ator network. As an example, a typical network provider guarantees 3 in the order of 20-50 milliseconds one-way latency, depending on the physical location of source and destination. Note, as a comparison for wireline UP IF UP IF IP Data UP IF Network Server CU/DU Server RAN Latency CSP/Operator Latency Latency FIGURE 3-6 Network component latencies. Chapter 3 Hardware system dimensioning networks, typical digital subscriber line latency is also reported as 20-50 milliseconds. These latencies constitute the bulk of the overall UE to Server latency and have been subject of recent operator focus-and driving data center localization. We expect these numbers to be aggressively reduced in the next years. CU latency. The performance of the CU UP depends much on the choice of implementation, which can be Network Processor, Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) or software centric on multicore central processing units (CPUs). Additional latencies can be added by switches or routers that are placed in between the CU UP function and the connectivity to/from the DU and the User Plane Function (UPF or core network). As a rule of thumb and omitting queueing delays caused by congestion, consider the following latencies: <1 microseconds latency for a latency-optimized (cut-through) Ethernet switch 10 microseconds latency for a store-and-forward Ethernet switch 10-100 microseconds latency for a software implemented switch or router function running on high-performance CPU core (example: Data Plane Development Kit (DPDK) software-based implementations). This latency includes IPSec or other tunneling cost. RAN latency. This latency consists of 3 main components that can be analyzed in more depth independently. Protocol processing latency associated with L2 protocol stack handling that is outside of the slot-based 3rd generation partnership project (3GPP) timing domain. We assume this component (as per software implementation for switch/router functions in the CU) to be relatively smal