1. July 25, 2016
Ms. Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
Re: Written ex parte presentation in GN Docket Nos. 14-177,
13-5
Dear Ms. Dortch:
Congress has asked the Commission to make sure that networks serve the economic and
social goals of the United States. Economically, to paraphrase Michael Porter of the Harvard
Business School, the right economic policy is to act so as to improve the standard of living for all
Americans. Socially, the goal is to permit all Americans the opportunity to express themselves,
to associate with, and to receive information from all other Americans.
The Commission has pursued these goals through Democratic and Republican
Administrations and Congresses with remarkable consistency. It has used a combination of
competition policy, interconnection, and open access rulemaking in order to permit firms to
invent new networks, compete with established networks, optimize existing networks. No other
nation in the world can boast of a regulatory agency that has been so successful, and consistent
in its policy goals.
Now the Commission faces the challenge and opportunity of helping to shape a new
network -- a combination of digitization, phased array antenna breakthroughs, new forms of
managing electromagnetic waves, signal processing on a finger nail sized chip, distributed data
centers housing more information than any book-lined library, sensors and beacons operating
on the bare suspicion of battery power, and many other inventions. This is what we call fifth
generation or 5G.
Typically, the Commission has received from the laboratories of scientists and garages of
entrepreneurs proposals concerning centralized networks. It has entertained visions of
hundreds of satellites managed from a central point, or telephone networks with centralized
signaling systems that direct traffic in optimal paths, or television networks that deliver the
same programming to every household. But internet based networks are distributed. They
operate not by central control but from one end point to another. Now that vision of
decentralized, locally controlled management is about to be realized for wireless as never before.
This is a big change between 4G and 5G.
The purpose of the slides enclosed herewith is to outline the difference between today's
wireless network architecture and the possible architectures of 5G. The central difference is the
change from one to many. Today's wireless architectures are not quite, but close to commodity
services. They are more the same than different in every country, and in the hands of every
competing service provider. The carrier manages them across their geographical regions with
little variation in the service provided anywhere. They are designed primarily for people to
communicate to people. This is shown on the first slide on the left.

2. Ms. Marlene S. Dortch
July 25, 2016
Page 2
That same slide shows on the right hand side four different versions of 5G networks.
These might be owned and operated by the carriers we know today. Indeed these firms may be
the best at deploying 5G networks. But the network architectures of 5G will vary according to the
uses of those networks. They will be versioned to specific ends. They will be nearly bespoke,
suited to the needs of different end users. Like so many markets, the ability to learn about
customers is now an essential feature of retailing, and translating that to network deployment
we can see that homogeneous, one size fits all networks are the past. In the future every end use
will get the network architecture optimally suited for it.
It is possible that a single firm will offer each of the four types of networks show in the
slide. The backup slides to this first slide depict the types of services offered, and single firms
may well be able to offer all of them. The four types might co-exist in the same geographic area.
They could share common elements, such as macrocell base stations, or access to long-haul
fiber. But even if there is one proprietor that firm will be offering at least the four types of
networks show in the slide, if not more. The reason is that consumers will want high speed
Internet access, businesses may privilege security and local control of data, a complex of health
care facilities may attach great importance to sharing data among different treatment locations,
and an airport may need to manage traffic and customers at the exact same time. These four
types of networks need to provide different services. They need different architectures. The
breakthroughs known collectively as 5G permit the individuation, and enable providers to profit
by providing them. What's possible and valuable is what the Commission should enable to be
delivered.
For the Commission the challenge is to determine how to apply a competition policy to
this desirable business and technical future. Should licenses be designed for services? That has
rarely been a good idea and is inconsistent with the spirit of the 1996 Act. Should multiple
licenses be granted for the same geography? That's typical. But should they be as versioned and
individualized as the networks, so that a certain geography might have a license for a wide area
network and several licenses for very localized networks in that geographical space?
The purpose of this letter is not to answer such questions but to provide a schematic of
possible network designs in order to make a contribution, however modest, to the important
debate about the 5G future. This Commission is the thought leader among government agencies
on a global basis in addressing 5G, but other nations are eager to move faster and farther.
There's not a moment to lose in raising and answering the important questions.
Very truly yours,
_/s/Reed Hundt_____
Reed Hundt

3. Networks of the Future
Tomorrow’s Network:
Need to serve diverse verticals :Mission critical IOT, MTC,
Industrial as well as MBB
Specific Network & Applications
Secure & Meeting Needs of Private
Sectors/Verticals
IT Centric + Connectivity Smart City/Communities
Heterogeneous small / macro cells
Indoor and Outdoor Connectivity, presence
Multi-Spectrum: 5G,Wifi, alternative
GE/Honeywell
Network in a Box Managed by the
Enterprise
Indoor/outdoor connectivity
Airlines
Segmented Network
Specific local apps
Licensed, Wifi, Small cell
Health
EPC Subscriber
Mgmt/Charging
DC
• Dedicated, Static HW
• Designed to serve mass
consumers
• Designed mostly for
Mobile broadband
• One network fits all
DC
BBU
REGIONAL
DC
Small Cell + edge computing
RRH
BBU,MEC
EPC, Regional
DC
RRH
Small Cell + edge computing
Network in a Box + Regional DC
Health (Private Network as a Service)
Segmented Network
Specific local apps
Indoor Connectivity, M2M presence
Secure Private
Network in a Box,
Regional DC
RRH
EPC=Evolve Packet Core
Network in a Box (BBU; Edge
Computing, EPC)
RRH = Remote Radio Head
DC=Data Center
BBU=BaseBand Unit +edge computing
Today’s Public Network
Backhaul

4. Back Up

5. Networks of the Future
Today’s Public Network
General Purpose
Specific Network & Applications
Secure & Meeting Needs of Private
Sectors/Verticals
IT Centric + Connectivity
Smart City/Communities
Heterogeneous small / macro cells
Indoor and Outdoor Connectivity, presence
Multi-Spectrum: 5G,Wifi, alternative
GE/Honeywell
Network in a Box Managed by the
Enterprise
Indoor/outdoor connectivity
Airlines
Segmented Network
Specific local apps
Licensed, Wifi, Small cell
Health
EPC Subscriber
Mgmt/Charging
DC
• Dedicated, Static HW
• Designed to serve mass
consumers
• One network fits all
DCEPC Subscriber
Mgmt/Charging
DC
BBU
REGIONAL
DC
Small Cell + edge computing
RRH
BBU,MEC
EPC, Regional
DC
RRH
Small Cell + edge computing
Network in a Box + Regional DC
Health (Private Network as a Service)
Segmented Network
Specific local apps
Indoor Connectivity, M2M presence
Secure Private
Network in a Box,
Regional DC
RRH
EPC=Evolve Packet Core
Network in a Box (BBU; Edge
Computing, EPC)
RRH = Remote Radio Head
Backhaul
Small Cell + edge computing
DC=Data Center
Small
Cell
BBU=BaseBand Unit +edge computing

6. Invigorate Innovation & Standard of Living
Service Provider (Network Operator)
Chooses Equipment Manufacturer (1 Or 2)
Machine to Machine Enterprise Driven
Enterprises builds specific networks
Solves Enterprise needs
N1 N2 N3 N4
S1 S2 S3 S4
S1 S2 S3 S4
S1 S2 S3 S4
S1 S2 S3 S4
…
…
… Machine to X :
Machine to Machine
Machine to Person
Machine to Enterprise
Massively Connected
Mobile Broadband
Mission Critical IOT
Today: Homogeneous Network
2024: Heterogeneous Purpose Driven Network
Ex: Enterprises:
GE, Auto Manufacturers,
Airlines, Honeywell,
Connected Healthcare,
Real Time Gaming, Smart
City
General Purpose Network
…
…
…
Rigid
ATT
N (Network)
E/// Nokia
Vz S/TMO
Invigorate Innovation, Raise Employment, Improve Quality of Life
Multiple Silicon choices
N# Network
S# Service/Slice

7. Network Slices
Transformation to
Dynamic Network
L1
L1
L1 RAN RNL
Mobility/
Bearer
RAN TNL MME HSS/PC RF
RAN RNL RAN TNL S-GW TNL P-GW App
NF Slice #1 (Wireless BB)
NF Slice #2 (Real time use cases e.g. Industrial Control)
RAN RNL
Mobility/
Bearer
HSS/PC RFL1
L1 AppRAN RNL
RAN RNL GWL1 App
NF Slice #3 (IoT Sensor – Massive MTC)
RAN RNLL1 App
NF Slice #4 (Mobile Edge Cloud e.g. caching)
Dynamic
Network
Element
Mapping
Mobile
Edge
Cloud
Flexible Definition
Diverse and Variable
Processing
Requirements
Dynamic Execution
Node
Network Slice
5
4G Architecture
• Dedicated, Static HW
• Simple Policy/Profile
• Vertical Silos
Many Industry; Diverse Use cases; Diverse network characteristics