Synchronization

solutions in 5G
transport
network

ericsson.com/mobile-transport
2 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network

Introduction
Accurate and reliable synchronization has long been a fundamental prerequisite
for the correct operation of telecommunications networks and it will be so in
5G. All synchronization requirements for 5G networks are driven from the New
Radio (NR) interface synchronization requirements defined by 3GPP. These
requirements are not more stringent, but are becoming more essential in 5G
than in 4G, therefore seamless synchronization operation is fundamental to
unlock the full potential of 5G. To efficiently address RAN synchronization
requirements, a good understanding of all the technology options for
synchronization distribution in transport networks is essential as the most
suitable and cost-efficient sync solution may be different from case to case.

The role and importance of synchronization distribution in transport networks has varied
during the different mobile generations.
The importance of synchronization distribution in the transport network has grown with
4G, and it will be more important than ever in 5G and future networks due to the need
of accurate phase alignment in the RAN. Although the fundamental synchronization
requirements have not become more stringent in 5G compared to 4G (and in some cases
became more relaxed), the need for time synchronization is critical, as new fronthaul
network architectures open new opportunities and new challenges for synchronization
distribution.
Finding the right balance between timing accuracy, availability and cost is key to make
services successful. To achieve this, a good understanding of all the technology options
for synchronization distribution in transport networks is essential, but not enough. It is
also important to understand RAN technology drivers for synchronization, and how that
translates to transport network requirements in various network scenarios.
The Ericsson Transport portfolio, including the MINI-LINK 6000, Router 6000 and
Fronthaul 6000 product families, is developed to address all relevant synchronization
requirements of 5G RAN in various transport scenarios. End-to-end solutions are verified
across the products providing operators with the benefit of guaranteed performance,
ease of use and quick synchronization solution rollouts.

To understand how Ericsson Transport products support synchronization

solutions in various positions of the network, this paper gives a comprehensive
picture of the 5G transport network synchronization landscape, including:
• an overview of RAN drivers for synchronization,
• the corresponding transport network synchronization requirements,
• the transport technology toolbox for synchronization and
• guidelines on how to find the right solution in various network deployments
(both fronthaul and backhaul) using the Ericsson Transport portfolio
to reach a reliable, cost efficient and easy-to-monitor synchronization
network in transport.
Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network 3

RAN drivers for 5G synchronization

All synchronization requirements for 5G networks are driven from the New Radio (NR)
interface synchronization requirements defined by 3GPP. Such requirements related to
communication over the radio interface can be divided into the following categories:
• FDD synchronization requirements
• TDD cell phase synchronization requirements
• Time Alignment Error (TAE) requirements of communication features based on
coordinated transmission or reception from multiple Transmission Reception Points
(TRxPs).
In the following sections we give a summary of these requirements; for further details
read [1].

FDD synchronization
requirements
Frequency accuracy requirements on the
air interface of FDD networks has not
changed in recent generations, being
50 ppb at the radio air interface [2],
and corresponding 16 ppb at RBS input
interface (according to ITU-T G.8261.1).
A new and important change in 5G is
the need for time synchronization of the
NR-FDD radio to allow for neighbor cell
discovery for the UE for handover. To
provide overlap of the 1 ms discovery
time gap of neighboring cells, a ±500 µs
time alignment requirement has been
introduced.
This level of time alignment is a special
case for RAN time synchronization that
allows for transport synchronization
solutions that are far simpler than those
required for TDD networks.

TDD cell phase

synchronization
TDD cells operating at the same frequency of a budget to the different components of references across different operators
(or adjacent frequencies) in overlapping the guard period is the result of a trade-off operating at overlapping coverage areas,
coverage areas require time domain between cost (product and deployment), by creating absolute accuracy requirements
isolation to prevent base-station-to-base- availability, TDD periodicity and overheads. that apply to all TDD networks.
station and UE-to-UE radio frequency
In 5G NR-TDD, cell phase synchronization ITU-T G.827x recommendations [4]
interference. For TDD synchronicity and
is specified as 3 μs [2] – a requirement that are translating this 3GPP cell phase
interference, the critical points are when
is also applicable for LTE-TDD [3]. synchronization requirement to
switching between transmission and
telecommunication network requirements,
reception. Guard periods are used for The practical interpretation of cell phase
deriving network limits and device specific
isolation with a configurable total guard synchronization is defined by ITU-T in
functional and performance requirements
time expressed as an integer number terms of maximum deviation in relation to
for transport network equipment, providing
of symbols. To decrease guard time a common absolute timing requirement,
a comprehensive set of synchronization
overheads, the emphasis is on striving to dividing that requirement by half
requirements that are applicable for
keep the guard periods short, while still (i.e. ±1.5 μs). This allows network designs
backhaul networks.
catering for the desired effects. Allocation with independent synchronization
4 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network

Communication features
based on coordinated
transmission or reception
A variety of features that benefit from
coordinated transmission or receptions
from multiple TRxPs have been
standardized over the years, all with
different purposes and characteristics:
• some relate to combining spectrum
assets, thereby allowing total higher
aggregated bandwidth and through-
put (carrier aggregation (CA), dual
connectivity (DC) and so on)
• others relate to improving link
performance at the cell edge (e.g.
variants of coordinated multi-point
operation).
• still others relate to specific services
like Multimedia Broadcast Multicast
Service over a Single Frequency
Network. Coordination may also occur
between NR and LTE.
These features are applicable within
a single operator network and cells
with overlapping coverage, and as
a result, control of relative time error
between antennas used by the feature
is sufficient within the specific area.
The most stringent TAE requirements
range between 65 ns to 260 ns, but
are only valid for collocated/intra-site
deployments, and are therefore not
applicable to backhaul scenarios.
With the evolution towards packet
switched fronthaul and centralized
RAN architecture, however, some
of these requirements may become
relevant for transport solutions that
will support fronthaul scenarios. Such
networks will require careful analysis to
understand timing requirements – and
corresponding network planning to fulfill
them.
Inter-node CA and synchronous DC
have most of their benefits when 3 μs
TAE is achieved (same as for TDD), and
while they can operate at a lower level of
accuracies, their benefits will decrease.
The synchronization requirements of
Ericsson Spectrum Sharing for efficient
combination of LTE and NR resources are
inherited from the requirements of the
combined technologies.
 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network 5

Summary of 5G Figure 1.
RAN drivers
The synchronization requirements for 5G
Synchronization requirements Relevance for
RAN are summarized in Figure 1, showing transport networks
of RAN technologies
the various synchronization types and Tight
performance levels of requirements. ≤ 1 μs RAN internal requirements,
Coordinated transmission or reception
Relative applicable for fronthaul networks

Time Sync
The main novelty in 5G is that NR-FDD has ~1.5 μs Time Division Duplex (NR/LTE-TDD)
a ±500 µs time alignment requirement, Absolute Carrier Aggregation (CA)
on top of the 50 ppb frequency stability 500 µs NR-FDD Requirements applicable for
requirement of LTE-FDD. The co-existence Absolute Neighbour cell measurements backhaul transport networks
of both NR-FDD and LTE-FDD at the same
Sync
Freq

50 ppb LTE-FDD
geographical area makes ±500 μs time Loose
alignment also required for LTE-FDD.
Figure 1: Synchronization requirements of RAN technologies applicable at radio interface
Cell phase sync requirements impose
a strict need for accurate time
synchronization for NR-TDD networks. This
3µs requirement is translated to the most2021-01-07
directly applicable for traditional transport Universal Time (UTC)) to allow networks
often mentioned ±1.5 µs requirement for
backhaul networks, but may be applicable from multiple operators to operate within
transport networks, and supported by the
locally for fronthaul networks or for the same geographical area.
G.827x set of recommendations, defined
collocated/intra-site deployments.
by ITU-T. The same performance level is For coordinated features, however, the
recommended for inter-node CA or for dual It is important to understand the difference time alignment requirements only apply to
connectivity. between absolute and relative timing the antennas that are participating in the
requirements, as explained in Figure 2. coordination, meaning such requirements
Finally, the most stringent timing
are relative within these antennas and only

Figure 2.
requirements are driven by coordinated All antenna reference points in NR-TDD
apply locally within a coordination area.
transmission or reception features networks must be aligned within ±1.5 µs
imposing relative time error requirements to a common timescale (common time
for these features. These are, however, not reference traceable to the Coordinated

Coordination area 1.
3GPP specifications for coordinated

e.g. ±260 ns

RU
Relative Time Error

transmission or reception

CPRI
R R
Baseband Router Router GNSS
RU

RU
e.g. ±130 ns

RU
R R
eCPRI
Router Router
Baseband
RU
T-GM
Coordination area 2.

Fronthaul Backhaul

±1500 ns ±1100 ns ±100 ns 0 ns

Absolute Time Error

3GPP specifications for TDD cell phase synchronization
ITU-T G.8271.1 Network limits

Figure 2: Absolute vs. relative time alignment requirements

2021-01-07
6 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network

Technology options
To efficiently address RAN synchronization requirements, a good understanding of all the
technology options for synchronization distribution in transport networks is essential.
Synchronization technologies can be implemented in the physical layer and/or in the
packet layer to deliver frequency and/or time synchronization. Synchronization solutions
can further be categorized depending on whether they require hardware support from the
transport network.

Frequency synchronization
technologies
In 5G networks all radio technologies
require some level of time synchronization,
therefore relevance of frequency
synchronization technologies has been
declined.
Two main use-cases remain for frequency
synchronization:
• to provide hybrid operation for PTP
in G.8275.1 profile with Synchronous
Ethernet
• to provide prolonged time holdover
for TDD networks, using enhanced
Synchronous Ethernet
Ethernet technology is – by its original
nature – an asynchronous technology,
which was subsequentially enhanced to
support physical layer synchronization by
additional HW circuitry. Therefore, when
Ethernet is used for frequency distribution
in the physical layer it is required that each
node and link in the synchronization path
supports synchronous mode, otherwise the
synchronization chain is broken.
Standard synchronous Ethernet technology
is suitable to distribute stable frequency
base for accurate time synchronization in
G.8275.1 profile as defined by ITU-T.
The new generation of this technology,
defined by ITU-T as Enhanced Synchronous
Ethernet (G.8262.1), allows for even more
stable distribution synchronization suitable
not only for hybrid Synchronous Ethernet
and PTP, but also to prolong time holdover.
While microwave technology is fully
capable to distribute enhanced synchronous
ethernet, leased lines are typically not. A
leased line is typically a 3PP-controlled
network through multiple hops, not a direct
hard line, and therefore is not transparent
for the underlying synchronization signals.
 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network 7

Figure 3.
Time synchronization
technologies
The time synchronization toolbox consists G.8271.1 Network Reference Points
of several options and combinations,
including GNSS at all base stations, PTP E A/B
protocol in different profiles, and various
GNSS
combinations of these.
GNSS at all base stations
Base station
Connecting a GNSS receiver to the RBS
subsystem at each RBS site by installing RBS internal
Time holdover budget GNSS
a GNSS antenna at rooftop or mast-top TE budget
(1000 ns) (100 ns)
(400 ns)
is a simple and direct solution to address
timing requirements of the RAN network.
±100 ns
Installation is usually straightforward,
±1500 ns 0 ns
provides excellent accuracy ( ±100 ns,
in case of good sky view), simple Figure 3: Time Error budget for RBS with GNSS installations
troubleshooting and most importantly
eliminates the need of timing distribution in
the transport network when the network is
not yet prepared to support it.
In this way the timing requirements of The most straightforward backup is the Another option to provide backup for GNSS
the RAN network are fulfilled without any G.8275.2 profile of PTP as an assisted is to use enhanced synchronous ethernet
involvement from the transport network. partial timing reference: local GNSS is the as assisting reference for time holdover
Such setup also allows a reasonable TE primary time source and is used as the periods. In such cases, when GNSS is lost,
budget for time holdover in the RBS, as active reference at the RBS site, while at time holdover stability is provided based
2021-01-07
shown in Figure 3. any GNSS outages the PTP signal provides on the synchronous ethernet signal. A
stable phase reference for an extended frequency reference, traceable to a Primary
A single reference is never a safe choice, so time holdover. Static asymmetry of the Reference Time Clock (PRTC), distributed
there is a need for backup in case of loss of PTP is characterized while both GNSS and over enhanced Synchronous Ethernet
the GNSS signal. The main backup options PTP sessions are active, and therefore capable devices, may extend time holdover
are: G.8275.2 does not require hardware as long as the frequency reference signal is
• Assisted Partial Timing Support (APTS) support or awareness in the transport uninterrupted.
profile of PTP as defined in network other than an appropriate quality
Another alternative to provide backup
ITU-T G.8275.2 of service design to minimize PDV (e.g.
for GNSS is time distribution in the RAN
forwarding messages in the highest priority
• Enhanced Synchronous Ethernet network (either as a GNSS assisting backup,
queue). In Ericsson RBS maximum PDV for
assisted time holdover or as a synchronization timing channel),
G.8275.2 APTS is 42 μs, which needs to be
called Over the Air Synchronization, a
• Over the Air Synchronization within provided for the PTP session through traffic

Figure 4.
technology that uses the radio air interface
the RAN engineering in the transport network.
communication between base stations
While the G.8275.1 profile of PTP may also For PTP unaware networks G.8271.2 to achieve accurate synchronization.
be used as GNSS backup, it is more typical to provides guidelines and examples for time This technology can complement timing
use it as primary source at the RBS with no error budget dimensioning, explained in distribution solutions of the transport.
GNSS reference, as discussed in next section. Figure 4.

G.8271.2 Network Reference Points G.8271.2 Network Reference Points

E C G.8275.2 (APTS)
A/B E C A/B

GNSS GNSS GNSS GNSS

Enh SyncE Enh SyncE

Base station T-GM Base station T-GM

PTP Unaware network PTP Unaware network
RBS internal RBS internal
Time holdover budget T-GM Time holdover budget T-GM
TE budget TE budget
(1000 ns) (100 ns) (1000 ns) (100 ns)
(400 ns) (400 ns)

±100 ns ±100 ns
±1500 ns 0 ns ±1500 ns 0 ns

Figure 4: GNSS at base station with assisting references, G.8275.2 (left) and enhanced Synchronous Ethernet (right)
8 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network

Figure 5.
Full timing PTP distribution in the Full Timing Network PTP unaware Network
transport network
Concerns regarding relying on GNSS are GNSS
G.8275.1 G.8275.1
increasing, as availability of a GNSS timing
reference may be impacted by multiple
Base station edge T-GM G.8275.2
intended or unintended sources (jammers or
GNSS
spoofers by police or military operations or
from the grey zone) [5]. Moreover, rooftop Full Timing Network
installations and in-building cablings can be core T-GM
G.8275.2
impractical, costly, or simply not possible at G.8275.1 G.8275.1
GNSS

some network sites (especially indoor).

Base station edge T-GM
To address this challenge, the evolution
towards accurate, reliable, and redundant
5G timing solutions leads to timing Figure 5: Introducing full timing in the RAN-near transport domain
distribution in the transport network
through the G.8275.1 profile of PTP, that is
full timing support (FTS) from the network. attention and careful planning to be able to where PTP support in the network is
It is a very attractive complement to GNSS, deliver accurate time distribution. provided. This is shown in Figure 5, with the
with the potential to eliminate exclusive formation of disjoint PTP areas in the RAN-
PTP also supports automatic formation of
dependence on local GNSS for sync. near transport domain. Each area should
a loop-free master-slave topology using
be installed with redundant time sources,
The PTP protocol in G.8275.1 profile the Best Master Clock Algorithm (BMCA)
2021-01-07 typically a few edge grandmaster devices
mandates timing support at each device in and rapidly adapts to any changes in the
per area.
the transport network to ensure accurate network topology. This helps to ensure
and robust distribution of the timing signal, a robust timing solution that provides While dedicated T-GM equipment with
otherwise the timing chain is broken. In this optimal PTP network topology according high-end internal oscillators are attractive
profile all nodes implement some type of to the network situation, influenced by any due to their time holdover capabilities, they
PTP clock – Telecom Boundary Clock (T-BC) optionally defined operator priorities. In also drive cost. Standard transport devices
or Telecom Transparent Clock, (T-TC) –, and doing so, the timing solution becomes as with a GNSS receiver and with built-in
distribute the PTP messages with hardware redundant as the transport network itself, T-GM functionality also fulfill 5G timing
assisted timestamping, giving the desired minimizing the need for time holdover requirements, while significantly lowering
accuracy to the clock recovery. (limited to cover the settling period of the cost.
network transients), while maximizing
Microwave as a technology is fully When PTP hardware support becomes
the availability and reliability of the 5G
capable of distributing accurate PTP more widely deployed in the network, PTP
network.
signals, however leased lines are typically full timing distribution can be enabled
problematic since they are not transparent Transport timing requirements are driven in larger network segments, potentially
for the PTP protocol. Other lower layer from the RAN timing needs, so introduction ranging from RAN to core leading towards
technologies, like OTN and WDM may of PTP full timing typically happens at GNSS independent transport solutions.
distribute PTP signals, but require special RAN-near part of the network, to an extent
 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network 9

Time Error budget allocation in time error of each PTP clock is a significant link asymmetries, if static over time and
G.8275.1 networks contributor, though not the only one. As a known, must be addressed by configuring
When PTP full timing is expanding in the rule of thumb half of the network budget compensation values in the PTP devices,
network, the accumulated time error of the is allocated for node time errors, while or sufficient budget needs to be reserved in
distributed PTP signal becomes important, the rest is reserved for other impairment the time error budget planning.
since each PTP clock in the distribution sources such as uncompensated link
Operators have the flexibility to do TE
chain slightly adds PTP error. asymmetries and network transients.
budget planning for their transport
G.8271.1 specifies network limits for The importance of link asymmetry network, allowing more budget to some

igure 6.
full timing networks matching the 3GPP compensation must be noted. While of these components at the expense of
requirements for 5G TDD networks, and microwave technology is inherently others, but must ensure that the ±1100 ns
provides guidelines and examples for time symmetrical in delays, fiber installations absolute maximum TE is not exceeded in
error budget dimensioning, as explained in and various optical technologies (OTN, the transport domain.
Figure 6. In these budget calculations the WDM, etc.) may have challenges. Such

G.8271.1 Network Reference Points

E C A/B
PTP Full Timing Support
GNSS
G.8275.1 G.8275.1

Base station T-GM

RBS internal Time holdover budget

TE budget (upto 400 ns)
Link cTE / NW transients
(upto 250 ns)
dTE of T-BCs cTE of T-BCs
(upto 200 ns) (upto 550 ns)

20+ x Class C
T-BCs
20 x Class B
T-BCs
10 x Class A T-GM
T-BCs
±100 ns
±1100 ns

Maximum allowed TE at G.8271.1 reference points ±1500 ns 0 ns

Figure 6: Network Time Error budget planning for full timing PTP networks, according to ITU-T G.8271.1

-07

Derived from these network limits, Class C supports enhanced backhaul timing PRTCs to form a distributed, coherent
G.8273.2 specifies the performance performance to stretch the chain length PRTC clock ensemble. Class D is not yet
characteristic requirements for a network beyond 20 devices or to leave more budget fully specified and not expected to be a
device implementing a Telecom Boundary for uncompensated link asymmetries and relevant accuracy requirement for standard
Clock at various performance levels. Class time holdover. Class C devices can also backhaul or switched fronthaul equipment.
A and Class B address regular transport address packet fronthaul applications.
network use-cases, with the main
Class D is intended for special time
difference being the number of T-BCs that
distribution solutions to interconnect
are allowed in a chain.

Maximum Constant Dynamic TE Dynamic TE Dynamic TE

G.8273.2 Absolute Time Error ow-pass low-pass high-pass
Time Error (cTE) (MTIE) (TDEV) (p2p)
Class A 100 ns ±50 ns 40 ns 4 ns 70 ns
Class B 70 ns ±20 ns 40 ns 4 ns 70 ns
Class C 30 ns ±10 ns 10 ns 2 ns Not spec.

Table 1: Performance specifications in ITU-T G.8273.2

 10 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network

Multi-profile scenarios default both the G.8275.1 and G.8275.2 This requires careful planning for the
There may be certain network scenarios networks are defined to consume the G.8275.1 network, complemented by
where the full timing area is small, entire ±1100 ns TE budget up to reference improved stability (lower PDV, reduced TE
consisting only of a few transport/ point C resulting in the consumption of budget) of the G.8275.2 timing recovery.
radio sites, meaning redundant T-GM twice the available TE budget.
The IEEE1588-2019 standard offers a
installations may become too costly
As shown in Figure 7, it is important useful extension for such scenarios: using
compared to the size of the PTP domain. In
to make sure that total time error the enhanced accuracy TLV a worst-case
this case, a single edge T-GM with GNSS as
accumulation in the G.8275.1 network estimation of the PTP signal inaccuracy can
primary timing source and a combination
and the G.8275.2 clock recovery stability be added to the PTP protocol messages,
of G.8275.1 (towards RBSs) and G.8275.2
does not exceed the requirements of allowing the end application to detect if

Figure 7.
profile (from a backup T-GM in the
the end application, even when the the received PTP signal is exceeding the
network) is a viable option.
synchronization is based on the core T-GM accuracy limits.
Network budget planning becomes and the combined G.8275.1 and G.8275.2
challenging in this scenario, since by distribution networks.

G.8271.1 Network Reference Points

A/B A/B
E C (edge T-GM) (core T-GM)

G.8275.2 (APTS)

GNSS GNSS
G.8275.1 G.8275.1

Base station edge T-GM core T-GM

G.8275.1 G.8275.2
Full Timing Network Timing Unaware Network
RBS internal T-GM
TE budget G.8275.1 total TE
(400 ns) G.8275.2 TE stability T-GM

±100 ns
±1100 ns
±1500 ns 0 ns

Figure 7: Network Time Error budget planning for combined PTP aware and unaware networks

-01-07
Figure 8.
Partial Timing scenarios
When a PTP signal traverses a PTP
unaware device without any timestamping
degradation are usually only observable
indirectly, through the degradation of RAN
network KPIs (e.g. interfering cells).
requirements of NR-FDD, providing a
simple and cost-effective solution for these
networks. In such cases the PDV tolerance
support, it may experience PDV and is also higher, up to 1ms in case or Ericsson
On the other hand, G.8275.2 partial timing
asymmetrical latencies in the downlink Baseband products.
solution can comfortably meet the ±500 μs
and uplink direction, resulting in time error
at the half of the mean asymmetry. Risk of
substantial asymmetry is especially high
over devices with different port speeds. G.8271.2 Network Reference Points
Asymmetry may also change at recablings
E C A/B
or network rearrangements, so asymmetry G.8275.2 (PTS)
calibration is not a safe remedy.
GNSS
NR-FDD
While using pure G.8275.2 partial timing
solutions without any GNSS at the end
application is an attractive option from Base station PTP Unaware network T-GM
a cost and simplicity perspective, such RBS internal Time accuracy budget T-GM
solutions have very limited applicability TE budget (100 ns)
(400 ns) (±500 us)
for TDD networks and are generally not
recommended. While in some cases TE
±100 ns
might be within the ±1.5 μs accuracy
±500 us (NR-FDD)
requirements, when it is exceeded it 0 ns
is challenging to detect or mitigate.
The consequences of time accuracy Figure 8: G.8275.2 partial timing for NR-FDD
 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network 11

Ericsson synchronization solution

for 5G transport networks
There is no one-size-fits-all solution for time synchronization. Each transport network
is unique and the most suitable and cost-efficient sync solution may be different from
case to case.
Depending where a network starts from and what the target solution is (influenced by
technology preferences, reliability goals, geopolitical situations, or state regulations), the
evolution path and the optimal solution could be different. Not all options and combinations
are suitable to meet the 5G timing requirements or provide an efficient and cost-effective
solution, therefore in the following we list the most typical and viable options.

Timing in backhaul
networks
In backhaul network scenarios planning The next step is to consider the transport to the cell site router. The latter has the
starts with understanding the RAN network preparedness for full timing advantage at large sites, because with a
technology that needs to be provided support, that is PTP support in network single GNSS receiver, all the RAN boxes can
with synchronization service. Figure 9. elements and transmission links, as be fed with timing.
summarizes the main combinations of discussed in 3.2.2. If the network is not
Such scenarios are well-supported by the
technology alternatives for various RAN prepared (no HW support for PTP in
Ericsson Router 6000 portfolio, which
technologies. equipment or significantly based on leased
provides full support for the G.8275.1
lines) or the PTP support is scattered and
Since most of the benefits of 5G technology and G.8275.2 profiles of PTP with Class C
network modernization is not expected in
can be achieved in the mid- and high- performance, enhanced EEC clock
the foreseeable future, then the most viable
bands, and those bands are suitable function and T-GM functionality with
option is to install GNSS receivers at all RBS
for TDD technology, the most future- GNSS receiver input, and automatic and

gure 9.
proof solution is to plan with NR-TDD
requirements, which specify
±1.5 μs at the RAN input.
sites with some backup reference: primarily
PTP in G.8275.2 profile or enhanced
Synchronous Ethernet. GNSS may either
smooth switchover between available
references, maximizing availability of the
synchronization signal towards the RBS.
be connected to the RBS equipment or

GNSS only GNSS + eSyncE

(holdover assist)
GNSS
GNSS GNSS eSyncE eSyncE
Carrier Aggregation (CA)

Base Station Base Station T-GM

No sync eSync PRTC

NR-TDD

GNSS GNSS
support Ethernet eSync Eth

GNSS + G.8275.2 G.8275.1

(APTS)
G.8275.2 GNSS GNSS
NR-FDD

G.8275.1 G.8275.1
GNSS

Base Station T-GM Base Station T-GM

No sync GNSS G.8275.1 G.8275.1 GNSS

GNSS
support G.8275.2 (w/wo SyncE) (w/wo SyncE) G.8275.1

G.8275.2
(PTS for ±500 us)
G.8275.2 GNSS

Base Station T-GM

No sync GNSS
G.8275.2
support G.8275.2

Figure 9: Transport network synchronization toolbox

 Figure 10.
12 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network

The natural next step in the evolution is

GNSS
to expand the full timing support in the
transport network further to the north PTP PTP
G.8275.1 G.8275.2
and distribute PTP from an edge T-GM, or T-BC-A
multiple redundant T-GMs, to all RBSs in a
R6000
network segment. (CSR)

This would allow saving GNSS installation Base station

Figure 11.
cost on most of the sites. Such full timing
scenarios can be extended over the
microwave transmission network as well.
G.8275.1
Full Timing Network
G.8275.2
Timing Unaware Network

Figure 10: GNSS at RBS site connected to Ericsson R6000 device (CSR)
Ericsson’s MINI-LINK product family
has proven PTP solutions for G.8275.1
profile, achieving Class B performance
or better [6].
In long term strategic plans for
synchronization it is advisable to consider a
GNSS-independent solution, which means GNSS

deploying a few high-quality PRTCs in the PTP

T-BC
PTP
T-BC
PTP
G.8275.1 G.8275.1 G.8275.2
core network that can operate without T-BC T-BC-A

GNSS for2021-01-07
long period of time (at least two
weeks), based on an assisting cesium R6000 MINI-LINK R6000
reference. (CSR) 6000 (edge T-GM)

Base station
By implementing G.8275.1 full timing
support all over the network, time can be G.8275.1 G.8275.2
Full Timing Network Timing Unaware Network
distributed redundantly and reliably to all
end points. Figure 11: PTP full timing distribution from an Ericsson Router 6000 edge T-GM via MINI-LINK 6000 hop

Timing in fronthaul
networks
2021-01-07
Fronthaul networks are traditionally point- and hence the TAE between RUs, may These are just a few examples of the
to-point direct connections between digital change over time, depending on which challenges that operators need to face,
baseband units (DU) and remote radio potential PTP path becomes active. It some of which are probably not fully
units (RU), where the baseband unit has full requires careful network planning and considered by some equipment vendors,
control of the timing of its attached radio some advanced PTP capabilities to keep making integration of equipment from
units. For advanced radio technologies, like the timing topology – and hence the TAE different vendors in their fronthaul network
various coordination features, tight time between RUs – under control, by forming more difficult for operators.
alignment of all the radio units are required a kind of PTP timing sub-segment from a
This is an evolving area, and there are not
in the range of 65-260 ns TAE. group of RUs intended for coordination.
yet standardized solutions to all possible
This is challenging even in point-to-point By decoupling the tight synchronization challenges. Ericsson, with its leading RAN
topologies, making single fiber installation control and adding multiple switches and fronthaul technologies, is pioneering
a preferred choice, as offered in Ericsson’s between DU and RU, multiple failure points future fronthaul synchronization solutions
Fronthaul 6000 optical portfolio. are introduced in the synchronization with the Ericsson Router 6673 fronthaul
chain, hence the availability of gateway, offering a flexible and feature-
With the advent of switched fronthaul
synchronization becomes an important rich synchronization solution for all
networks, it will be more challenging to
player in total system availability. Proper possible needs.
meet the timing requirements, driving
handling of synchronization network
requirements towards more accurate
transients both from the performance
PTP clocks. Clock performance, however,
and functional perspectives (e.g. clock
is not the only challenge in fronthaul
class signaling in various clock states) is
synchronization solutions. Another
of utmost importance, making consistent
important aspect to consider is the impact
network operation and interoperability
of flexible fronthaul topologies on the
between RAN and fronthaul transport
timing distribution: in redundant switched
equipment a critical network quality factor.
fronthaul networks the timing topology,
Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network 13

Towards an ultra-reliable
sync solution
As we have seen, synchronization requirements are not more stringent, but are becoming
more essential in 5G than in 4G. Seamless synchronization operation is fundamental
to unlock the full potential of 5G and to maintain uninterrupted network services. This
includes seamless management, easy monitoring and observability, as well as addressing
security challenges.

Management
Like for any other features, network-wide
operation requires flexible and efficient
configuration capabilities. Ericsson transport
products offer a wide range of management
options including configuration over GUI,
command line or various machine-to-

Figure 12.
machine interfaces (SNMP, YANG) and net-
work topology visualization. Synchroniza-
tion management models have not yet been
standardized but will hopefully be addressed
by IEEE and ITU-T in the coming years.

Monitoring, observability
PTP vs.
Network-wide monitoring and and monitor time error, traditionally GNSS
observability is key for quality assurance an external timing reference (typically PTP GNSS
G.8275.1 T-BC
and efficient troubleshooting in case GNSS) is required along with a dedicated PTP PTP vs.
G.8275.1
something goes wrong. This includes alarm measurement device that is connected to PTP
R6000
handling, and monitoring synchronization the network equipment in the field. This is
counters and PM data collection including usually cumbersome, costly and does not
historical 15mins / 24hours counters. Such scale in large networks. Figure 12: In-service time error monitoring without
PTP PM counters have been standardized external measurement equipment
Instead, the transport device could do
in IEEE1588-2019 [7] and all Ericsson
such in-service measurements in two main
transport equipment has support for them.
approaches, as shown in Figure 12: Such measurement functionality is offered
While these counters give a powerful by the Ericsson Router 6000 product
• Absolute time error measurement
tool for network operators to monitor family, making these products not only
between a GNSS and one or more PTP
and troubleshoot their PTP network, the feature-rich transport synchronization
references (when equipped with GNSS
ultimate limitation of all these monitoring devices, but also in-service time error
receiver)
options is that they do not reveal any time monitoring equipment that could report
error that could emerge from link delay • Relative time error measurement measurements in real-time over the
asymmetry or other sources. To measure between two PTP references standard management network.

Security
2021-01-07

Transport network security is growing in While there are various approaches facing interface). In G.8275.2 profile
importance. While time is not a secret and addressing security challenges, including encapsulation to IPSec tunnels may
therefore encryption is not needed, the new security TLV in IEEE1588-2019, address most threats.
reliability and authenticity of the synchro- most threats in the G.8275.1 profile can be
It is worth noting that with any security
nization references are of increasing impor- handled by proper configuration,
measures, asymmetrically delayed PTP
tance, especially if we understand that mainly by disabling sync on all ports that
messages through man-in-the-middle
radio service can be disturbed by taking the are not used for sync distribution, and
attacks may be unnoticeable, though
synchronization service down. A compre- forcing master-only mode on ports where
probably difficult to do.
hensive summary of the security require- PTP reference is not expected (e.g. client
ments of time protocols can be found in [8].
14 Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network

Summary
To efficiently address RAN synchronization requirements, a good
understanding of all the technology options for synchronization distribution in
transport networks is essential.
Although the fundamental synchronization requirements have not become
more stringent in 5G compared to 4G (and in some cases became more
relaxed), for many operators 5G will be the very first time they have to meet the
tight timing requirements of the TDD networks ( ±1.5 μs), with its very different
needs versus FDD, and with a much smaller holdover window if sync fails. On
top of this, NR-FDD also introduces the need for some level of time alignment,
though to a much more relaxed level ( ±500 μs).
Due to the coming wide deployment of TDD in 5G, the concept of “GNSS
everywhere” will not be feasible. Instead, adding PTP in G.8275.2 profile in
an (assisted) partial timing manner to the network could be the first step and
then continuously evolving towards G.8275.1 full timing, taking advantage of
the natural transport equipment depreciation/upgrade cycle to build time sync
capability through the entire transport network.
Ericsson’s transport portfolio has been built specifically to address the timing
needs of 5G RAN and is best-in-class for industry sync solutions both in
performance and in feature offer.
Ericsson | Synchronization solutions in 5G transport network 15

References
[1] 5G synchronization requirements and solutions, Ericsson Technology Review, January
2021., available at: https://www.ericsson.com/en/reports-and-papers/ericsson-
technology-review/articles/5g-synchronization-requirements-and-solutions
[2] 3GPP technical specification TS 38.133, NR; Requirements for support of
radio resource management, Chapter 7.,available at: https://portal.3gpp.org/
desktopmodules/Specifications/SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=3204
[3] 3GPP technical specification TS 36.133, LTE; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio
Access (E-UTRA); Requirements for support of radio resource management,
Chapter 7.,available at: https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/
SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=2420
[4] ITU-T Recommendations “G.8200-G.8299: Synchronization, quality and availability
targets”, available at https://www.itu.int/itu-t/recommendations/index.aspx?ser=G
[5] ITU Technical Report TP-GSTR-GNSS – Considerations on the use of GNSS as a
primary time reference in telecommunications, 2020, available at: https://www.itu.int/
pub/T-TUT-HOME-2020
[6] EANTC 2019 Interoperability White paper, available at https://eantc.de/fileadmin/
eantc/downloads/News/2019/EANTC-MPLSSDNNFV2019-WhitePaper-v1.2.pdf
[7] IEEE1588-2019 - IEEE Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization Protocol,
available at https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9120376
[8] Security Requirements of Time Protocols in Packet Switched Networks, IETF RFC
7384, available at https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7384

Abbreviations
3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project PRC Primary Reference Clock
APTS Assisted Partial Timing Support PRTC Primary Reference Time Clock
BMCA Best Master Clock Algorithm PTP Precision Time Protocol
CSR Cell Site Router RAN Radio Access Network
DU Digital Unit RBS Radio Base Station
eEEC Enhanced Ethernet Equipment Clock RU Radio Unit
FDD Frequency Division Duplex SNMP Simple Network Management Protocol
FTS Full Timing support T-BC Telecom Boundary Clock
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite Systems T-GM Telecom Grandmaster
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers T-TC Telecom Transparent Clock
ITU-T International Telecommunication Union TAE Time Alignment Error
– Telecommunication Standardization Sector
TDD Time Division Duplex
KPI Key Performance Indicator
TDM Time Division Multiplexing
NR New Radio
UE User Equipment
NTP Network Time Protocol
UTC Coordinated Universal Time
OTN Optical Transport Network
WDM Wavalength Division Multiplexing
Ericsson.com The content of this document is subject to EN/LZT 3/28701-FGB 101 08 59 Uen Rev A
revision without notice due to continued © Ericsson AB 2021
progress in methodology, design and
manufacturing. Ericsson shall have
no liability for any error or damage of
any kind resulting from the use of this
document