|
TDoc Tracking - Air Interface
The 6G air interface (6GR) study consolidates contributions from a wide range of companies to define the high-level design principles, targets, and overall architecture for 6G. The work emphasizes creating a single RAT capable of supporting diverse device types, service categories, and spectrum environments. Key design aspects include scalable channel bandwidth definitions (minimum and maximum), flexible coverage strategies, robust initial access and common channel design, and mechanisms for
multiplexing and collision management such as MRSS (Multi-RAT Spectrum Sharing). Proposals also highlight service and spectrum efficiency, support for both existing and emerging services, and harmonized operation across all duplex types. A central goal is to ensure seamless integration of terrestrial networks (TN) and non-terrestrial networks (NTN), while exploring compatibility with 5G NR to enable efficient 5G6G coexistence.
Some of important highlights on this topics includes
NOTE : None of these are finalized into the 6G standard yet, but it will help you with drawing a big picture of what to consider in terms of specifying 6G air interface. For further details, track down corresponding TDocs listed under Reference section.
The foundation of 6G is not just about new technologies. It is about building a radio interface that lasts, scales, and adapts to future needs. Earlier generations often traded performance for more complexity. 6G focuses on universality, sustainability, and practicality.
The air interface must be open, secure, energy-efficient, and forward-compatible. It should grow through clear milestones, not fragmented releases. A key idea is keepchangeadd. Keep what works in NR. Change only the parts that block progress. Add carefully chosen new features like ISAC, AI-native functions, NTN, and advanced IoT.
The design stays grounded in real deployment needs. 6G targets early-stage problems like coverage, efficiency, and complexity. It also avoids over-engineering for rare use cases.

A key change is to make efficiency and coverage improvements mandatory from the first release. This avoids the slow adoption seen with late 5G features. The focus is on real deployment from the start.
This also applies to traffic behavior. 6G must handle both short IoT bursts and long high-throughput flows. The scheduler must adapt dynamically to mixed traffic.
To reduce fragmentation, 6G aims for a unified RAT. One scalable baseline should support everything from cheap sensors to high-end immersive devices. This avoids siloed profiles that make networks complicated.
Simplification is a core goal. A clean perch/anchor/data structure reduces energy waste from always-on signals. Mandatory UE capability sets prevent option explosion. A lean control plane lowers device complexity and speeds up procedures.

Together, these
guiding principles sketch a vision of 6G as not only faster or more capable than its predecessors, but also more disciplined, sustainable, and deployment-ready from the very beginning.
- Universal design goals : open, secure, flexible, energy-efficient, forward compatible.
- Prioritize longevity and smooth evolution across releases.
- Balance performance with deployment practicality.
- Keepchangeadd principle : keep proven NR elements, change where gains exist, add ISAC/AI/IoT/NTN.
- Reduce risk by reusing validated components.
- Focus changes on high-impact bottlenecks (e.g., control, MIMO).
- Design for real deployments : solve Day-1 problems; avoid niche over-engineering.
- Make efficiency features mandatory in the first release.
- Limit optionality to curb fragmentation.
- Traffic-behaviordriven design : efficient for bursty small sessions and large flows.
- Fast setup for short transactions; efficient ramp-up for big flows.
- Scheduling aware of mixed traffic patterns.
- Unified RAT concept : one 6GR for diverse devices/services with a scalable framework.
- Common baseline spanning IoT to high-end UEs.
- Minimize parallel profiles to simplify networks.
- Perch/Anchor/Data framework : reduced raster Perch, minimized Anchor, lean Data.
- Cut always-on signaling for network energy savings.
- Separate discovery/control from high-throughput data.
- UE capability framework : mandatory capability sets; minimize optional combinations.
- Define device-type/use-case tiers to avoid option explosion.
- Simplify interoperability and certification.
- Other simplifications : PxSCH interleaving, simpler BWP adaptation, flattened RRC.
- Lower UE complexity and blind-decode burden.
- Speed up control-plane procedures.
Migration and deployment in 6G must avoid the messy 4G to 5G path. Too many migration options and late SA adoption slowed 5G and increased the burden on networks and devices.
6G takes a disciplined, needs-based approach. It aims to reuse existing infrastructure while delivering real performance gains from the start.
Operators should reuse radios as much as possible. Hardware refresh should happen only when spectrum or business needs require it. No forced forklift upgrades.

A core part of this vision is MRSS in legacy bands. This lets 6G coverage ride on existing deployments. It brings real benefits early, even before new spectrum becomes common.
6G starts with standalone architecture from Day-1. MRSS, carrier aggregation, and selective dual connectivity act as transition tools.
This approach boosts capacity and coverage without fragmenting the ecosystem. It also keeps adoption moving forward.

The migration goal is to make 6G a seamless extension, not just another overlay. Services like voice and mission-critical apps must keep running without interruption. Operators can add new features step by step.
MRSS plays a key role. Examples include semi-static sharing with NB-IoT and LTE-M, hidden 6G sync signals, and reuse of 5G random access. These make 6G invisible to existing NR devices and prevent cross-generation interference.
Deployment follows a practical path. Focus goes to features with real value from Day-1. Examples are Msg3 repetition for stronger access, network energy savings, and uplink coverage gains. Low-impact or niche features can wait for later releases.
6G migration is about smart continuity, not big flashy changes. It aligns technical progress with operator needs and spectrum reality to make the transition smooth and valuable from the start.
- Needs-based hardware refresh reuse existing radios; selective upgrades.
- Prioritize MRSS in legacy bands for early coverage.
- Align refresh with spectrum availability/business case.
- Smooth 5G→6G migration SA focus, MRSS in existing bands, 6G CA, optional DC/DS.
- Leverage CA to add capacity without forklift upgrades.
- Maintain service continuity for voice/mission-critical.
- MRSS migration methods semi-static sharing incl. NB-IoT/LTE-M; hidden 6G SSBs; reuse 5G RA.
- Rate-matching and signal sharing to avoid collisions.
- Backward invisibility to NR UEs.
- Early deployment prioritization prioritize features with early commercial value.
- Examples: Msg3 repetition, NES, coverage essentials.
- Defer low-impact features to later releases
More on MRSS
A core pillar of 6G migration is MRSS from Day-1. It enables coexistence and smooth evolution. 6G and 5G NR can run on the same spectrum, using the same radios, without disrupting current services.
MRSS is more efficient than 5Gs DSS. DSS had heavy overhead from LTE reference signals. MRSS builds on a clean NR baseline with no CRS, flexible CORESETs, and lower control overhead.
MRSS acts as a natural bridge for migration. It removes the need for full spectrum re-farming. 6G waveforms and frame structures stay CP-OFDM compatible. Subcarrier spacing and numerology stay aligned with NR. Both systems can share the same grid without conflict.
In practice, MRSS brings early 6G gains without breaking NR continuity. Improving spectral efficiency and cell-edge performance may be more important than chasing peak rates.
With carrier aggregation, operators can combine NR and 6G carriers for higher throughput. MRSS stays invisible to legacy UEs. Rate-matching and flexible resource use let 6G fill gaps in NR scheduling, avoiding collisions and improving utilization.
In areas where tight inter-RAT coordination is hard, MRSS can work with dual connectivity or dual-stack. But MRSS stays the main baseline.
MRSS is more than just a migration tool. It also aligns numerology. By keeping the same SCS and FFT sizing between NR and 6G, handover becomes simpler. Device complexity goes down. Spectrum planning stays clean and unified. 6G looks like a natural NR extension in both signaling and traffic.
MRSS corrects the problems of 5G DSS. DSS was a quick patch between LTE and NR, but it was not so efficient and practical. However MRSS is built to be efficient, forward-compatible, and commercially practical. It lets 6G use existing spectrum and radios right away, while preparing for new mid-band spectrum later.
-
Core Concept
- Coexistence of 5G NR and 6G on the same spectrum resources.
- Uses existing 5G radio units (no immediate forklift upgrades).
- Designed to be backward invisible to NR UEs (they dont see 6G signals).
-
Lessons from 5G DSS vs. MRSS
- DSS problem: LTEs legacy CRS and rigid overhead reduced efficiency.
- MRSS advantage: Built on NRs lean design (no CRS, flexible CORESETs).
- Expected to be more resource-efficient than DSS ever was.
-
Waveform and Numerology Alignment
- MRSS requires CP-OFDM compatibility between 5G and 6G.
- Reuses 5G scalable subcarrier spacing and frame structure.
- Ensures multiplexing of 5G/6G signals on the same grid without hardware divergence.
- Numerology harmonization (same SCS/FFT sizes) simplifies mobility and reduces UE complexity.
-
Resource Utilization & Rate Matching
- Flexible resource allocation and rate-matching so 6G can fill unused NR resources.
- Prevents collisions with NR traffic while maximizing utilization.
- Semi-static sharing across NB-IoT and LTE-M also considered.
- Hidden 6G SSBs and reuse of NR RA procedures for seamless operation.
-
Deployment Options
- MRSS + 6G Carrier Aggregation (CA) to combine 6G carriers with MRSS bands.
- Fallback when tight inter-RAT coordination is difficult: 6G5G Dual Connectivity (DC) or Dual Stack (DS).
- Enables staged migration without disrupting NR services.
-
Operator and Ecosystem Benefits
- Early 6G coverage in existing 5G bands before new spectrum is widely available.
- Reuses existing radios, lowering deployment costs.
- Provides continuity for mission-critical services (voice, emergency, industrial IoT).
- Simplifies handover and mobility across generations through shared numerology.
- Avoids fragmentation by aligning 6G evolution with real operator needs.
Spectrum and duplexing in 6G are both a challenge and an opportunity. The aim is to simplify what became fragmented in 5G.
Channel sizes will grow. The target is 200 MHz in FR1 and FR3, and 400 MHz in FR2-1. At the same time, 6G will still support very narrow bands, down to 3 MHz, for low-end IoT.
This dual goal needs flexible numerology. 8k FFT and 60 kHz SCS in FR1/FR3 help balance efficiency and implementation cost.
Spectrum use will become more integrated. Native multi-carrier support with cross-carrier scheduling, HARQ, and CORESET control lets carriers act as one logical block. This gives operators more freedom to place uplink and downlink across different bands.
Efficiency is a core part of the 6G vision. Studies focus on site densification, TRP coordination, and larger antenna arrays near 7 GHz. The goal is to find where real performance gains justify the cost of power and infrastructure, especially when UE antenna scaling hits practical limits.
On the duplexing side, simplicity and robustness come first. FDD and semi-static TDD stay as the main options. SBFD (Sub-Band non-overlapping Full-Duplex) is being studied to boost uplink coverage and reduce latency. Dynamic TDD is avoided due to interference and deployment complexity.
Carrier aggregation is the common method for combining spectrum. Fast activation and deactivation of CCs make aggregation agile and low-latency. It works smoothly across bands, supporting both high-throughput bursts and low-power idle modes.

The main idea is simple: 6G spectrum and duplexing are not just about wider channels. They aim to harmonize bands and duplex modes to balance efficiency, cost, and practical deployment.

- Maximum / Minimum Carrier Bandwidth (CBW)
- 6G FR1/FR3 targets up to 200 MHz per component carrier.
- 6G FR2-1 targets up to 400 MHz per component carrier.
- Device-side CC bandwidth expected to scale up to 400 MHz for new 68+ GHz bands.
- Large bandwidth is needed to compensate for higher pathloss and support higher peak rates.
- Narrow 5 MHz baseline remains supported for broad spectrum reuse.
- 3 MHz minimum channel bandwidth is optionally supported for low-power IoT devices.
- Sync raster design and initial access flow must remain functional even at 35 MHz operation.
- 6G aims to retain compatibility with narrow legacy allocations used by IoT ecosystems.
- 8k FFT or 60 kHz SCS are considered as alternatives for FR1/FR3 large-bandwidth operation.
- Spectrum Operations & Multi-Carrier Behavior
- 6G assumes native multi-carrier operation across wide spectrum ranges.
- Supports flexible DL/UL decoupling across bands to optimize both coverage and capacity.
- Cross-carrier scheduling, cross-carrier HARQ, and shared CORESETs are baseline behaviors.
- Carriers can be grouped so control is sent on one carrier while data follows on others.
- Giga-MIMO in FR3 (68+ GHz) with up to 1000-element arrays enhances multi-carrier efficiency.
- 6G spectrum operations integrate smoothly with MRSS for reuse of 5G bands.
- Supports coordinated TRP selection and densification for high-capacity clusters.
- Flexible UL/DL placement across carriers allows partial decoupling for uplink-heavy services.
- Spectrum Efficiency Studies & Deployment Factors
- Study efficiency trade-offs across 25 GHz, 68+ GHz, and FR2-1 regions.
- Consider 7 GHz offset scenarios where additional antennas compensate pathloss.
- Quantify capacity gain vs. additional site cost and power consumption.
- UE antenna scaling is limited smartphone 4Tx/8Rx is the practical baseline.
- Site densification must be balanced with spectrum reuse and power efficiency.
- Ensure uplink coverage does not degrade when shifting to higher mid-bands.
- Spectrum strategy must include coexistence with 5G and migration from existing bands.
- Duplexing Options (FDD, TDD, SBFD)
- 6G supports both FDD and semi-static TDD in legacy and lower mid-band spectrum.
- Dynamic TDD is de-prioritized due to cross-link interference and complexity.
- SBFD (Split-Band Full Duplex) becomes the preferred solution for high mid-bands.
- SBFD enables uplink duty cycle improvements of more than 4 dB.
- SBFD allows quasi-FDD operation inside a nominal TDD carrier.
- Best deployed in greenfield 68+ GHz where legacy coexistence issues are minimized.
- Common/unified SBFD design is needed for PHY and control-channel consistency.
- SBFD supports normalized uplink coverage comparable to 3.5 GHz even at double the frequency.
- Simplifies mid-band planning by avoiding interference constraints typical in TDD grids.
- Aggregation & UL/DL Decoupling
- Carrier Aggregation (CA) is retained as the only aggregation mechanism.
- 6G aims to unify CA behavior across FR1, FR3, and FR2-1.
- Rapid activation and deactivation of carriers is required for energy and spectrum efficiency.
- Lower latency CC addition/removal prevents slow responsiveness seen in NR.
- Enable fast directional activation e.g., activate DL on a CC without full UL setup.
- UL/DL decoupling across different carriers allows uplink coverage to be sourced from low bands while DL uses wide high-band carriers.
- 6G should support coordinated CA control to avoid forcing the UE to run wideband clocks unnecessarily.
- Inter-band UL CA (FR1 + FR3) is emphasized for uplink coverage enhancement.
- Scheduling across bands must consider UE per-band power availability.
In 6G, waveform, numerology, modulation, and coding build on the NR foundation. The goal is coexistence, scalability, and efficient implementation, not reinvention.
Downlink stays on CP-OFDM. Uplink uses CP-OFDM with optional DFT-s-OFDM. This keeps backward alignment with NR and allows smooth MRSS spectrum sharing.
Numerology reuse is intentional. It avoids fragmentation while supporting much wider carriersup to 400 MHzin FR2 and even FR1/FR3.
For extreme bandwidths like 200 MHz in FR1/FR3, new options such as 8k FFT and 60 kHz SCS are being explored. These aim to balance spectral efficiency, hardware complexity, and coexistence with narrow carriers.
In 6G, modulation and coding build on the NR baseline. QAM constellations are extended to boost throughput. LDPC stays for data channels and Polar codes for control.
6G adds refinements. New LDPC base graphs support extreme rates. Advanced shaping techniques improve spectral efficiency. Constellation shaping and non-uniform modulation, aligned with RAN4, aim for small but meaningful dB gains without losing robustness.
Cost efficiency is a key focus. PHY blocks must deliver higher performance with less silicon and DRAM use. HARQ buffer optimization prevents memory scaling from becoming a bottleneck.

The goal is clear: make 6Gs physical layer faster, leaner, and easier to deploy. It keeps NRs strengths while fixing its weak points in a sustainable way.

- Waveform & numerology DL CP-OFDM; UL CP-OFDM/DFTS-OFDM; reuse NR numerologies.
- Ease MRSS/coexistence with NR.
- Support up to 400 MHz carriers.
- Modulation & coding NR QAM baseline; LDPC (data)/Polar (control).
- Explore new base graphs for extreme rates.
- Coordinate shaping/constellation work with RAN4.
- 200 MHz CBW alternatives 8k FFT or 60 kHz SCS (FR1/FR3).
- Trade FFT size vs. SCS for implementation cost.
- Maintain coexistence with narrower carriers.
- Cost-efficient PHY blocks coding/modulation/shaping efficiency; HARQ buffer optimization.
- Reduce silicon/DRAM footprint.
- Preserve link performance at lower complexity.
Synchronization and initial access in 6G must take a bigger step forward. Past generations improved slowly, but 6G targets energy efficiency and coverage strength from the start.
The design moves away from always-on, heavy signaling. It focuses on lean, smart signaling that lets networks sleep longer while keeping discovery and attachment reliable.
SSB periodicity will stretch beyond 20 ms. Sync bandwidth will shrink. Extra symbols or boosted DMRS will keep detection stable under tougher conditions. A coarser sync raster and limited-band options will cut UE search time, reduce power use, and simplify FR2 handling.
Initial access will be unified for all device types. It will scale smoothly from eMBB to IoT. Early MIMO and bandwidth signaling will be built in, with support for high Doppler and NTN.
Enhancements include more PRACH contention resources, new sync signal variants like NCD-SSB, and flexible periodicities around 40 ms. These reduce sync overhead for both the network and the UE while preserving detection and coverage.

In short, 6G treats synchronization and access as core enablers. They support energy savings, stable coverage, and diverse services, setting up a more sustainable and forward-compatible network.

- Basic Sync Design
- On-demand SSB and SIB1 broadcasting to avoid unnecessary always-on signaling.
- Supports fast sync while minimizing idle-mode UE energy consumption.
- Enables on-demand SIB1 delivery to avoid repeated PBCH decoding.
- Multiple SSB structures: compact SSBs for IoT/low-power devices; richer SSBs for high-end devices.
- Low-power devices are not forced to detect all SSB types.
- Unified sync structure across device classes avoids fragmentation and keeps detection complexity low.
- Sync must accommodate minimum supported UE bandwidth (35 MHz operation).
- Sync Raster Reduction
- Narrower SSB footprints (~12 RB or fewer) reduce sync raster by up to ~80% in FR1-like bands.
- Smaller SSB widths shorten frequency scanning time and reduce UE energy consumption.
- Compact SSBs remain functional in narrow channelization (35 MHz).
- Raster unification made possible by dropping LTE-era 100 kHz raster constraints.
- Unified raster reduces the large number of raster points encountered in NR.
- Faster initial search, reduced blind detection, and simplified multi-band IA procedures.
- Sync raster aligns with MRSS to support NR→6G coexistence with minimal overhead.
- Initial Access Improvements
- Energy is a first-class KPI in initial access design.
- IA must avoid over-complexity and backward-compatibility burdens seen in 5G.
- Simplification of PRACH by removing rarely used formats while keeping deployment flexibility.
- PRACH design reduces blind tries and detection overhead.
- Supports both 2-step and 4-step RACH.
- 2-step RACH suited for low-latency or low-energy scenarios.
- 4-step RACH retained for deep coverage, weak signal, or high-mobility conditions.
- Initial access must maintain low complexity for low-power devices.
- IA design must jointly consider coverage, detection latency, and UE complexity.
- SSB / Sync Signal Options
- SSB periodicity adaptation between 20160 ms based on load and energy targets.
- Short periods for high-load or mobility; long periods for low-load energy saving.
- Time-domain repetition of PSS/SSS/PBCH to improve one-shot detection under longer periodicity.
- Repetition compensates for narrower bandwidth and for higher mid-band pathloss.
- PBCH design enabling soft combining through time-invariant fields such as SFN.
- Separate discovery from paging/control functions.
- Lean SSBs used purely for discovery: coarse timing, frequency, and cell ID.
- Paging or SIB1 delivered via on-demand bursts to reduce always-on overhead.
- Prevents low-power UEs from unnecessary PBCH or paging decoding.
- Advanced Considerations for Sync & IA
- Sync must support consistent detection performance across MBB, RedCap, IoT, and CPE devices.
- Must enable reliable IA even with minimal UE RF/BB bandwidth.
- Initial access latency influenced by raster density, SSB size, and repetition strategy.
- Higher mid-band (FR3) detection challenges addressed by repetition and compact PBCH.
- Sync must maintain robustness under high pathloss frequencies (68+ GHz).
- Design supports smooth NR→6G migration, enabling hybrid sync during transition via MRSS.
- Initial access must be simple, deterministic, and energy-aware for all device categories.
Control channels and scheduling in 6G focus on simplicity and adaptability. The goal is to remove the overhead and fragmentation of past generations.
On the uplink, control signaling becomes leaner. The number of formats is reduced. Redundant overhead is cut. Instead of multiple PUCCH types, one baseline structure for scheduling requests and HARQ-ACK covers most needs. Long-term CSI moves to MAC-level control for better efficiency.
Downlink control follows the same idea. Lean, predictable signaling replaces complex structures. Features like a PCFICH-like channel, lean bandwidth parts, and semi-persistent scheduling tuned for AI/ML traffic reduce blind detection. This saves UE power and aligns better with traffic patterns.
Beyond simplification, control signaling in 6G brings deeper changes to robustness and privacy. DCI size is now decoupled from its content, so signaling formats become more flexible. Scrambling and better reference signal design add privacy and make the system more resistant to interference.
Control signaling will also become more asynchronous, so it works more like Layer-2. This reduces timing rigidity but keeps reliability. As a result, the system can react more smoothly to network variations.
It must also respond fast to bursts of mixed traffic. This is where fast bandwidth and multi-carrier adaptation help. A unified DCI framework allows near-instant activation or deactivation of carriers and bandwidth parts. This minimizes misalignment and keeps resources aligned with demand.

Together, these shifts make control channels lightweight and adaptive. They scale well from IoT to AI-driven traffic. As a result, 6G gains better efficiency, privacy, and responsiveness across the entire air interface.

- UL control simplification simpler UCI multiplexing; reduce CR overhead.
- Fewer PUCCH formats (e.g., SR + HARQ-ACK baseline).
- Move long-term CSI to MAC-CE.
- DL control & scheduling PCFICH-like channel; lean BWP; dynamic UL/DL association; semi-persistent DL for AI; dynamic CG-PUSCH.
- Reduce blind detections and UE power.
- Fit control to AI/ML periodicity.
- Control signaling evolution asynchronous UCI (as L2); reworked PDCCH/DCI; privacy via scrambling/RS.
- Decouple DCI size from content.
- Enhance PDCCH privacy/robustness.
- Fast BW & multi-carrier adaptation unified DCI; fast cell activation/deactivation.
- React quickly to traffic bursts.
- Minimize misalignment between carriers.
In 6G, MIMO, beamforming, and reference signals are not just add-ons. They are the core engine for scaling performance across devices, frequencies, and deployment scenarios.
On the transmission side, the design stays transparent and consistent for downlink. For uplink, it offers flexible closed-loop and open-loop modes. Non-precoded DMRS on PUSCH and PRB bundling improve channel estimation and make the uplink more robust. This ensures good CSI quality even for UEs under mobility.
MIMO must also scale widely. It should work for a few antennas on IoT devices and grow up to 1024 ports at base stations in FR3. So, the design needs to be streamlined. The codebook proliferation and always-on RS approach of 5G wont work anymore.
Instead, unified codebooks and on-demand RS transmission will reduce overhead. This also prepares the system for near-field beamforming in higher mid-band and FR3 ranges.
Reference signals in 6G are being redesigned as multi-purpose tools. CSI-RS densities will increase, so the system can acquire channel state with higher accuracy. DMRS expansion up to 24 ports and flexible SRS settings will support advanced beam tracking, mobility, and positioning. This avoids the need for separate signal families.
TRS and SRS reuse will further cut signaling overhead. This creates a tighter and more energy-efficient design. Beam management will also become more unified. TCI signaling, weak-beam reporting, and conditional switching will enable fast beam recovery and keep MU-MIMO pairing stable.
Cross-band assistance adds extra strength. For example, FR1 can help guide beams in FR2 or FR3, so coverage and handover become more resilient. Spatial diversity schemes like cyclic delay diversity, when explicitly indicated, can bring back diversity gains for broadcast and control channels. At the same time, DMRS transparency and interference rank remain consistent.

Overall, 6G treats MIMO, beamforming, and reference signals as one integrated system. They are scalable and efficient, so they support both peak performance and strong coverage in real deployments.

- MIMO transmission DL transparent + PRB bundling; UL closed/open-loop; non-precoded DMRS-PUSCH.
- Scale across UE tiers and mobility.
- Improve uplink CSI fidelity.
- Streamlined MIMO & RS unified codebooks; 128→1024 ports; on-demand RS.
- Cut always-on RS overhead.
- Prepare for FR3 near-field scaling.
- Reference signals CSI-RS up to 256; DMRS up to 24; TRS; multi-purpose SRS.
- Enable advanced beam/CSI accuracy.
- Reuse RS for mobility/positioning where possible.
- Beam management evolution unified TCI; weak-beam reporting; FR1-assisted FR2/FR3; conditional switching.
- Improve MU-MIMO pairing and stability.
- Speed beam recovery and handover.
- Spatial diversity schemes CDD with explicit indication; transparent DMRS consistency.
- Add diversity for broadcast/control.
- Preserve interference rank assumptions.
Channel State Information and feedback in 6G are being redesigned for simplicity, efficiency, and real-world robustness. In 5G, iterative codebook upgrades added complexity but saw limited adoption. So, 6G takes a cleaner path.
CSI reporting will rely on simplified codebooks. CQI will be more tightly linked to BLER targets. Some CSI may even be signaled at the PDCCH level. This lowers UE processing load and makes feedback quality match the needs of latency-sensitive and AI-driven traffic.
Feedback itself builds on NR Type-I PMI but becomes more compact. Higher-rank representations allow more MIMO layers without flooding the uplink with feedback. This keeps overhead low while enabling efficient use of large antenna arrays.
Another key shift in 6G is acknowledging bursty and sporadic uplink traffic. Traditional wideband, periodic CSI reports often arrive too late or waste resources when traffic is unpredictable. So, 6G moves to UL-centric CSI with dynamic uplink reference signals. This lets networks quickly stabilize modulation, coding, and precoding during traffic bursts.
Receiver design will also take on a bigger role. RX-centric approaches can better tolerate inter-layer interference and use more advanced baseband processing. As a result, the system can keep MIMO performance strong even when CSI is imperfect or fast fading breaks old assumptions.

Together, these changes redefine CSI and feedback. They become adaptive, low-overhead enablers of reliable, high-rank MIMO in realistic deployment conditions.

- CSI reporting simplification simplified codebooks; tighter CQI/BLER; PDCCH CSI.
- Lower UE feedback complexity.
- Support stricter QoS (e.g., AI traffic).
- CSI feedback evolution extend NR Type-I PMI; compact representations.
- Raise supported MIMO rank.
- Reduce uplink reporting overhead.
- UL CSI for bursty traffic UL-centric CSI; dynamic UL RS.
- Adapt rapidly to sporadic loads.
- Stabilize MCS/precoding decisions.
- Resilient MIMO mapping RX-centric robustness; inter-layer interference tolerance.
- Mitigate CSI errors and fast fading.
- Exploit advanced receiver capabilities.
In 6G, HARQ and retransmission are being redesigned for higher efficiency and lower latency. The old method of retransmitting an entire transport block when only a few code blocks fail is no longer practical in wideband, high-rate systems.
Instead, 6G introduces repair at the code block level. The scheduler can use precise redundancy signaling to resend only the parts that actually failed. This avoids unnecessary retransmissions and makes feedback channels more resilient.
With this finer control, networks can cut overhead, save spectrum, and speed up recovery. This is especially important for applications with tight latency requirements.
But improving efficiency alone is not enough. Feedback reliability also becomes a key design focus. Errors like NACKs misread as ACKs, timing mismatches, or bandwidth part desynchronization can hurt throughput more than missed retransmissions.
To prevent this, 6G introduces hardened feedback channels and tighter timing alignment. It also adds explicit fallback options that the scheduler can trigger when control mismatches happen.

These measures make HARQ both more precise and more robust. Retransmissions become surgical, and signaling becomes more reliable. As a result, 6G can deliver high spectral efficiency without losing consistency or service continuity.

- HARQ retransmission efficiency avoid full TB when few CBs fail; accurate redundancy signaling.
- Lower wasted resources and latency.
- Provide CB-level repair guidance to scheduler.
- Robust HARQ & scheduling address NACK→ACK errors, ACK misalignments, BWP out-of-sync.
- Harden feedback channels and timing.
- Design fallbacks for control mismatch.
Mobility, resilience, and security in 6G are being treated as one integrated foundation. The goal is to build a network that moves smoothly and stays strong against disruptions.
The mobility framework will unify mechanisms that are now split across layers. It combines L3 mobility, conditional handover, link and beam management, and wake-up radioassisted measurements into one design. By cutting down on signaling handshakes and guiding beam and cell selection intelligently, it can lower handover latency and reduce failures. This matters most at cell edges and in high-mobility cases.
Resilience extends this logic beyond mobility. The architecture avoids single points of failure and reacts fast to problems. A failing PCell will no longer bring down an entire carrier aggregation group. Secondary cells can stay active independently. Early health checks, quick instability detection, and recovery paths make performance dips short and almost invisible to users.
Security and privacy are also built in from the start. Integrity protection for broadcast information like MIB and SIB makes spoofing and tampering much harder. New PDCCH designs use scrambling and obfuscation to limit what eavesdroppers can learn. Stronger DMRS structures protect control and reference signals under hostile conditions.

In short, 6G makes mobility, resilience, and security core pillars. It enables smoother movement through the network, stronger continuity under stress, and trusted signaling that stays both authentic and private.

- Unified mobility framework merge L3 mobility, CHO, LTM, beam mgmt; WUR-assisted measurements.
- Reduce handover latency and failures.
- Simplify mobility signaling across layers.
- Resilience minimize single points of failure; early failure detection/recovery.
- Decouple CA behavior from single PCell.
- Introduce health checks and rapid recovery.
- Privacy & security integrity for MIB/SIB; improved PDCCH privacy; strengthened DM-RS.
- Protect system information authenticity.
- Limit observability of control activity.
Coverage in 6G is a baseline design goal. It is not a feature added afterward. The primary motivation is the uplink bottleneck seen in todays mid-band deployments. Downlink grows fast, but devices cannot send back enough data. So, 6G starts with a coverage-native foundation.
Uplink budgets get stronger. This comes from higher UE transmit power, low-PAPR waveforms, uplink carrier aggregation, and uplink MIMO. These combine with SBFD in mid-band. As a result, edge reliability improves for AI inference, XR streaming, and other uplink-heavy applications.
Smarter coverage tools add an extra layer. Generalized TBoMS and scheduler-aware repetition schemes make transmissions more resilient. Enhanced random access increases initial access success when the signal is weak. Early Msg3-based power headroom reporting gives the scheduler more information before the link becomes stable.
Uplink-centric coverage also ties into AI-driven services. PUSCH/PUCCH/PRACH repetitions stabilize the early phases of UL transmission. Early power-control information allows more accurate adaptation in the critical first moments of connection setup.

Overall, 6G coverage enhancements remove current mid-band limits. They give stronger uplink, more reliable edge performance, and more robust initial access.
- Coverage-native design in 6G
- Covers 6G as a Day-1 priority, not an add-on.
- Removes mid-band uplink bottlenecks where UL lags far behind DL.
- 6G aims for 37 dB uplink coverage gain over current systems.
- Coverage evaluation follows a two-step method:
- Step 1: Required SINR for each physical channel
- Step 2: Convert SINR to link budget metrics like MCL/MIL/MPL
- Coverage target considers frequency, deployment scenario, and service UL/DL targets.
- Uplink power enhancement
- Higher UE transmit power classes for upper mid-band frequencies.
- Smartphone uplink target of approximately 29 dBm aggregated across 4 antennas.
- Includes study of power-class-free operation and revised waveform power backoff definitions.
- Low-PAPR uplink waveforms
- Use of DFT-s-OFDM with low-PAPR modulation such as π/2-BPSK.
- Revisiting MPR table to unlock full low-PAPR potential.
- Study tunable waveform families that balance PAPR and spectral efficiency.
- Waveform duration & coherence
- Support multi-slot uplink transmissions via long SLIV.
- Uniform DMRS mapping across multi-slot durations.
- Maintain cross-slot phase coherence for robust channel estimation.
- Cross-slot PUSCH with RF glitch RS
- Handles RF discontinuities at slot boundaries caused by PA/LNA updates.
- Low-overhead RF glitch reference signals are inserted near slot boundaries.
- Enables joint DMRS processing to improve uplink robustness.
- Uplink carrier aggregation (UL CA)
- Removes traditional sum-power constraints across aggregated uplink carriers.
- Allows true power pooling across bands.
- Improves uplink stability across mixed FR1 and higher mid-band deployments.
- Requires better network visibility into per-band UE power headroom.
- Inter-band uplink aggregation is treated as a baseline requirement.
- Uplink MIMO & antenna selection
- Network-assisted UL antenna selection when UL/DL reciprocity does not hold.
- Coherent uplink MIMO designed under practical phase-drift and device limitations.
- Dynamic uplink reference signals for fast CSI updates and rapid MCS/precoding adjustments.
- UL CSI for bursty traffic
- NR SRS-based CSI is too slow for bursty or sporadic uplink traffic.
- 6G introduces flexible uplink reference signals for rapid CSI acquisition.
- SBFD (Split-Band Full Duplex)
- Improves uplink duty cycle compared to TDD, yielding several dB of uplink gain.
- Essential for strong uplink coverage in 68+ GHz mid-band.
- Operates best in greenfield deployments without legacy coexistence constraints.
- Treated as a Day-1 uplink coverage enabler in 6G.
- FR3 (68+ GHz) coverage targets
- Goal: achieve uplink coverage similar to todays 3.5 GHz systems.
- Enabled through higher UL power, SBFD operation, and large-array MIMO.
- Smartphone requirements include 4Tx/8Rx capability and support for up to 400 MHz bandwidth.
- Smarter repetition & TBoMS
- Scheduler-aware repetition patterns improve robustness for weak-signal uplink.
- Generalized TBoMS enables smarter repetition bundling for low-SNR transmissions.
- Enhanced Random Access coverage
- Multi-slot Msg1/PRACH repetitions strengthen initial access in weak coverage.
- Scheduler-aware RA mapping improves reliability at cell edges.
- RA enhancements account for wider delay spreads and propagation in higher bands.
- Msg3 Early Power Headroom Reporting
- Early Msg3-based PHR gives the network quick insight into UE uplink capability.
- Stabilizes early stages of uplink transmission.
- Coverage in mobility / MRSS
- MRSS enables NR and 6G to operate within the same spectrum resources.
- Avoids LTE-CRS complexity seen in earlier migration schemes.
- Efficient control-channel coexistence improves edge coverage.
- Allows immediate 6G coverage using existing 5G radio units.
- Spectrum aggregation for coverage
- CA used to select the most reliable uplink cell across bands.
- Relaxed uplink power rules enable stronger multi-band uplink coverage.
- 6G extends these mechanisms to support broader uplink paths.
- Coverage for IoT / LPWA devices
- Coverage-native design applies to IoT and LPWA device classes.
- Uplink data rates down to around 1 kbps supported at deep coverage.
- 5 MHz baseline bandwidth (with optional 3 MHz) aligns IoT with standard 6G SSB layout.
- A single carrier should serve both IoT and eMBB devices with the same coverage radius.
- Synchronization signal coverage
- 6G sync raster must reduce scanning points for faster acquisition.
- Improves initial cell search under weak signal conditions.
- Unified device-type coverage
- All device types share identical coverage targets.
- Only service data rates differ between device categories.
- Control-channel coverage
- 6G treats control-channel coverage independently from data-channel coverage.
- Ensures reliability for voice, positioning, and initial access procedures.
- New duplexing for coverage
- Duplexing modes aim to reduce DL-to-UL interference at higher frequencies.
- Leverages large-array MIMO to offset coverage losses in upper mid-band.
- Scheduling behavior for coverage
- Flexible uplink repetition patterns improve reliability.
- Aligns scheduling with per-carrier power availability.
- Switches efficiently between narrowband and wideband uplink modes.
- Uplink-first stability in early access
- PUSCH/PUCCH/PRACH repetitions stabilize early access phases.
- Ensures reliable uplink establishment at deep cell-edge.
Energy efficiency stands as the second core design axis in 6G. The objective is an ultra-lean network where every layer avoids unnecessary always-on behavior. This reduces energy at both the network side and the device side.
On the network side, always-on signaling shrinks. SSB periodicity extends up to 160 ms. Wake-up signals allow paging without continuous scanning. DRX switching keeps idle UEs attached with almost no energy drain. The network stays responsive even with long sleep cycles.
On the UE side, 6G expands NR power-saving techniques. Sparse PDCCH monitoring reduces control-channel checks. Bandwidth-part adaptation keeps only the required spectrum active. Grant-free uplink bursts let UEs send short packets without full scheduling. These reduce both control-plane and uplink overhead. UEs sleep longer between network interactions, so battery life increases.

Together, these mechanisms create an energy-efficient ecosystem. The network becomes more sustainable. Devices last longer on the same battery. New low-power applications, such as sensors and lightweight AI endpoints, become practical.
- Energy-efficient 6G design principles
- Energy efficiency is a core design axis from the start.
- Targets both network energy savings and UE power savings.
- Energy efficiency considered together with spectral efficiency, coverage, and complexity.
- Network energy efficiency (ultra-lean network)
- Minimize always-on signaling and broadcast overhead.
- More symbols are used for data rather than always-on control.
- SSB periodicity can be extended (e.g., up to 160 ms) to reduce idle scanning energy.
- Longer SSB offsets increase discovery latency, so sync design must be jointly optimized.
- Sync raster, periodicity, and resource structure must support both energy efficiency and fast access.
- Multi-RAT spectrum sharing aims to reduce overhead compared to legacy approaches.
- Bandwidth adaptation & UE energy savings (BWP evolution)
- BWP aligns UE active bandwidth with traffic needs to reduce power consumption.
- Traditional BWP switching can cause misalignment, limiting aggressive power saving.
- 6G keeps flexible NR-style BWP but improves reliability and speed.
- Two adaptation mechanisms:
- A reliable but slower mechanism for long or medium-term adaptation.
- A fast DCI-based mechanism for short-term adaptation inside active bursts.
- Fast mechanism adjusts:
- Maximum bandwidth
- Maximum rank
- Minimum scheduling offset
- PDCCH monitoring periodicity
- Design ensures at least some PDCCH candidates are always decodable even during transitions.
- CA-based power saving (multi-carrier operation)
- CA provides tools such as cross-carrier scheduling and aligned DRX cycles.
- sCell addition, release, activation, and deactivation used to manage UE power.
- When bandwidth is not needed, secondary carriers can be deactivated to reduce UE power drain.
- Current activation/deactivation is slow, causing schedulers to keep sCells on longer than required.
- 6G should speed up CA configuration and sCell transitions.
- Directional activation (DL-only activation for DL bursts) enables power savings.
- CA works together with BWP so UE can stay narrow most of the time and widen bandwidth only briefly.
- Network-side DRX and wake-up signaling
- Network adopts ultra-lean DRX-friendly behavior.
- Wake-up signals reduce the number of paging scans needed by UEs.
- DRX switching keeps idle UEs connected while minimizing energy consumption.
- Goal is to minimize idle-mode energy without harming access latency.
- UE-side power saving modes
- More aggressive DRX than NR where traffic allows.
- Sparse PDCCH monitoring reduces unnecessary UE activity.
- BWP adaptation keeps UE in narrow operation by default.
- BWP widens quickly for bursts, then shrinks again.
- Grant-free uplink bursts allow small data transmissions without full scheduling overhead.
- Grant-free reduces control-plane wakeups and saves UE power.
- Sync signal design with energy in mind
- Sync design must balance energy, detection performance, and latency.
- Unified sync structure across device types, including IoT.
- Minimum 5 MHz baseline channel, with possible support for 3 MHz low-power devices.
- PBCH design can separate SFN from other fields, allowing soft combining.
- Soft combining lowers the number of decodes for weak-RF devices, reducing UE energy consumption.
- Trade-offs in SSB periodicity for energy savings
- Longer SSB periods reduce scanning energy but increase discovery latency.
- Energy savings depend on load, architecture, and traffic model.
- 6G requires load-aware strategies instead of one fixed SSB period.
- Specification streamlining for power optimization
- Reduce optional modes and fragmentation.
- Mainstream key power-saving mechanisms as baseline features.
- Streamlined features help UE and gNB implementations optimize power consistently.
- Fewer variants reduce complexity and improve real-world energy efficiency.
- Overall result
- Network becomes more energy-efficient and sustainable.
- UE battery life extends through DRX, BWP adaptation, and CA-based power control.
- Low-power services become feasible, including sensor-type and background devices.
- Energy efficiency becomes a fundamental pillar across the whole 6G ecosystem.
Evaluation assumptions are the bedrock of the 6G study. To ensure the new air interface works across diverse bandsspecifically the new upper mid-band (715 GHz)channel and antenna modeling has moved beyond simple abstractions. The goal is to create a unified simulation framework that accurately reflects physical reality for both terrestrial and non-terrestrial deployments, ensuring that performance gains are genuine rather than artifacts of simulation.
Base station modeling scales up significantly to support the "Upper Mid-band." Evaluation configurations now specify massive element counts, ranging from 128 to 256 elements (and up to 1024 for higher bands). The architecture is defined by precise panel parameters (M, N, P, Mg, Ng) to support advanced MIMO and beamforming. On the device side, the "one-size-fits-all" model is discarded. Distinct antenna assumptions are defined for Handhelds (e.g., 1T2R
or 2T4R), High-power
CPEs for Fixed Wireless Access (FWA), Vehicles, and constrained IoT devices, ensuring the link budget reflects the specific capabilities of each vertical.
The channel models themselves are evolving to capture new physical phenomena. While TR 38.901 remains the baseline, 6G necessitates extensions. High-frequency, large-aperture arrays introduce Near-Field (radiative near-field) propagation effects which must be modeled. Furthermore, Spatial Non-Stationarity is introduced, where the channel impulse response varies across the physical extent of a large antenna array. For Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN), specific models for LEO satellite dynamics,
large delays,
and varying Doppler shifts are integrated alongside distinct satellite antenna types (Reflector vs. Phased Array).
Together, these modeling enhancements allow for a rigorous assessment of 6G technologies, from ISAC sensing accuracy to extreme coverage in rural scenarios.
- Base Station Antenna Scaling 128 to 256+ elements; Panel-based design.
- Support higher frequencies (715 GHz).
- Enable accurate simulation of massive MIMO and beamforming.
- Device-Specific Modeling Handheld, CPE, Vehicle, IoT differentiation.
- Define specific Tx/Rx counts (e.g., 2T4R for handheld).
- Tailor link budgets to specific form factors and power limits.
- Advanced Channel Physics Near-field propagation; Spatial non-stationarity.
- Account for large antenna apertures where plane-wave assumptions fail.
- Model channel variations across the physical array surface.
- NTN & Satellite Modeling LEO dynamics; Reflector vs. Phased Array.
- Simulate high Doppler and long propagation delays.
- Differentiate between satellite antenna architectures.
- Sensing (ISAC) Integration RCS modeling; Clutter environments.
- Incorporate target reflection properties into the channel model.
- Evaluate sensing accuracy alongside communication throughput.
Network-Controlled Repeaters (NCR) and Reconfigurable Intelligent Surfaces (RIS) are identified as critical tools for cost-effective coverage expansion and energy efficiency in 6G, particularly to address the challenges of higher frequency bands like FR2 and FR3. While NCRs were introduced in 5G Rel-18, their commercialization has been limited, and 6G aims to integrate them, along with RIS, from the initial design phase to ensure better support and standardization.
RIS offers a low-energy, low-cost method to dynamically reshape the radio propagation environment, enhancing coverage in "dead zones" such as dense urban canyons or extending cell edges. To make RIS effective, 6G must define standardized interfaces and control mechanisms for passive and semi-passive elements, preventing them from becoming proprietary "black boxes".
The deployment of these relay nodes necessitates a flexible beam management framework capable of handling the increased number of beam paths and dynamic network topology. Additionally, specific improvements are needed for NCRs, such as better positioning support, to facilitate their commercial adoption.
- Early Standardization Incorporate NCR and RIS support from the initial stages of 6G to enable cost-effective coverage enhancement.
- Avoid late-stage introduction that hinders commercial deployment.
- Dynamic Environment Shaping Use RIS as a low-cost/low-energy method to dynamically enhance coverage and capacity.
- Target challenging environments like dense urban areas and cell edges.
- Standardized Control Interfaces Define standard interfaces for RIS to ensure interoperability and network control.
- Support passive and semi-passive RIS elements.
- Flexible Beam Management Adapt beam management to accommodate the dynamic addition of relay nodes and the resulting increase in beam paths.
- Ensure robust and low-latency beam switching.
- Commercialization Improvements Address remaining aspects for NCR commercialization, such as positioning provision.
AI and machine learning are built into 6G from the start. They are not just optimization tools but core parts of the air interface.
At the framework level, 6G introduces a unified lifecycle for AI. Operators can see, manage, and interact with AI pipelines directly. Standard hooks define how models are trained, deployed, and updated. Privacy and security controls are aligned with the sensitive data these models use. AI traffic is treated as its own category. Model updates and token-based interactions follow their own QoS rules. This prevents AI workloads from competing blindly with user traffic.
On the physical layer, the network moves to an AI-native air interface. Neural transceivers, pilotless or superimposed reference designs, and AI-based interference prediction make the PHY adaptive. It can co-optimize coding, modulation, and RS density in real time. This dynamic behavior naturally extends to higher layers through AI-driven services. Net4AI focuses on serving AI traffic. AI4Net applies AI to control the network. Together, they create a closed loop where AI both drives and uses
the air interface.
The RAN digital twin is a key enabler. By merging sensing, CSI, and telemetry, operators can maintain local and network-wide twins. These twins anticipate issues before they affect users, manage resources proactively, and detect anomalies early.
Communication itself may shift to token-based exchanges. Latency-sensitive AI workloads use tokens to signal their modalityhuman, robotic, or agent. Token-aware scheduling, HARQ, and QoS let the network treat different traffic types appropriately. Ultra-low-latency control loops get the priority they need, while less urgent traffic uses leftover resources efficiently.

Together, these elements make 6G the first cellular system with AI woven into its core. AI shapes both how the network operates and what it can enable.

- 6G AI/ML framework unified LCM; operator-visible data; separate AI traffic.
- Standardize model lifecycle hooks.
- Align privacy/security for data collection.
- AI-native air interface neural Rx/Tx; pilotless/superimposed pilots; anomaly/interference prediction.
- Co-optimize PHY blocks with learning.
- Adapt RS/pilot density on demand.
- AI/ML-driven services Net4AI & AI4Net; support model updates and token traffic.
- Expose AI data/control planes distinctly from UP/CP.
- Prioritize latency/jitter for AI loops.
- RAN digital twin local→network-wide twins for optimization and services.
- Fuse sensing/CSI/telemetry streams.
- Drive proactive planning and anomaly detection.
- Token communication modality tokens; token-aware scheduling/HARQ/QoS.
- Latency tiers (human/robot/agent) guide QoS.
- Handle streaming vs. burst token arrivals.
In 6G, service types and verticals are part of the core design, not afterthoughts added later. The goal is to build a single global framework that supports massive IoT from the start. This resolves the fragmentation left by LTE-M, NB-IoT, and NR IoT variants.
Mandatory IoT features like multicast and group messaging become native capabilities. So, low-cost devices can work seamlessly around the world. An IoT profile is planned with modest requirements: 35 MHz bandwidth, single-antenna HD-FDD operation, and 15 Mbps throughput. This keeps devices affordable and power-efficient while giving them a clear upgrade path from LTE Cat-M.
Device diversity is also a central focus. The design supports everything from tiny sensors and wearables to XR headsets and braincomputer interfaces. It scales from narrowband allocations to 400 MHz channels. Features like eDRX, wake-up radio, and extended maximum coupling loss keep small devices efficient and connected. At the same time, high-end UEs can use wider bandwidths and richer capabilities.
This approach applies to verticals as well. Instead of separate standards for IoT, XR, or RedCap, 6G offers one common toolbox. Vertical-specific KPIs can be configured, but the air interface stays unified.
Immersive services push these principles even further. XR, holography, and robotics need high uplink capacity and multi-TRP consistency to keep interaction stable and QoE high. Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) is also built in. Uplink MIMO and power are dimensioned for CPEs to handle asymmetric traffic patterns in homes and enterprises.

Together, these choices give 6G a single, flexible framework. It supports everything from basic sensors to demanding immersive applications, avoiding the fragmentation that slowed adoption in earlier generations.

- 6G massive IoT baseline single global solution; mandatory features.
- Unify fragmented LTE/NR IoT variants.
- Include multicast/group messaging support.
- IoT migration profile 35 MHz, 15 Mbps, single-antenna, HD-FDD.
- Target LTE Cat-M migration path.
- Keep cost/energy within IoT constraints.
- Diverse device types & IoT low-complexity to high-end UEs; eDRX/WUR/extended MCL.
- Scale bandwidth from 3 MHz to 400 MHz.
- Support wearables, XR, BCI, sensors.
- Support for verticals unified framework for IoT/RedCap/XR.
- Common toolbox with vertical-specific KPIs.
- Avoid vertical-specific forks in the standard.
- Immersive communication XR/holography/robotics; UL-heavy KPIs; multi-TRP consistency.
- Low-latency uplink for interaction loops.
- Stable QoE via coordinated TRPs.
- Fixed Wireless Access account for FWA traffic; UL MIMO/power for CPEs.
- Dimension uplink for asymmetric loads.
- Optimize for outdoor/indoor CPE scenarios.
In 6G, Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) is treated as a core air-interface function, not a side feature. The goal is to use the same spectrum, waveforms, and hardware for both communication and sensing, so networks dont need separate infrastructure.
This shift starts at the physical layer. Monostatic designsboth full-duplex and pulsedalong with bistatic configurations are under study. The key idea is to share RF chains to lower cost and shrink the hardware footprint. Self-interference is the main technical challenge, especially in full-duplex sensing. Overcoming it is essential for stable ISAC operation.
A major enabler is reference signal reuse. Instead of adding heavy sensing-specific signaling, 6G leverages SSB, CSI-RS, and SRS in FR1 and FR3. Dedicated RS is reserved mainly for FR2, where higher angular resolution is required. Even user-to-user sensing is being explored under the same principle: minimize RS overhead while keeping communication reliable. This keeps the interface lean while maintaining sensing accuracy.
The ISAC vision goes beyond the PHY layer. Sensing-as-a-Service is expected to emerge as a new operator offering. Networks will expose detection, tracking, and situational awareness through standardized APIs. This creates new business opportunities, but it also requires strict privacy, policy, and security controls to protect sensing data.

In short, ISAC in 6G is both a technical and service-layer innovation. It combines connectivity and environmental awareness into a single, efficient, and secure network capability.
- ISAC design monostatic (FD/pulsed) & bistatic; common waveform/hardware.
- Share RF chains to reduce cost.
- Address self-interference for FD sensing.
- Common RS for comms & sensing SSB/CSI-RS/SRS in FR1/FR3; dedicated RS mainly in FR2; study U2U.
- Minimize added RS overhead.
- Preserve communication performance.
- Sensing-as-a-Service operator exposure/monetization.
- APIs for detection, tracking, situational awareness.
- Privacy and policy controls for shared data.
For 6G, NTN integration is treated as a natural extension of terrestrial networks, not a separate track. Past experience with 5G showed that many NTN featureslike coverage extensions, RACH-less handover, and extended HARQended up benefiting terrestrial networks too. So, 6G begins with a unified TN/NTN design philosophy.
This means common mechanisms for search, initial access, HARQ, and even multi-satellite support. Only a few NTN-specific adaptations are added where absolutely necessary.
Several challenges shape this design. Delay and Doppler variations, especially from LEO satellites, require stronger uplink timing control, PRACH repetitions, and more robust random access. In GNSS-limited situations, terminals may need to run fully GNSS-free. So, frequency offset handling, time alignment, and beam or AoDbased mobility become critical.
Beamforming and mobility must also keep service continuous as satellites move in and out of view within minutes. The guiding idea is simple: reuse terrestrial mechanisms wherever possible, define lightweight NTN deltas, and keep one unified baseline.

This approach lowers cost, avoids ecosystem fragmentation, and turns NTN into an organic extension of the 6G radio system instead of a parallel silo.
- Unified TN/NTN design unified search, IA, HARQ, bands; multi-satellite; CA; GNSS-less options.
- Reuse TN mechanisms where feasible.
- Define minimal NTN-specific deltas.
- NTN aspects PRACH reps with FO/TA; AoD-based mobility; delay/Doppler handling.
- Robust access in GNSS-limited scenarios.
- Mitigate mobility with beam/AoD support.
In 6G, device diversity is treated as a core design axis, not an afterthought. The standard is built as one modular framework that scales from basic sensors to advanced immersive headsets. The idea is simple: one common toolbox for all verticals, not fragmented RATs or separate profiles.
Features scale by capability tiers. Low-power IoT devices focus on coverage and battery life. High-tier UEs unlock full eMBB or URLLC performance. This keeps interoperability intact even as device complexity varies widely.
The design supports a broad range of channel bandwidths. IoT can run on as little as 3 MHz, while XR or braincomputer interfaces can use up to 400 MHz. Graceful degradation is a key principle. Low-tier devices operate efficiently without carrying the burden of high-end features. High-tier devices, on the other hand, can scale throughput and latency to match their hardware and use cases.
FR2 devices are a special focus. The framework expects single-panel UE designs to lower cost and simplify manufacturing. Power efficiency and reliability are balanced carefully. Even with leaner hardware, smart beam management and adaptive signaling keep mmWave links strong.

Altogether, the 6G device and capability framework brings forward compatibility, cost efficiency, and scalable performance into one ecosystem. It ensures that every devicefrom a tiny sensor to an advanced XR headsetfits into the same standard.
- Scalable, modular design min KPIs (massive IoT) → eMBB/URLLC; single toolbox.
- One spec set for all verticals.
- Scale features by device capability tiers.
- Diverse devices & channel bandwidth 3400 MHz CBW across AR/VR/wearables/BCI/IoT.
- Balance power vs. throughput per device class.
- Enable graceful degradation on low-tier UEs.
- FR2 device design single-panel UE trade-offs for cost/power vs. reliability.
- Reduce UE BOM and complexity.
- Maintain link robustness at mmWave.
In 6G, testing, certification, and standardization are being redesigned to avoid the fragmented, option-heavy model of past generations. The focus is on global minimum capability sets that every device and network must support. This creates a tighter baseline and ensures interoperability across regions and vendors.
Certification is treated as a binding process between networks and UEs. It checks not just standalone compliance but also how well devices and networks work together in real deployments. By making key features mandatory and tracking their adoption from the first release, 6G avoids the trap of optional features that never gain traction.
This disciplined approach shortens time-to-market and reduces fragmentation. It also gives operators and vendors more confidence that deployed features will actually be supported in the field.

In short, 6G certification is leaner, stricter, and more globally harmonized. It ties standardization directly to practical deployment, ensuring smoother rollout and wider interoperability.
- New testing & certification paradigm global minimum capability sets; binding network/UE certification; avoid excessive options.
- Track deployment of mandatory features.
- Improve interoperability and time-to-market.
Reference
- RAN1#122 (2025-08-25 - Bengaluru(IN))
- RP-251881 New SID: Study on 6G Radio NTT DOCOMO (Moderator)
- R1-2506303 RAN1 workplan for Rel-20 Study of 6GR NTT DOCOMO, China Mobile, AT&T, Vodafone
- R1-2505125 Nokia Views on 6G Radio Air Interface Nokia
- R1-2505143 High level views on 6GR air interface FUTUREWEI
- R1-2505170 Spreadtrum overview on 6GR air interface Spreadtrum, UNISOC
- R1-2505181 Overview of 6GR air interface Huawei, HiSilicon
- R1-2505263 Overview of 6GR Air Interface Google
- R1-2505285 Discussion on the overview of 6GR air interface TCL
- R1-2505295 Outline and highlight of 6GR air interface CATT, CICTCI
- R1-2505414 Overall design considerations on 6GR air interface vivo
- R1-2505461 6GR air interface design overview Xiaomi
- R1-2505509 High-level views on 6GR ZTE Corporation, Sanechips
- R1-2505511 Overview proposal of 6GR air interface Panasonic
- R1-2505516 Overview of 6GR air interface China Telecom
- R1-2505519 Overview of 6GR air interface NVIDIA
- R1-2505582 Design of 6GR air interface Samsung
- R1-2505612 Tiami Networks views on 6G Radio Interface Tiami Networks
- R1-2505627 Clarifying MRSS Requirement for 6G Waveforms Cohere Technologies
- R1-2505648 Overview of 6GR air interface Pengcheng Laboratory, BUPT
- R1-2505650 Overview of the 6G air interface Ericsson Telecom S.A. de C.V.
- R1-2505655 Views on 6GR air interface Fainity Innovation
- R1-2505673 Initial Views on 6GR Air Interface Ofinno
- R1-2505755 Overview of 6GR: A unified air interface with modular design OPPO
- R1-2505763 Overview of 6GR air interface InterDigital, Inc.
- R1-2505771 Intels view on 6GR air interface Intel
- R1-2505790 Overview of 6GR air-interface Lenovo
- R1-2505798 Overview of 6GR air interface KT Corp.
- R1-2505813 Overview of 6GR air interface Fraunhofer IIS, Fraunhofer HHI
- R1-2505854 Views on overall design and techniques for 6GR air interface LG Electronics
- R1-2505865 6G Radio Access Needs Overview T-Mobile USA Inc.
- R1-2505911 Revised in R1-2506396 Overview of 6GR air interface Apple
- R1-2505933 Overview of 6GR air interface NEC
- R1-2505957 Overview on 6G Air interface Tejas Network Limited
- R1-2505967 Fujitsus view of 6GR air interface Fujitsu
- R1-2505982 Overview of 6GR air interface Sharp
- R1-2506002 Discussion on overview of 6GR air interface HONOR
- R1-2506018 Overview of 6GR air interface MediaTek Inc.
- R1-2506063 Overview of the 6GR air interface ETRI
- R1-2506095 Overview of 6GR air interface CMCC
- R1-2506116 Overview of 6GR air interface Sony
- R1-2506139 Discussion on the Overview of 6GR Air Interface Rakuten Mobile, Inc
- R1-2506150 Views on overview of 6GR air interface SK Telecom
- R1-2506156 Physical-layer security considerations for 6G Radio (6GR) ST Engineering iDirect, Philips
- R1-2506164 Discussion on 6G Radio TOYOTA Info Technology Center
- R1-2506216 Overview of 6GR air interface Qualcomm Incorporated
- R1-2506238 Views on 6GR Air Interface Design AT&T, Ericsson
- R1-2506262 Views on 6G AI-native System Design CAICT
- R1-2506304 Discussion on overview of 6GR air interface NTT DOCOMO, INC.
- R1-2506323 Overview of 6G Radio air interface WILUS Inc.
- R1-2506325 General aspects of 6G IoT and NTN Nordic Semiconductor ASA
- R1-2506326 Discussion on Overview of 6GR air interface China Unicom
- R1-2506327 Overview of 6GR air interface THALES
- R1-2506335 Views on 6GR air interface CSCN
- R1-2506358 Overview of 6G Air Interface CEWiT
- R1-2506365 Overview of 6GR air interface KDDI Corporation
- R1-2506368 Views on 6GR air interface design criteria NICT
- R1-2506394 Views on 6G PHY choices BT, Orange, Vodafone, Deutsche Telekom, Turkcell, KPN
- RAN1#123 (2025-11-17 - Dallas(US)
- R1-2508314 LS on 6GR system parameter evaluations RAN4, Huawei
- R1-2508320 More high level views on the 6GR air interface FUTUREWEI
- R1-2508321 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface FUTUREWEI
- R1-2508334 Nokia Views on Selected Aspects of 6G Radio Air Interface Nokia
- R1-2508335 On Evaluation Assumptions for Study of 6G Radio Air Interface Nokia
- R1-2508352 Overview of the 6G air interface Ericsson
- R1-2508386 Overview of 6GR air interface Spreadtrum, UNISOC
- R1-2508392 Discussion on AIML in 6GR interface Spreadtrum, UNISOC
- R1-2508430 Overview of 6GR air interface vivo
- R1-2508431 Evaluation methodology and assumptions for 6GR air interface vivo
- R1-2508453 Overview of 6GR air interface CMCC
- R1-2508454 Discussion on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface CMCC
- R1-2508472 Overview of 6GR air interface THALES
- R1-2508473 Discussion on Evaluation Assumptions and Performance Evaluation for ISAC Tiami Networks
- R1-2508474 Discussion on Overview of 6GR Air Interface Tiami Networks
- R1-2508476 Overview of 6GR air interface Fraunhofer IIS, Fraunhofer HHI
- R1-2508515 AI/ML for 6G Air Interface InterDigital, Inc.
- R1-2508523 Overview of 6GR air interface TCL
- R1-2508524 Discussion on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface ZTE Corporation, Sanechips
- R1-2508560 Overview of 6GR air interface NEC
- R1-2508562 Feature Lead summary #1 on 6G waveform Moderator (Nokia)
- R1-2508563 Feature Lead summary #2 on 6G waveform Moderator (Nokia)
- R1-2508564 Feature Lead summary #3 on 6G waveform Moderator (Nokia)
- R1-2508579 Outline and highlight of 6GR air interface CATT, CICTCI
- R1-2508580 Discussion on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface CATT
- R1-2508582 AI/ML in 6GR interface CATT, CICTCI
- R1-2508613 Discussion on ISAC evaluation assumptions and performance evaluation China Telecom
- R1-2508614 Overview of 6GR air interface China Telecom
- R1-2508618 Evaluation assumptions and performance evaluation for ISAC EURECOM
- R1-2508619 Overview of 6GR air-interface Lenovo
- R1-2508620 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Lenovo
- R1-2508625 Waveform for 6GR Air Interface Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
- R1-2508627 Discussion on 6G Evaluation Requirements NEC
- R1-2508631 Waveform for 6GR air interface InterDigital, Inc.
- R1-2508632 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface InterDigital, Inc.
- R1-2508637 High-Level Considerations for the 6GR Air Interface Design AT&T
- R1-2508638 Evaluation Assumptions for 6GR Air Interface AT&T
- R1-2508643 AI/ML use cases and framework for 6GR Air Interface AT&T
- R1-2508682 6GR air interface design overview Xiaomi
- R1-2508683 Discussion on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Xiaomi
- R1-2508725 Overview of 6GR air interface OPPO
- R1-2508726 Evaluation assumption for 6GR air interface OPPO
- R1-2508732 AIML use cases for 6GR air interface OPPO
- R1-2508733 Overview of 6GR air interface Huawei, HiSilicon
- R1-2508734 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Huawei, HiSilicon
- R1-2508735 Waveform for 6GR air interface Huawei, HiSilicon
- R1-2508741 Overview of 6GR air interface InterDigital, Inc.
- R1-2508798 Discussion on ISAC evaluation assumptions and performance evaluation Samsung
- R1-2508800 Design of 6GR air interface Samsung
- R1-2508801 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR Samsung
- R1-2508824 Overview on 6G Air interface Tejas Network Limited
- R1-2508825 Evaluation Assumptions for 6GR Air Interface Tejas Network Limited
- R1-2508855 High-level views on 6GR ZTE Corporation, Sanechips
- R1-2508856 Views on the waveform for 6G ZTE Corporation, Sanechips
- R1-2508862 Features for 6GR Air Interface National Spectrum Consortium
- R1-2508865 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR Intel
- R1-2508874 Overview of 6GR air interface Amazon Web Services
- R1-2508878 Study on 7 - 24 GHz frequency range for NR Spark NZ Ltd
- R1-2508880 Overview proposal of 6GR air interface Panasonic
- R1-2508918 Fujitsus view of 6GR air interface Fujitsu
- R1-2508934 Evaluation Assumptions for 6GR Air Interface Tejas Network Limited, CEWiT, IIT Madras
- R1-2508936 Overview of 6GR air interface NVIDIA
- R1-2508937 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface NVIDIA
- R1-2508945 Overview of 6GR Air Interface Google
- R1-2508971 Overview of the 6GR air interface ETRI
- R1-2508972 Discussion on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface ETRI
- R1-2508993 Discussion on overview of 6GR air interface HONOR
- R1-2509026 Discussion on 6GR Air Interface Ofinno
- R1-2509052 On Evaluation Assumptions for the 6GR air interface Google
- R1-2509055 NTN Characteristics for the Evaluation Assumptions for 6GR air interface ESA, Thales, Viasat, Eutelsat, Airbus, SES, Hispasat
- R1-2509061 Overview of 6GR air interface Sharp
- R1-2509062 Discussion on 6GR evaluation assumptions Sharp
- R1-2509072 Overview of 6GR air interface Sony
- R1-2509073 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Sony
- R1-2509108 Overview of 6GR air interface Apple
- R1-2509109 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Apple
- R1-2509117 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR Ericsson AB.
- R1-2509132 Discussion on Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Ofinno
- R1-2509133 Discussion on waveform for 6GR air interface Ofinno
- R1-2509134 General aspects of 6G IoT Nordic Semiconductor ASA
- R1-2509139 Overview of 6GR air interface KT Corp.
- R1-2509141 Overview of 6GR air interface MediaTek Inc.
- R1-2509142 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface MediaTek Inc.
- R1-2509170 Discussion on 6G Radio for NTN TOYOTA Info Technology Center
- R1-2509229 Overview of 6GR air interface Qualcomm Incorporated
- R1-2509230 Evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Qualcomm Incorporated
- R1-2509256 Draft reply LS on 6GR system parameter evaluations NTT DOCOMO, INC.
- R1-2509288 FL summary#1 on overview of 6GR air interface Moderator (NTT DOCOMO)
- R1-2509289 FL summary#2 on overview of 6GR air interface Moderator (NTT DOCOMO)
- R1-2509290 FL summary#3 on overview of 6GR air interface Moderator (NTT DOCOMO)
- R1-2509291 FL summary#4 on overview of 6GR air interface Moderator (NTT DOCOMO)
- R1-2509292 FL summary#5 on overview of 6GR air interface Moderator (NTT DOCOMO)
- R1-2509333 Discussion on 6GR air interface IIT Kanpur
- R1-2509335 Views on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface CSCN
- R1-2509337 Views on 6GR air interface CSCN
- R1-2509339 Overview of 6GR air interface KDDI Corporation
- R1-2509348 Overview of 6G Air Interface CEWiT
- R1-2509355 Overview of 6G Radio air interface ITL
- R1-2509360 Discussion on 6G energy efficiency Google
- R1-2509361 Energy Efficiency in 6G Radio ITL
- R1-2509366 Discussion on the Overview of 6GR Air Interface Rakuten Mobile, Inc
- R1-2509379 Discussion on coverage enhancement DENSO CORPORATION
- R1-2509382 Overview of 6G Radio air interface WILUS Inc.
- R1-2509385 FLS#1 on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Moderator (Huawei)
- R1-2509386 FLS#2 on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Moderator (Huawei)
- R1-2509387 FLS#3 on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Moderator (Huawei)
- R1-2509388 FLS#4 on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Moderator (Huawei)
- R1-2509389 FLS#5 on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Moderator (Huawei)
- R1-2509390 FLS#6 on evaluation assumptions for 6GR air interface Moderator (Huawei)
- R1-2509413 OSDM for 6GR University of Sheffield
- R1-2509415 Maintenance for 724 GHz channel model Ericsson
- R1-2509455 Overview of 6GR air interface Sharp
- R1-2509520 Maintenance for 724 GHz channel model Ericsson
|
|