via CH and serving AP) to switch its
beam and will be served via target AP after the switch. In case
of inter-RAT handover, the maximum data rate supported by
the technology and expected rate fluctuations (as a result of a
handover) may be shared as cross-layer information with
application level services to avoid frequent rate variations,
impacting the end user QoE.
C. MAC and RRM
Challenging path loss conditions are a key driver for
performing some advanced joint RRM techniques over
multiple cells in mmWave bands. Beamforming can lead to
bursty inter-cell interference in ultra-dense scenarios where
strong multipath components from reflectors can impact users
camping in adjacent cells. Some coordination between cells
can be effective in coping with this strong and unpredictable
interference. RRM coordination can rely on the user device as
an anchor node to avoid costly exchange of inter-cell
information, with the twofold objective of i) detecting any
interfering beams from neighbor cells and ii) reporting this
condition to the serving cell. Beams can be conveniently
labeled upon transmission with a unique identifier containing
e.g. the intended UE to be served. A victim UE can acquire
this information and together with the interfering cell ID, send
an “interference report” to the serving cell to inform of this
condition. Interference reports from multiple UEs can then
serve as a basis for further coordination of resources among
the cells involved, either in the temporal, frequency or spatial
(beam) domain.

Hybrid Automatic Repeat-Request (HARQ) operation at
MAC level can also be challenging in mmWave systems.
Given the large bandwidths foreseen to be available in
mmWave bands, fulfilling the HARQ round trip time (RTT)
may be challenging in centralized deployments, leading to
significant delay constraints in the transport network.
Moreover, increasing the HARQ RTT in the uplink may
impact the device complexity as transmission buffer length
will increase, leading to device issues. One alternative may be
to decouple uplink HARQ from Forward Error Correction
(FEC) decoding, by closing the HARQ loop at the antenna
whilst performing full FEC decoding of the packets in a
central node at a later time. This approach can help to relax the
transport network delay requirements without increasing the
device complexity
D. Self-backhauling aspects
While considering self-backhaul design requirements,
various parameters such as latency, reliability, availability and
average/peak-UL/DL data rates must be taken into account. In
addition, other attributes such as availability of frequency
bands, spectrum regulation and mobility access requirements
will also have to be considered.
The dynamics and self-autonomy of self-backhauling
solutions can gradually evolve into Software Defined
Networking (SDN)-based solutions, where one logical
controller is supposed to monitor topology changes, node-tonode radio channel status and all the traffic needs in a realtime manner.
In this case, in one envisioned scenario backhaul
networking for densely deployed small cells could be
characterized by a ringed-tree topology [16] with multiple
backhaul links per node and different levels of backhaul links
(where vertical links would have higher priorities in route
selections than horizontal ones). An example of a ringed-tree
backhaul networking is illustrated in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5 An example of ringed-tree backhauling
Moreover, dynamic RRM decisions will be made by the
controller in terms of how much radio resources to be
allocated per link at each node. The network can also enable
multi-route connection, allowing coordination and cooperation
among network elements to be performed via management

provided by the controller (in order to achieve network-level
optimization).
In the context of radio resource management, multiplexing
of time and frequency resources between backhaul and access
links attracts the most attention, where the two links are
operating on the same frequency band in a dynamic TDD
system. In this kind of scenario, one relevant issue
is
to
determine efficient resource allocation mechanisms to split
radio resources between backhaul and access links, ensuring
that there are enough backhaul capacities for all traffic from
access links in order to maximize the resource utilization of
the network. Another relevant issue is that when both
backhaul and access links operate in the same spectrum band,
the optimum distribution of non-conflicting resources between
the two links needs to be determined. In addition to the time
resource management between backhaul and access links
under in-band relaying in a dynamic TDD system,
multiplexing of spatial resources that exploits directional
transmission with extensive beamforming has been envisioned
to be a promising candidate to overcome the unfavorable path
loss in high frequency bands.
V.

CONCLUSIONS

The so-called mmWave band (6-100 GHz) is envisioned to
play a key role in enabling highly advanced services and
applications such as eMBB or UHD/3D streaming for future
5G systems. In this paper, we reviewed key requirements and
challenges for mmWave networks followed by a description of
key RAN architectural components and functionalities of the
mmWave-based RAT that will enable tight integration of
mmWave technology into the overall 5G system. On the RAN
architecture side, we covered key aspects of network slicing,
multi-connectivity, multi-layer and multi-RAT management,
access point clustering, and network dimensioning and
backhauling. On the RAN functionality side, we presented
contributions on initial access, mobility management,
MAC/RRM, and self-backhauling aspects. All these
technology components will lay the foundations for future
studies towards a commercially feasible mmWave RAT within
future 5G systems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The research leading to these results received funding from
the European Commission H2020 programme under grant
agreement n°671650 (5G PPP mmMAGIC project).

REFERENCES
1.

Interactive Traffic exploration online tool, Ericsson AB [online],
Available:
http://www.ericsson.com/TET/trafficView/loadBasicEditor.ericsson

2.

NGMN Alliance, NGMN White Paper, Feb. 2015 [online], Available
https://www.ngmn.org/uploads/media/NGMN_5G_White_Paper_V1_0.
pdf

3.

mmMAGIC D3.1. Initial concepts on 5G architecture and integration,
2016

4.

3GPP SID-RP160671. Study on NR New Radio Access Technology.
2016

5.

mmMAGIC project, https://5g-mmmagic.eu

6.

mmMAGIC Project. D1.1: Use case characterization, KPIs and preferred
suitable frequency ranges for future 5G systems between 6 GHz and 100
GHz. Nov. 2015.

7.

mmMAGIC Project. W2.1: 6–100 GHz Channel Modelling for 5G:
Measurement and Modelling Plans in mmMAGIC. Feb. 2016.

8.

S. Jaeckel, L. Raschkowski, K. Börner, and L. Thiele. QuaDRiGa: A 3D multi-cell channel model with time evolution for enabling virtual field
trials. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 62, pp. 3242–3256, 2014 [online],
Available: http://quadriga-channel-model.de

9.

Ericsson. 5G Systems White Paper, January 2015 [online], Available:
http://www.ericsson.com/res/docs/whitepapers/what-is-a-5g-system.pdf

10. Ericsson. The Real-Time Cloud White Paper, February 2014 [Online],
Available: http://www.ericsson.com/res/docs/whitepapers/wp-sdn-andcloud.pdf
11. 3GPP TR 22.891, Study on New Services and Markets Technology
Enablers, V1.0.0, 2015.
12. 3GPP TR 36.808. Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (EUTRA); Carrier Aggregation; Base Station (BS) radio transmission and
reception. V1.0.0. 2010.
13. 3GPP TR 36.842. Small cell enhancements for E-UTRA and EUTRAN—Higher Layer Aspects. V1.0.0. 2013.
14. I. Siaud, A.M. Ulmer-Moll, H. Peng, S. Nanba, K. Moriaki. C/U-plane
splitting architectures and Inter-RAT management for Radio
Reconfigurable Systems. ETSI workshop on Future Radio Technologies
focusing on Air Interfaces, Sophia-Antipolis, Jan. 2016.
15. R. Kraemer, M. Brzozowski, S. Nowak. Reliable Architecture for
Heterogeneous home networks: the OMEGA I-MAC Approach: Elec.
Energ. 25 (1), Apr. 2012.
16. R. Nadiv and T. Naveh. Wireless backhaul topologies: Analyzing
backhaul topology strategies. Ceragon White Paper, 2010.

