©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Open RAN Functional Splits, Explained .................................. 3

RAN Functional Splits ............................................................... 4
Which Split? ............................................................................... 7
RAN Functional Split 6: Small Cell Split .................................. 8
RAN Functional Split 7: Dense and Urban Areas .................... 9
RAN Functional Split 8: For 2G and 3G.................................... 9
Implementations ...................................................................... 10

©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA
OPEN RAN FUNCTIONAL SPLITS, EXPLAINED

Open Radio access networks offer the option

of placing network functions in different
places along the signal path. That option,
called a functional split, let's network
engineers optimize performance and make
tradeoffs.
Starting with 2G wireless networks, the radio
access network (RAN) architectures were
based on monolithic building blocks. In those
networks -- and many 5G networks as well –
- have contained functions in proprietary
boxes called baseband units (BBUs) at the
base of radio towers. These functions
Figure 1. The Open RAN concept separates the
demodulated the RF signal, converting the Distributed Units and Centralized Unit from a
output into digital data streams for transport proprietary Baseband Unit, connecting them with
on the backhaul to the core network. That open interfaces.
situation is changing and becoming more
open. Open RAN is about horizontal openness –
with open interfaces enabling functions of the
Since the earliest phases of 5G New Radio
RAN to connect with other functions, from a
(NR), there's been a push to disaggregate
radio unit (RU) to a baseband (DU-CU), to
the BBU (Figure 1), breaking off functions
the controller to the NMS/orchestrator. With
beyond the Radio Unit (RU) into Distributed
flexibility comes tradeoffs. Where should
Units (DUs) and Centralized Units (CUs).
network functions reside. While it's clear that
The argument for disaggregation was
RF functions need to be in the RU, the rest is
flexibility, letting network operators decide
a decision.
how to locate these functions and maximize
performance. Flexible hardware and A split architecture (between central and
software implementations allow scalable, distributed units) allows for coordination of
cost-effective network deployments. For performance features such as latency and
disaggregation to happen, hardware and cost. Network engineers must decide among
software components must be interoperable, load management, real-time performance
letting network engineers mix and match optimization, and adaptation to various use
these units from different vendors. cases to maintain quality of service (QoS).
Disaggregation also brings tradeoffs in Gaming, voice, video, have different latency
deciding which unit should control certain tolerances. These services depend on
operations – the functional split. different transport and deployment
scenarios, like rural versus urban, that have
different access to the fiber that transports
data.

©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA
The functional split concept was introduced • DU: The distributed unit software that is
for 5G, though it can be applied to 2G, 3G 4G deployed on site on a COTS server. DU
as well. These previous generations, with software is normally deployed close to the
their lower data rates than 5G, can still RU on site and it runs the RLC, MAC, and
benefit from Open RAN, though not to the parts of the PHY layer. This logical node
extent of 5G. includes a subset of the eNodeB
(eNB)/gNodeB (gNB) functions, depending
When the RAN is opened up horizontally, it on the functional split option, and its
could bring in a new range of low-cost radio operation is controlled by the CU.
players, and it gives mobile operators a • CU: The centralized unit software that runs
choice to optimize deployment options for the Radio Resource Control (RRC) and
specific performance requirements at much Packet Data Convergence Protocol
better cost. (PDCP) layers. The gNB consists of a CU
RAN FUNCTIONAL SPLITS and one DU connected to the CU via Fs-C
and Fs-U interfaces for CP and UP
3GPP considered the split concept (DU and respectively. A CU with multiple DUs will
CU) for 5G from the beginning of writing its support multiple gNBs. The split
specifications. The DU is responsible for real architecture lets a 5G network utilize
time layer 1 (L1, physical layer) and lower different distributions of protocol stacks
layer 2 (L2) which contains the data link layer between CU and DUs depending on
and scheduling functions. The CU is midhaul availability and network design. It
responsible for non-real time, higher L2 and is a logical node that includes the gNB
L3 (network layer) functions. functions like transfer of user data, mobility
control, RAN sharing (MORAN),
While CUs will maintain BBU-like positioning, session management etc.,
functionalities such as digital processing, except for functions that are allocated
DUs are software based and could contain exclusively to the DU. The CU controls the
some functions related to the Remote Radio operation of several DUs over the midhaul
Head (RRH) contained in the RU. This is interface. CU software can be co-located
where the Open RAN concept comes in: from with DU software on the same server on
COTS-based servers for DU and CU site.
software to RU from any vendor. Because the RAN functional split
• RU: This is the radio hardware unit that architecture (Figure 2) is fully virtualized, CU
coverts radio signals sent to and from the and DU functions runs as virtual software
antenna into a digital signal for functions on standard commercial off-the-
transmission over packet networks. It shelf (COTS) hardware and be deployed in
handles the digital front end (DFE) and the any RAN tiered datacenter.
lower PHY layer, as well as the digital
As the functions are virtual, several
beamforming functionality. 5G RU designs
are supposed to be “inherently” intelligent, independent instances of DU and CU can
but the key considerations of RU design share the same physical (server) resources.
are size, weight, and power consumption. This allows several RAN services to run on
Deployed on site. the same hardware, each with their own
requirements and resource needs fulfilled.

©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA
Figure 2: Open RAN disaggregation with RU, DU, CU offers several options for locating RAN functions.

There are three purposes of separating DU That's in opposition to the traditional OSI
functionality from RU: model where layer 1 is the physical layer.
• To reduce cost. Less intelligent RUs cost While the CU/DU split adds flexibility in how
less. RAN services are deployed, RU cost still
• Ability to look at a sector of RUs at once needs addressing. Today, the interface
and not just an individual RU. This will help between the BBU and RU in 4G LTE is
to enable features like CoMP. proprietary to mobile equipment vendors and
• As processing is done in the DU, resources is based on the Common Public Radio
can be pooled resulting in pooling gains. Interface (CPRI) interface. CPRI is not an
open interface. It has dependencies in the
The centralized baseband deployment implementation of BBUs and RRHs that
enables load-balancing among different require both to come from the same vendor.
RUs. In most cases, the DU will be co- Furthermore, it creates a bottelneck; it's
located near one or several RUs and conduct based on transport of digital radio signals
intense processing tasks such as Fast directly over a point-to-point optical fiber.
Fourier Transform/inverse Fast Fourier That creates a cost issue when a point-to-
Transform (FFT/IFFT) used in OFDMA point fiber connection needs to be made
modulation. Edge-centric baseband between multiple microcell RUs to BBUs
processing delivers low latency, local installed 20 km away. The CPRI interface
breakout, seamless mobility with real-time requires a constant bit rate no matter the load
interference management, and optimal and there is no possibility for statistical
resource optimization. multiplexing.
The CU’s server and relevant software can In 2017, Ericsson, Huawei, NEC, and Nokia
be co-located with the DU or hosted in a introduced an update to this interface called
regional cloud data center. The actual split enhanced CPRI (eCPRI). The eCPRI
between DU and RU (Fig. 2) may be different interface uses Ethernet as the L2 interface,
depending on the specific use-case and which lets existing solutions for control,
implementation (the O-RAN Alliance management and synchronization to be
definition is Option-7.2 and Small Cell Forum used. Ethernet allows packet-based
is Option-6). The option number increase as switching and statistical multiplexing of
you approach the RU and the physical layer. several RU connections onto a single

©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA
backhaul fiber, reducing the cost of eCPRI specifies a number of split options in
deploying micro-cells. the protocol stack and, as Figure 3 shows,
these options align with 3GPP RAN
The industry is coming to a consensus that
the lower level interface that connects RU functional and those from the O-RAN
and DU (fronthaul) should be eCPRI, which Alliance.
delivers the lowest latency at a lower cost.

Figure 3: Propietary CPRI interface (left) versus open eCPRI interface being able to support low latency at
much lower cost.

As fronthaul latency is constrained to 100 considered de-facto between DU and CU is

microsec, using eCPRI interface helps with Option-2. There’s also very little difference
it. As Figure 2 shows, a single DU may serve on the midhaul interface between the
RUs up to many kilometers away. Using different splits (1-5). The latency on the link
eCPRI becomes cost-effective. should be around 1 msec. A centralized CU
can control DUs in an 80 km radius.
The DU/CU split is hardly impacted by the
type of physical infrastructure. The primary Backhaul connects the 4G/5G core to the
new interface is the F1 interface in Figure 4 CU. The 5G core may be up to 200 km away
between the DU and CU. Midhaul connects from the CU.
the CU with the DU. While there can be
different splits, the only one being

Figure 4. Source: Altran (Aricent)

©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA
To summarize, with the increase in Mobile operators need the flexibility to pick
deployment footprint, fiber and availability of and choose different splits based on the
required front hauls can be challenging. By same COTS-based hardware and network
distributing protocol stacks between different components. The flexibility comes from using
components (different splits), network different software implementations. Protocol
engineers and providers can focus on layers can reside in different components
addressing the tight requirements for a near- based on fronthaul availability and
perfect FH between RU, DU and CU. deployment scenarios. This approach will
reduce the cost of operations and total cost
WHICH SPLIT? for mobile operators.
The choice of how to split NR functions in the Higher functional splits are more desirable
architecture depends on some factors for capacity use cases in dense urban areas
related to radio network deployment while lower functional splits will be the
scenarios, constraints and intended optimum solutions for coverage use cases.
supported use cases. Three key ones are: So, while lower functional splits utilize less
• A need to support specific QoS per offered than perfect fronthauls, there is a greater
services (e.g. low latency, high throughput dependence on fronthaul performance for
for urban areas) and real/non-real time higher functional splits (Figure 5).
applications.
• Support of specific user density and load
demand per given geographical area.
• Available transport networks with different
performance levels, from ideal to non-ideal.

Figure 5. Functional splits divide network functions such that the remote radio unit may contain RF
only or more functions such as the PHY layer, MAC layer or RLC layer depending on network
requirements. Source: Parallel Wireless

The mapping of functions to devices results between DU and RU is now formally defined
in different functional RAN split options. That by 3GPP.
is, to which layers of the protocol stack are
This new split-RAN architecture makes it
mapped to an RU, DU or CU. The split
possible to deploy the DU and CU functions

©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA
either centrally or at the edge close to the RU 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G baseband functions
depending on latency and backhaul (Figure 6). For the best latency support
bandwidth requirements. Thus, it provides requirement, baseband functions DU and CU
greater flexibility in meeting different software are decoupled from hardware and
deployment scenarios. are deployed on NFVI or as containers. An
MNO can use any VM requirements and/or
To take full advantage of split architecture
that can deliver interoperability, ability to any hypervisor or orchestration provider to
select best-of-breed components, and enable these functional splits.
scalability, any network needs support for

Figure 5. Showing bare metal and containerized deployment of DU and CU software dependent on the requirements

Different RAN functional splits work for competition and innovation among suppliers
different use cases. of small cell platform hardware, platform
software, and application software by
One split might not fit all. A solution that can
providing a common API. These interfaces
support many technologies including not just
will help network architects by letting them
4G and 5G, but 2G and 3G, is the most
mix distributed and central units from
attractive to mobile network operators
different vendors.
(MNOs) as it will simplify network
management and reduce cost. Split 7.2 is the
best for 4G and 5G; split 8 will be the best
option for 2G and 3G. Both options can run
over 7.2 Open RAN radios.
RAN FUNCTIONAL SPLIT 6: SMALL
CELL SPLIT
The small cell nFAPI (network FAPI)
interface in ran functional split 6 of figure 6 is
enabling the open ran ecosystem by allowing Figure 6. In Split 6, the RF, upper PHY, and
lower PHY layers reside in the radio unit.
any small cell cu/du to connect to any small Source: Small Cell Forum
cell radio unit (s-RU). 5G FAPI encourages
©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.
WP-001-03-21-RevA
RAN FUNCTIONAL SPLIT 7: DENSE be embedded with the DU on the same
AND URBAN AREAS server, or it can be pushed up the network as
a virtualized aggregation entity, along with an
In case of requirements for more delay- OpenRAN Controller or aggregator. Option 7
sensitive service, based on appropriate (Figure 7) lets operators share or pool gains
fronthaul availability, the MAC-PHY split will while maintaining the lowest processing
be the preferred solution. Option 7 Split utilizations on both the DU and RU – leading
architecture is where the DU handles the to a very cost-effective option with a low cost
RRC/PDCP/RLC/MAC and higher PHY and an ideal option for a distributed RAN
functions, whereas the RU handles the lower deployment, including Massive MIMO
PHY and RF functions. CU functionality may

Figure 7. Split 7 moves the upper PHY layer to the DU. Source: Parallel Wireless

Higher splits, as in 7.x are ideal for 4G and The O-RAN Alliance has defined a multi-
5G and can support traffic in dense urban vendor fronthaul interface between DU and
areas. RU based on Split 7-2x. In O-RAN
terminology, RU is denoted as O-RU and DU
is denoted as O-DU.
The fronthaul specifications include Control,
User and Synchronization (CUS) &
Management (M) plane protocols, as
indicated in Figure 8.
RAN FUNCTIONAL SPLIT 8: FOR 2G
AND 3G
Additionally, O-RAN Alliance facilitates multi-
vendor integration by defining suitable
interoperability (IOT) profiles, test
configurations and test cases, so that the
Figure 8: O-RAN Architecture, 3GPP-related radio conformance testing
source: O-RAN Alliance remains independent from the O-RAN
fronthaul testing.
©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.
WP-001-03-21-RevA
Split 8 is based on the industry standard handled by the DU, while the RF layer reside
CPRI interface and has been around for a in the radio (Figure 9).
while. With traffic split 8, all functions (from
PHY to RRC layers) except for RF are

Figure 9. At Split 8, only the RF hardware resides in the radio unit. Source: Parallel Wireless

Split 8 is highly effective in 2G and 3G, where traffic rates are much lower (and therefore
processing itself is lower, to a certain extent) and can be easily done on an x86 server, while
allowing operators to use cost-optimized RUs with minimal logic and processing. The DU and RU
should be interoperable with other third party DUs and RUs. The enhancement over the legacy
Split-8, is that for RUs to run multiple technologies over the same fronthaul interface, they now
need to utilize eCPRI instead of the legacy CPRI interface between the RU and DU. This approach
allows for centralized traffic aggregation from the RUs, which in turn enables a seamless migration
path from the traditional LTE ecosystem to the NR ecosystem.
The RAN DU real-time L2 functions and baseband processing. In the O-RAN Alliance working
group, the DU is proposed to support multiple RUs. To properly handle the digital signal
processing and accelerate network traffic, an FPGA can be used. Hardware acceleration is
considered a requirement for 5G but less so for 2G, 3G, and even 4G.
There has also been a focus around hardware accelerators –- FPGA and GPU –- to accelerate
real-time sensitive processing for the lowest layers of the 5G radio baseband. FPGAs in the RU
not only perform digital processing tasks but can also integrate some of the analog subsystems.
Xilinx, for example, has integrated mixed analog digital subsystems (including DACs and ADCs)
into its RFSoC device family.
Ericsson and Nokia are looking at GPU-based acceleration for some virtual RAN (vRAN)
workloads, especially for 5G M-MIMO and for AI. Reducing overall cost will be a priority, and a
solution around GP processor architectures to deliver the most efficient and cost-effective
compute, storage and network elements will drive the innovation.
IMPLEMENTATIONS
O-RAN alliance has already specified O-Cloud (O-RAN Cloud) as O-RAN includes the
cloudification of RAN for single or multi tenants and automation of RAN end-to-end. O-Cloud
includes both edge cloud (vCU) and far edge cloud (vDU/vRU).
©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.
WP-001-03-21-RevA
Figure 10. O-Cloud brings some O-RAN functions to the cloud. Source: O-RAN Alliance

As the edge equipment is required to be compact, energy efficient and ruggedized, many operators and
vendors are leaning towards deploying DU and CU on site (far edge cloud) on one server to reduce
deployment cost and complexity. Based on their experience, Nokia (Figure 11) believes that the only valid
split is between RU and DU. Time will tell if integration of one vendor’s DU with another vendor’s CU will
deliver flexibility and savings.

Figure 11. Nokia's view of Open RAN is to have a functional split between the Ru and DU but keep DU and CU
functions centralized. Source: Nokia

Overall, you can expect RAN Functional splits to lower network costs if interfaces between
hardware and software components are open.

©2021 Parallel Wireless. All rights reserved.

WP-001-03-21-RevA