Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 67 posts

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#41

Post by kurokawad »

femto wrote: post #24
kurokawad wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cellular comms. are all complex, proprietary, closed standards by big telecoms companies. There are some projects trying to solve this: OpenRAN, OpenAirInterface, O-RAN Alliance. This project tries to build an open solution following O-RAN standards for RAN software. It is targeting telecom. companies for their Radio Access Network (RAN). Their infrastructure is divided into the Core Network (like a simple internet n…

Complex: yes Proprietary, Closed Standards: no Here are all the 3GPP 4G/5G standards that govern cellular phone networks: https://www.3gpp.org/specifications-technologies Also look under the "Specifications" drop down menu at the top of the page. Every release is listed. These standards being freely available is why SRS were able to write srsRAN. There is nothing stopping others from doing so either, apart from the a…

The 3GPP spec is “available”, but the implementation in practice is closed. Stuff like the scheduler is what actually brings value to the company delivering a good service. Being closed, the interoperability of network components from different vendors is just impossible. That’s the point of O-RAN Alliance.

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#42

Post by kurokawad »

leidenfrost wrote: post #22
kurokawad wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cellular comms. are all complex, proprietary, closed standards by big telecoms companies. There are some projects trying to solve this: OpenRAN, OpenAirInterface, O-RAN Alliance. This project tries to build an open solution following O-RAN standards for RAN software. It is targeting telecom. companies for their Radio Access Network (RAN). Their infrastructure is divided into the Core Network (like a simple internet n…

Why can't I create an ad hoc 4/5g network between phones? Genuine question. It looks so closed and complex compared to more traditional comms like wifi or even ethernet.

AFAIK cellular comms aren’t designed to be ad hoc. They require base stations (whose placement is very studied) to build coverage “cells” (cellular). The network is responsible of delivering a QoS, it’s not a best-effort like WiFi.

However, if I’m not mistaken 5G has V2V comms (Vehicle to Vehicle) specifically designed for self-driving cars, drones and IoT and that is the most “ad hoc” it can get

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#43

Post by fulafel »

markus-k wrote: post #37
mateuszbuda wrote: post #36

Can I use this to run my own mobile network? Is there something like a blank SIM card which I could use for it? I don't need global coverage but is it possible to create my own BTS on a PC (with some antenna connected to it) and then have my own SIM card which I can insert into regular phone/device and have it connected to my BTS and connect to the Internet?

Yes and yes, although in most parts of the world it won't be legal when done via antennas. You can buy blank SIM cards from vendors like Sysmocom, which are preprogrammed but "writable" SIM cards. The important part is knowing the private key that is used to authenticate end user devices. Then you'll just need a decent SDR and it actually works fairly well for small test setups.

Nitpick: in most places you need a license to do this with antennas (in some places temporary licenses aren't that hard to get for temporary/noncommercial use)

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#44

Post by rusk »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #38
bsder wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why can't I create an ad hoc 4/5g network between phones? Because billing. All the complexity in cellular can be traced back to making the system secure the whole way back to SIM cards because there is actual money at stake if the system gets cracked.

The complexity is actually down to mobility. You can turn your phone on anywhere and it'll work. You can have a call/data session while travelling hundreds of miles and it'll work (usually).

What you suggest could be accomplished with mesh networking. GP is correct in saying the reasons are orthogonal to functional reasons. Phone systems have always been centralised like this. Billing is one aspect, but lawful surveillance is another.

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#45

Post by mschuster91 »

miav wrote: post #2

Could anyone more knowledgeable on the topic explain to what extent common wireless connectivity standards are open and feasible to implement for, say, a medium sized company? Apple has been working on a 5G modem for what feels like a billion years, but other standards seem to be more democratized.

> Apple has been working on a 5G modem for what feels like a billion years, but other standards seem to be more democratized.

The main problem is the sheer age of mobile phone networks. A phone has to support everything from top-modern 5G down to 2G to be usable across the world, that's almost as much garbage that a baseband/modem FW/HW has to drag along as Intel has to with the x86 architecture.

And if that isn't complex enough, phones have to be able to deal with quirks of all kinds of misbehaving devices - RF is shared media after all, and there's devices not complying with the standard, the standards containing ambiguous or undefined behavior specs, completely third-party services blasting wholly incompatible signals around (e.g. DVB-T operates on frequencies in some countries that are used for phone service in other countries, and often on much much higher TX power than phone tower sites). If it can't handle that or, worse, disrupts other legitimate RF users, certification won't be possible.

But that experience in dealing with about 35 years worth of history is just one part of the secret sauce - that just makes the costs of entry for FOSS projects really huge (which is why all of these projects I'm aware of support only 4G and afterwards since that generation is the first one to throw away all the legacy garbage).

The other part of why there are so few vendors is patents, and there is a toooooon of patent holders for 5G [1], with the top holders being either Chinese or known for being excessively litigious (Qualcomm). And even assuming you manage to work out deals with all of the patent holders (because of course there is, to my knowledge at least, no "one stop shop" compared to say MPEG), you still have to get a design that fulfills your requirements for raw performance, can coexist peacefully with almost all other users of the RF spectrum to be power efficient at the same time. That is the main challenge for Apple IMHO - they have a lot of experience doing that with "classic" SoCs, but almost none for RF hardware, virtually all of that comes from external vendors.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1276457/leading-owners-o...

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#46

Post by mytailorisrich »

rusk wrote: post #44
mytailorisrich wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The complexity is actually down to mobility. You can turn your phone on anywhere and it'll work. You can have a call/data session while travelling hundreds of miles and it'll work (usually).

What you suggest could be accomplished with mesh networking. GP is correct in saying the reasons are orthogonal to functional reasons. Phone systems have always been centralised like this. Billing is one aspect, but lawful surveillance is another.

With respect, if you think that mesh networking would have worked considering the scale and capacity needed, and relevant type of devices then I am afraid this is a case of not knowing what you don't know...

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#47

Post by pgorczak »

rusk wrote: post #44
mytailorisrich wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The complexity is actually down to mobility. You can turn your phone on anywhere and it'll work. You can have a call/data session while travelling hundreds of miles and it'll work (usually).

What you suggest could be accomplished with mesh networking. GP is correct in saying the reasons are orthogonal to functional reasons. Phone systems have always been centralised like this. Billing is one aspect, but lawful surveillance is another.

They are not entirely orthogonal. You need a central base station with scheduling, high dynamic range and power control to maximize performance in an OFDM system. In addition, most cells used to use frequency division multiplexing meaning that the base station and phones send and receive on different frequencies. So lack of point to point capabilities can at least in part be explained by the design goal of optimizing for throughput and user density.

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#48

Post by solarboii »

mateuszbuda wrote: post #36

Can I use this to run my own mobile network? Is there something like a blank SIM card which I could use for it? I don't need global coverage but is it possible to create my own BTS on a PC (with some antenna connected to it) and then have my own SIM card which I can insert into regular phone/device and have it connected to my BTS and connect to the Internet?

Yes, is simple enough to get started if you have access to the required hardware. You might able to operate in the n41 band (2.4GHz, like wifi) even without a license.

Phones are nitpicky about network configuration (chippers, emergency calling and so on). I would recommend starting with a USB modem. Also setting your network PLMN to the 00101 (the testing one), as it usually gets preferencial treatment in UEs.

Re: SrsRAN: Open-Source 4G/5G

#50

Post by blacklion »

femto wrote: post #24
kurokawad wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cellular comms. are all complex, proprietary, closed standards by big telecoms companies. There are some projects trying to solve this: OpenRAN, OpenAirInterface, O-RAN Alliance. This project tries to build an open solution following O-RAN standards for RAN software. It is targeting telecom. companies for their Radio Access Network (RAN). Their infrastructure is divided into the Core Network (like a simple internet n…

Complex: yes Proprietary, Closed Standards: no Here are all the 3GPP 4G/5G standards that govern cellular phone networks: https://www.3gpp.org/specifications-technologies Also look under the "Specifications" drop down menu at the top of the page. Every release is listed. These standards being freely available is why SRS were able to write srsRAN. There is nothing stopping others from doing so either, apart from the a…

Patents equal proprietary.
Post reply on HN