What is Open RAN?

Open RAN is the approach of disaggregating the radio access network (i.e. the linkage connecting wireless cellular devices to the core network) (the RAN) to allow different elements of the RAN to be provided by different suppliers across the telecoms industry. In theory, there are a number of benefits for a network operator (or MNO) when adopting Open RAN principles.

These benefits include:

• Allowing the operator to pick and choose the best suppliers for different components of the RAN, therefore benefitting from higher quality equipment and, consequently, increased operating efficiency, speed, and ultimate customer experience.
• Increased competition in the market and avoiding supplier lock-in. Diversifying the supplier marketplace, in theory, encourages suppliers to maintain their competitive edge, drives innovation, and ultimately leads to better end solutions. Naturally, increased competition in the market also opens the door for MNO cost savings through competitive pricing.

Barriers to Open RAN

Despite these potential benefits, there remain a number of barriers to widespread adoption of Open RAN. These barriers have understandably caused difficulty and a reluctance on the part of the MNOs to meaningfully invest in, and contract for, Open RAN sites.

These barriers and potential solutions include:

Standardisation

Historically, the RAN relied on a single supplier for most equipment. Moving to a multi-supplier Open RAN model introduces complexity, as components must interoperate seamlessly. Without a standardised blueprint, suppliers lack clarity on each other’s technical requirements, creating uncertainty about interoperability and undermining the benefits of Open RAN.

One potential solution is for MNOs to develop detailed specifications for every RAN component and an overarching site specification, requiring suppliers to comply. However, this shifts significant cost and risk to the MNO as any risk of this specification failing in practice would, without contractual agreement to the contrary (which would be difficult to secure in practice), fall on the MNO without any meaningful recourse.

This highlights a bigger issue: the lack of mandatory technical standards. Without them, MNOs have no certainty about component quality, interoperability or compliance. If the industry had standardised, tested and publicly validated requirements, and suppliers had to prove compliance before winning projects, MNOs would have more confidence when considering investment in Open RAN.

There are some initiatives, like the O-RAN Alliance specifications, 3GPP standards, and SONIC Labs testing, that aim to improve standardisation and interoperability, and allow suppliers to test equipment in neutral labs to ensure interoperability and compliance with requirements. These are steps forward, but it’s still unclear whether they’ll accelerate Open RAN adoption or deliver the intended results.

Interoperability

Open RAN represents a major shift from traditional RAN principles, and without industry-wide standardisation, one of the biggest challenges the industry faces is uncertainty around operational interoperability.

An MNO has no guarantee that equipment and software from different suppliers will work together. This raises a critical question: who is responsible when interoperability fails? In a model where multiple suppliers’ components must integrate seamlessly, disputes over dependencies and liability are inevitable.

It is easy to imagine the chain of arguments brought by various parties and the claims that they have been unable to meet certain requirements due to another supplier’s failure to meet dependencies. This is a difficult issue to grapple. It is likely that suppliers will look to resist liability for a failure of its equipment where the equipment is used with the equipment of another supplier (something inherent in the concept of Open RAN).

Further, integrators involved in the development of the Open RAN site will be performing technical and complex services and again would want to limit any sort of liability where the equipment of different parties do not work together. It is easy to see the contractual complexity and the potential risk for an MNO is respect of contractual recourse.

There is no simple solution. One option is to invest heavily in robust acceptance testing, far beyond traditional levels, though this requires significant resources and offers no certainty. Alternatively, MNOs could contract all suppliers under a single agreement, but this is rarely practical given the complexity and need for unified cooperation.

Ultimately, the lack of clear contracting solutions underscores the importance of industry standardisation and independent testing. If recognised standards existed and compliance guaranteed performance, contractual liability allocation would be far simpler. This also opens the door for standardised Open RAN contract frameworks, similar to JCT or NEC suites in the construction industry.

Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity remains a key barrier to Open RAN adoption, especially given the rising number of cyber attacks across the UK.

Because Open RAN relies on components from multiple suppliers, an MNO’s network faces increased risk from multiple entry points. For example, if the RAN Intelligent Controller (RIC) hosts several software applications, a vulnerability in any one of them could compromise the entire network.

To mitigate this, an MNO could impose clear cybersecurity obligations on each supplier, including requirements to collaborate during breaches and implement continuity plans. Whilst an MNO may engage an MSP for ongoing monitoring, true assurance comes from rigorous initial and ongoing testing, such as penetration tests across all suppliers. Standardisation and collaborative testing initiatives can further strengthen security and give confidence that all components work securely together.

Conclusion

While other challenges exist, such as some suppliers’ reluctance to fully support Open RAN due to strong market positions, the issues above point to one conclusion: to drive wider adoption of Open RAN sites, the telecoms industry needs mandatory standardisation and greater use of neutral testing facilities.

Progress has been made in the standardisation of Open RAN requirements, but it comes from multiple industry bodies. If suppliers work to different standards, Open RAN sites could still lack consistency and interoperability across the network.

The UK government has stated it is not well positioned to create a standardisation framework, leaving this to the industry. While that may be operationally true, government involvement is still critical. It should engage with industry bodies to accelerate progress.

A single mandatory standardisation framework, one that works when followed is, in our view, the most important step in achieving widespread adoption. Creating this framework requires significant investment, collaboration, and testing, which is hard to achieve without strong UK government support.

If you have any questions on this article or need support in navigating any telecoms contracts, contact Ryan Doodson or Fraser Halle-Smith.