GSM and UMTS (P9)

to the Technical Bodies where the main work is beingdone; † to focus on semi-autonomous projects; † to aim at proper project management; † to allow the creation of ETSI Partnerships Proj

Chapter 9: The Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)

Section 1: The Creation of 3GPP

Karl Heinz Rosenbrock1

Having read the title, it should not surprise you that this section deals with the creation of thePartnership Project for the standardisation of a Third Generation Mobile CommunicationsSystem (3GPP)

Why, you may ask, in a history book about the GSM and UMTS development, do I want totalk about the establishment of a partnership project? Isn’t it the most natural thing to do?This is, of course, a stance an insider can take today – after nearly 30 months of 3GPP’screation and the smooth and successful running of this project

As this section will eventually show, it took quite some time, filled with tough and evenpassionate discussions, before the goal was achieved Approaching this idea from a ratherphilosophical point of view, one should not be too surprised about the big efforts needed,because already the old Greek ancestors knew that ‘‘prior to being successful the Gods willdemand some sweat’’…2

This section starts with some general considerations leading the European cations Standards Institute (ETSI) membership towards a global approach in standardisationand then deals with the establishment of an ad hoc group of the ETSI Board (UGG ¼ UMTSGlobalisation Group) to address the matter of global standardisation in this context and therelated meetings and discussions Afterwards, the 3GPP will be described in a rather generalmanner, highlighting how it works, who the stakeholders are and dealing with the resultsachieved so far The section is rounded up with the relationship towards the InternationalTelecommunication Union (ITU) and other initiatives as well as a few concluding remarks

Telecommuni-9.1.1 First Approaches to Globalisation

The re-engineering process ETSI, the ‘‘Excellent’’ Telecommunications Standards Institute

in Europe, undertook in the years 1995/1996 – only 7 years after its creation – resulted inamong others a kind of mission statement for the Institute: ‘‘Making international standardshappen first in Europe’’

1 The views expressed in this section are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of his affiliation entity.

2 One of my cruel translations of a German idiom ‘‘Vor den Erfolg haben die Go¨tter den Schweiß gesetzt’’…

Classical examples of ETSI success stories that witness this slogan are among others: theGlobal System for Mobile Communication (GSM); Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommu-nications (DECT); Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB); Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB);Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA), just to name a few of them.

In positioning ETSI in the standardisation landscape, it became clear that the trends andchanges towards globalisation, convergence and new value chains would lead to the creation

of a huge volume of standards making space Furthermore, it was not tenable for ETSI to try

to fill the entire space Choices had to be made In addition, the investigations revealed thatcollaboration by means of appropriate partnerships could be a promising formula

ETSI consciously withstood the temptation to become a global standards body But it hasalways undertaken great efforts to ensure that all of its products, i.e deliverables, such asEuropean Norms (ENs), ETSI Standards (ESs), ETSI Technical Specifications (TSs), etc.satisfy real market needs and have the potential to become global standards The ITU remainsETSI’s global partner of choice But the fast moving markets were expected to require ETSI

to supplement this with various international partnerships on a case-by-case basis

The high level task force that undertook the ETSI review in 1995/1996 advised the Institutethat it had to sustain its core competence of making high quality standards for large andcomplex telecommunications systems But, if neat demarcation lines are going to cease toexist, then ETSI must inevitably move more into the IT, audio-visual and other fields Itshould do this in good partnerships, where other Standards Developing Organisations (SDOs)

or appropriate fora and consortia are willing to co-operate with ETSI Retrenchment by ETSIwas not considered to be in Europe’s interest

Other results of interest here, of ETSI’s re-engineering process after 7 years of existencewere:

† to reduce the hierarchical structure in the Technical Organisation to a minimum;

† to delegate power (of approval, etc.) to the Technical Bodies where the main work is beingdone;

† to focus on semi-autonomous projects;

† to aim at proper project management;

† to allow the creation of ETSI Partnerships Projects (EPPs);

† to streamline and rationalise the ETSI Working Procedures;

† to improve the use of electronic tools for further rationalisation and innovation;

† to use audio and video conferencing;

† to broadcast inter-active meetings;

† to increase standards promotion activities;

† to facilitate and to promote direct electronic access to ETSI documents and deliverables,free of charge

Regarding ETSI’s external relations the advice given was: that ETSI should add to itsstrength through partnerships in complementing areas, ceding some sovereignty on a case-by-case basis to achieve common purposes

ETSI should continue its dialogue (in GSC/RAST) with its major regional/national terparts, with the objective of strengthening arrangements for effective co-operation and beprepared to enter into bilateral co-operation on a case-by-case basis

coun-With this short excerpt of some basic results stemming from the ETSI re-engineering

process undertaken in the middle of the 1990s, we have the fertile soil, i.e the driving forces,motivations, basic elements needed in order to establish a partnership project.

The tremendous success story of GSM may have even led some ETSI members to believethat it would have been the most natural choice to repeat this with the third generation mobilecommunication system within ETSI, too But for insiders it became clear that such a successcould not be guaranteed another time

After having dealt with the ETSI internal change in orientation from Europe-centric tointernational and global, let’s have a short look at the first attempts at getting into closercontact with our partners Let’s start with our American friends

In Sections 5.3 and 5.4 the standardisation work on PCS 1900 in ANSI T1P1 as well as thenew co-operation between ANSI T1P1 and ETSI Technical Committee SMG are described.The relationship between ANSI T1P1 and ETSI TC SMG started in 1996/1997 BothTechnical Committees were working on independent sets of Technical Specifications, i.e.GSM 1900 in the US and GSM 900/1800 in Europe, etc Parallel working with differentspeeds includes the risk of differences that may result in incompatibilities In order to avoidthese difficulties both SDOs agreed to merge the two independent sets of specifications into acommon one and to further develop it commonly using a co-ordinated approach, i.e eachwork item and the results were approved in both committees and incorporated into thecommon specifications

Despite the fact that the co-operation between T1P1 and SMG was excellent, it suffered alittle from the fact that the double approval process and the difficult co-ordination process atseveral levels, e.g first in T1P1 and then within SMG, were not very efficient and too timeconsuming One of the lessons learnt from this exercise was: Why don’t we really co-operate,i.e work together, from the very beginning – then avoiding any type of ‘‘approval ping-pong’’? This was another good reason to consider what and how to improve the standardisa-tion work for the third generation…

Now let’s have a look at the relationships with our friends from Asia

In the People’s Republic of China, network operators had implemented large GSMnetworks based on existing ETSI standards In order to avoid divergence, Chinese authorities(RITT) joined ETSI as an associate member and participated fully in the work of ETSI TCSMG since 1997 Thus, it was possible to fully integrate the Chinese requirements into thestandardisation process within TC SMG in order to secure the integrity of GSM betweenChina and the ‘‘rest of the world’’

In the meantime – with the Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (UTRA) decision in January

1998 – contacts with Japanese ARIB/TTC colleagues had been established within ETSI TCSMG These contacts had started in spring 1997, 1 year earlier

Discussions on the Technical Committee working level at the end of 1997 and the ning of 1998 between ETSI, ARIB/TTC, and T1P13led to the hope that the creation of acommon UMTS concept applicable in all territories – and thus de facto globally – waspossible Such a concept could be based on UMTS service innovation, UTRA and theGSM core network evolution

begin-In other words, there was from the beginning a lot of goodwill available from all sides todo/undertake something in common But how to do it? It became clear that to perform theUMTS standardisation within the three (or more) existing organisations would have beennearly unmanageable Three committees in different continents could have developed the

3

More information is in Chapter 8, Section 8.2.6.2.3

UMTS radio specifications whilst several other committees would have worked on networkaspects The situation in other key areas, such as services, Subscriber Identification Module(SIM), and Operation and Maintenance would have been equally difficult Furthermore, therewould have been no overall decision-making body for the resolution of possible conflicts Allthese difficulties sketched out here simply called for a new and much more effective globalorganisational solution.

As the friends from ARIB were quite interested in developing a common radio interfacewhose key parameters had been agreed in Japan and in the UTRA radio interface decision inJanuary 1997, a delegation from the ETSI TC SMG undertook an exploratory mission toJapan on 5 and 6 February 1998 in order to find out whether or not a kind of co-operation withthem would be possible Further information is given in Chapter 8, Section 8.2.6.2.3.These informal contacts on the working level revealed that there was a good resonance onthe Japanese side In an association like ETSI, there is not only the working level, there areother levels as well, e.g the General Assembly (GA), the highest ETSI authority, and theBoard, a body with some 25 clearly identified powers delegated by the GA In 1997/1998 thefirst ETSI Board could have looked back at about 18 months of existence and had, of course,

to play its role… Without acting like a ‘‘donkey who eats up the grass that has grown over(above) an old and nasty story,4 one has to admit that the communication/co-operationbetween the ETSI Board and the ETSI TC SMG suffered a little bit from irritations, mis-understandings, mal-perceptions, etc In other words, it was far from optimum at that time…Nevertheless, there was a role to play from a more political strategic point of view And nowthe question was what to do in order to make something useful happen?

What do you do, when you do not exactly know how to proceed? You create a committee

At least the politicians are supposed to do so Well, within ETSI it was the Board that – after

an interesting extraordinary meeting at the Frankfurt Airport on 27 February 1998 – decided

to create an ETSI UMTS Globalisation Group (UGG), i.e not a committee but an ad-hocgroup, but what is the difference? The next section will tell you more

Coming back to the extraordinary ETSI Board meeting on 27 February 1998, to simplymention ‘‘it was an interesting one’’ is, of course, correct, but an understatement We hadalready quite an emotional ETSI Board#11 meeting dealing, with among other items, thequestion of how to standardise UMTS in the most useful manner As no consensus could beachieved, a specially convened Board meeting was required

At the beginning, a recall of the ETSI Board#11 results concerning the third generationmobile standardisation was made In addition, reports from ETSI TC SMG were given,especially about their exploratory contacts with potential partners

Regarding the ETSI strategy and policy for the standardisation of a third generation mobilecommunications system, there were quite differing opinions and fears expressed The twoextreme positions were something like:

† create a new and independent 3G forum; and

† keep all 3G standardisation within ETSI

With all shades of compromise in between – among others why not use an ETSI ship Project (EPP)? By the way, at that time it was not very clear what an EPP was Thereexisted a general description in the ETSI Rules of Procedure, but it dated from 1995/1996 andcovered some basic characteristics only, allowing for a great variety of different implementa-

Partner-4 Wenn endlich Gras u¨ber eine (traurige) Angelegenheit gewachsen ist, kommt ein Esel, der das Gras auffrißt.

tions… Thus, asking three people about their interpretations, one could well be confrontedwith four descriptions…

The result of this heated discussion was the idea to create a kind of starter group, UGG.And the Board agreed that the group should consider the requirements for the globalisation ofGSM-based UMTS and make recommendations as to how this may be achieved

9.1.2 The ETSI UMTS Globalisation Group

The UMTS Globalisation Group (UGG) was an ad-hoc group established by the ETSI Boardfrom where it got its first draft Terms of Reference They have been refined since based on theexperience gained in the meantime

9.1.2.1 Terms of Reference of UGG

In the following you will find the UGG Terms of Reference as revised during the first UGGmeeting and approved by correspondence by the ETSI Board

9.1.2.1.1 Objectives of the Group

The objective of this Group was to consider the actions, which are required to enable UTRAand ‘‘GSM-based’’ UMTS specifications to be prepared and promoted in a manner, whichmakes them attractive to global partners such that they will be implemented world-wide

To achieve this objective the Group should:

† provide strategic management of those activities which fall within the scope of this Group;

† investigate the development of relationships with external partners and identify theirexpectations for UMTS;

† propose an organisational structure which meets the expectations of the Institute andexternal partners, taking into account the recommendations of the ETSI GA ad-hocGroup on fixed/mobile convergence (after their approval by the ETSI GA);

† consider what transition arrangements are necessary to move towards a new organisationalstructure;

† propose a mechanism, which enables all active partners to take part in the approval ofrelated specifications

In their work the Group may need to take into account the following factors:

1 Management characteristics (How do stakeholders define and approve strategic direction?How is the ‘‘work-programme’’ defined and approved to carry out the strategic objec-tives?)

2 Business model (How are ‘‘regional’’ priorities, based on their business model, definedsuch that the standards are truly global?)

3 Financial model (How are ‘‘overhead’’ costs assigned?)

4 Operating principles (How is actual standardisation work carried out? How are thestandards approved in different regions/countries?)

5 Maintenance work (How are improvements, maintenance of standards performed?)

6 European fall-back (What is the fall-back solution for Europe if there are disagreements at

strategic/operational level? How can European interests be safeguarded if other regions

do not want ‘‘European solutions’’ and if they retain the right to develop their own solutionsince they have a ‘‘multi-standards’’ market?)

7 IPR policy (Is the ETSI IPR policy the one to use?)

8 Relationship with other ETSI activities

9 Relationship with ITU (How to maximise the effectiveness of ETSI’s input into the

IMT-2000 activities of the ITU?)

9.1.2.1.2 Composition of the Group

The Group will have the following composition:5

Chairman ETSI director-general

Vice-chairmen Two to be elected by, and from, the group

Eight board members Mr Davidson, Mr Etesse, Dr Haas, Mr Kaiser, Mr Lang, Mr

Lathia, Mr Lindstro¨m, Mr SallesSMG Two representatives (Mr Hillebrand and one to be advised)GSM MoU Association One representative (Dr Nugter)6

UMTS Forum One representative (Mr Beijer)

FMC Group FMC Group chairman (Mr Hearnden)7

9.1.2.1.3 Reporting Arrangements

The Group will report to the ETSI Board

9.1.2.1.4 Duration of the Group

Since the detailed GSM-based UMTS phase 1 specifications will be completed by the end of

1999, the Group should aim to complete its work in the fastest timeframe, with the objective

of producing their final recommendations no later than the September 1998 Board meeting.This should enable relationships with external partners to be established, and organisationalchanges to be implemented by autumn 1998

Commenting a little on these Terms of Reference, the following needs to be said.The additional text in italics and brackets is explanatory and had been added by the UGGsecretary in order to facilitate understanding

Regarding the duration, to finish the work by September 1998 was extremely ambitious.This time pressure came from the fact that the Japanese partners were seeking to have anoperational 3G system by the year 2001!

Despite an awkward UGG meeting schedule (see paragraph 9.1.2.3), that prevented the key

5 The chairman may co-opt additional representatives as required to assist in the completion of the tasks of the group.

6 The representatives of the GSM MoU Association and the UMTS Forum are guests, invited to assist the Group, but which are not bound by the governing rules of ETSI.

7 The FMC Group chairman will participate for as long as the FMC Group exists It is expected that the FMC Group will be closed during ETSI GA#30.

people from taking any summer vacation, it was not possible to fully meet that ambitiousgoal Nevertheless, as you will read in the following, 3GPP was able to have their firstmeetings at the beginning of December 1998 at Sophia Antipolis.

9.1.2.2 Composition of UGG

The UGG ad-hoc group met very often (13 times) in the period between March and ber 1998! This was the reason that the UGG members had some difficulties in attending all themeetings This situation again led to repetitive discussions owing to the fact that some results

Novem-of meeting X were challenged by members in meeting X 1 1 who were unable to participate

in the previous one

The UGG meetings were chaired by myself, the ETSI director-general

The Vice-chairmen were Mr Phil Davidson and Mr Kirit Lathia Mr Adrian Scrase acted

in the ETSI Board ad-hoc group UGG Under this arrangement, the benefit of the GSM MoUAssociation and UMTS Forum expertise could be fully realised without them being bound bythe governing rules of ETSI The GSM MoU Association was represented by Ms AdrianaNugter and the UMTS Forum by Mr Thomas Beijer, its chairman

Mr Chris Roberts acted on behalf of the European Commission as ETSI counsellor

As the Fixed Mobile Convergence Group (FMC) was closed by the ETSI GA #30 in Spring

1998, there was no FMC delegate participating in UGG But in the later meetings there wassome representation from the ETSI TC NA (Network Aspects), e.g Messrs Franc¸ois Lucasand Hans van der Veer

In general, there were between 10 and 17 delegates present, except for UGG meeting #12where we reached 29 delegates including the SMG STC chairmen and vice-chairmen

9.1.2.3 UGG Meeting Schedule

UGG met 13 times in 1998 as regular UGG meetings as follows:

UGG#1 On 13 March in Brussels, hosted by Airtouch

UGG#2 On 24 March in Sophia Antipolis, hosted by ETSI

UGG#3 On 08 April in Brussels, hosted by Airtouch

UGG#4 On 20 April in Sophia Antipolis, hosted by ETSI

UGG#5 On 12 May in Brussels, hosted by Airtouch

UGG#6 On 08 June in Sophia Antipolis, hosted by ETSI

UGG#7 On 29 June in Frankfurt, hosted by ETSI

UGG#8 On 28 July in London, hosted by DTI

UGG#9 On 19 and 20 August in Brussels, hosted by EricssonUGG#10 On 14 September in Munich, hosted by Siemens

UGG#11 On 30 September to 02 October in Sophia Antipolis, hosted

by ETSIUGG#12 On 28–29 October in Amsterdam, hosted by LucentUGG#13 On 23 November in Frankfurt, hosted by Nokia

In addition, it was basically UGG that conducted exploratory and negotiation meetingswith potential partners as described in the following

9.1.2.3.1 GSC/RAST

GSC stands for Global Standards Collaboration and RAST for Global Radio Standardisation.These are loose co-operations between recognised Standards Developing Organisations(SDOs) from different regions in the world: ACIF (Australia), ARIB (Japan), ETSI (Europe),ITU (global, with its two sectors radiocommunications & telecommunications), TIA (US),TSACC (Canada), TTA (Korea), and TTC (Japan) The GSC/RAST activities date back toFebruary 1990 to a meeting of the former ITSC (Interregional Telecommunications Stan-dards Conference) at Fredericksburg, VA, where ITU-T, T1, TTC and ETSI delegates met forthe first time

In the meantime the activities within GSC/RAST have resulted in a number of bilateral andmultilateral actions/collaborations and a considerable creation of trust between the partici-pating organisations

One can even state that without the mutual exchange of information and co-operationwithin ITSC/GSC/RAST and the creation of trust between the bodies from different regions,the establishment of the third generation partnership project would have been more difficultand complicated if not impossible…

During the GSC/RAST meetings that took place from 30 March to 1 April 1998 at the ETSIpremises in Sophia Antipolis, a lot of discussion focussed on the question about how best tostandardise the next generation of mobile communication That meeting offered additionaloccasions for exploratory discussions with potential partners

9.1.2.3.2 Meeting the Japanese Partners

In Japan standardisation in the area of telecommunications is undertaken by two SDOs:

† ARIB (Association of Radio Industry and Businesses) for radio matters, and

† TTC (Telecommunication Technology Committee) for the fixed network part

After the ETSI TC SMG delegation that visited Japan on 5 and 6 February 1998, UGG met

as follows with the Japanese partners:

† on 2 and 3 April 1998 in connection with the GSC/RAST meeting at Sophia Antipolis

† on 28 and 29 May 1998 in Tokyo

† on 29–31 July 1998 in London

† on 7-9 October 1998 in Tokyo together with T1, TTA and

† on 2–4 December 1998 in Copenhagen together with T1, TTA and CWTS

9.1.2.3.3 Meeting the American Partners

In the US, there is the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), responsible for dardisation The actual standardisation work is performed by more than 300 SDOs that got theANSI accreditation

stan-In the telecommunications area, the SDOs with which ETSI has the closest links are:

† The T1 Committee; and

† The Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA)

On 19 March 1998, in conjunction with an ETSI TC SMG Plenary that took place at SophiaAntipolis, a discussion on the working level with representatives of T1P1 and TC SMG tookplace in order to explore how to standardise UMTS in the future The GSC/RAST meeting in

1998 at Sophia Antipolis allowed for further exchange of information with both T1 and TIArepresentatives At the end of May/beginning of June, Mr Franc¸ois Grassot was authorised byUGG to represent ETSI at a meeting with T1P1 and inform them about the UGG work as well

as the negotiations that took place on 28 and 29 May with the Japanese partners

Afterwards, UGG undertook the following negotiations with the Americans:

† 25 and 26 June 1998 in Seattle The T1 Committee was officially informed about the UGGwork and was invited to join the UMTS standardisation initiative

† 10 July 1998 in London An ANSI delegation met UGG and welcomed the UMTS tive

initia-† 25 September 1998 in Washington UGG met the ANSI delegation again, which wasenriched by a few T1 and TIA representatives The idea of the UMTS initiative to betreated by means of a common partnership project was addressed as ‘‘paradigm shift’’ bythe Americans

† 26 and 27 August in Paris This meeting between UGG and T1 (P1) Committee sentatives resulted in a breakthrough regarding the engagement of T1 delegates in thefurther preparation of the 3GPP The T1 delegates then took part in the meetings with allother potential 3GPP partners, i.e

repre-† 7–9 October 1998 in Tokyo; and

† 2–4 December 1998 in Copenhagen

9.1.2.3.4 Meeting the Korean Partners

In Korea the SDO responsible for standardisation in the fields of telecommunications is theTelecommunications Technology Association (TTA)

After the ARIB/ETSI/TTC meeting on 28/29 May 1998 in Tokyo, Mr Kirit Lathia wasauthorised by UGG to inform the Korean colleagues about the 3GPP preparations Furthercontacts were maintained by the ARIB/TTC colleagues that resulted in inviting TTA to thenext common meetings:

† 7–9 October in Tokyo; and

† 2–4 December in Copenhagen

9.1.2.3.5 Meeting the Chinese Partners

The Research Institute of Telecommunications Technology (RITT) of China via the ChineseAcademy of Telecommunications Research (CATR) joined ETSI as an associate member andrepresented the de facto SDO of the People’s Republic of China

In the meantime, since 1999, standardisation in the UMTS related area is being performed

by the China Wireless Telecommunication Standard (CWTS) group

The Chinese authorities are currently considering the creation of a Chinese nications Standards Institute (CTSI)) and have consulted ETSI for support…

Telecommu-In addition to the contacts mentioned already in paragraph 9.1.1, the following was done inorder to involve the Chinese partners:

26 May 1998 in Beijing In conjunction with a UMTS seminar organised by the UMTSForum, some unofficial meetings took place with RITT and CATR representatives in order toinform them about the UMTS standardisation initiative and the plans to create a 3GPP.Afterwards, some contacts were established between the Japanese and the Chinese part-ners With assistance from ARIB/TTC the Chinese partners were invited to the next commonmeetings:

† 7–9 October in Tokyo; and

The ETSI internal discussions within UGG and the negotiations with the different partners– as described in paragraph 9.1.2.3 – as well as the feedback/decisions stemming from theETSI Board and GA meetings resulted in the establishment of the documents that wereapproved during the final preparatory 3GPP meeting in Copenhagen on 2–4 December 1998:

† The 3GPP Description;

† The 3GPP Agreement; and

† The 3GPP Working Procedures

The exact wording of these basic papers for the creation of the 3GPP can be found on the3GPP website at http://www.3gpp.org

In paragraph 9.1.3 and its sub-paragraphs a rather general description of 3GPP will begiven without going in to too much detail

It is not the intention to record here all discussions that took place because what counts atthe end of the day are the results aren’t they? Furthermore, as history very often proves theheated discussions of yesterday may even be regarded as ‘‘water under the bridge’’, especiallywhen the development of events have proven that fears that may have existed at the begin-ning, either have not materialised of are of no more relevance today…

9.1.2.4.2 The Start of UGG Discussions

During the second UGG meeting Mr Dieter Kaiser prepared schematic diagrams to show apossible structure for the proposed project as viewed from the ETSI side, and from the side ofpotential partners These diagrams were discussed in depth and the following points werenoted:

† The potential partners would need to be willing to adjust their own internal organisationalstructures in order to contribute to the new project (to avoid duplication of effort within thepartner organisations)

† Some parts of the existing ETSI TC SMG would need to be moved into the new project

† The remaining work would be undertaken within ETSI TC SMG as normal

† The ETSI TC SMG structure would remain largely unchanged, since the output of the newproject would be passed to SMG for further regional treatment, particularly for regulatorydeliverables

† The membership of the existing ETSI TC SMG could be widened to include externalpartners, rather than creating a new project This option was not supported by the UGG,particularly since there would be no fallback position

† Participation in ETSI TC SMG, from potential partners for the new project, could beincreased on an interim basis pending the creation of the project

† The participation within the new project should be on an individual members basis, and thecreation of regional views should be avoided (i.e there should not be regional blocking)

† The new project could be structured in a similar manner to the EP TIPHON

† The new project must be made attractive to potential partners

From the points listed above, the diagrams were updated and served as a basis for thedevelopment of the 3GPP structure

In addition, Mr Friedhelm Hillebrand prepared a document, whose principles had beenendorsed by TC SMG, giving the proposed responsibilities of the new project The text wasedited during the meeting and a revised draft agreed as follows:

The UMTS Project elaborates, approves and maintains the necessary set of common tions for:

specifica-† UMTS terrestrial radio access (UTRA): W-CDMA in Frequency Division Duplex (FDD)mode and TD-CDMA in Time Division Duplex (TDD) mode

† GSM platform evolution towards UMTS (including mobility management and globalroaming)

The common specifications will be developed in view of global roaming and global tion of terminals.The common specifications aim at forming the technical basis of an IMT-

circula-2000 family member The UMTS project elaborates contributions to the ITU on relevantaspects of the IMT-2000 family.In the framework of agreed relationships the UMTS projectelaborates common specifications for approval and publication as standards, or parts ofstandards, by ETSI and/or other standards bodies (such as ANSI, ARIB/TTC and RITT).This can be considered a starting point for the 3GPP scope and project description.Furthermore, Mr Hillebrand also prepared a document giving the proposed responsibilities

of SMG following the creation of the new project It was agreed that this document should befurther discussed during the next meetings of the Group

Mr Tom Lindstro¨m and Mr Gunnar Sandegren prepared a draft Project RequirementsDefinition for the new project Some preliminary work was undertaken to edit the draft butthis was not completed due to time constraints Members were requested to study the draftand to make proposals for amendments.

UGG noted that in accordance with an action requested during its first meeting, a pressrelease had been made immediately prior to ETSI GA meeting #30 in Spring 1998 announ-cing ETSI’s plans to globalise its work on UMTS

9.1.2.4.3 First Contacts with the Partners

The recent GSC and RAST meetings in March/April 1998 at Sophia Antipolis made goodprogress and experienced a good collaborative atmosphere that ran through both meetings.The meetings had been well attended (approximately 80 participants) from Europe, Canada,

US, Australia, Korea, and Japan

The informal meetings that had taken place with T1 representatives during the SMGplenary (19 March) and with T1 and TIA representatives on 31 March had been positive,with the US representatives expressing an interest in participating in the proposed ETSIPartnership Project There had also been good support for the offer made by ETSI to providethe administrative umbrella under which the new activity could be launched

A more extensive discussion had taken place with delegates from ARIB and TTC on 2/3April, immediately after the GSC/RAST meeting Views had been exchanged on how such anETSI Partnership Project could be structured and operated The concerns of most importance

to the Japanese delegates appeared to be the following:

1 The name of the ETSI Partnership Project ‘‘UMTS’’ was seen as a European term, whichwould be inappropriate in a global environment

2 ETSI dominance The Japanese wished to participate as equal partners, with equal rights,and equal responsibilities

3 Use existing structures The benefits of using existing ETSI structures (rather than creating

a new forum for example) were supported by the Japanese representatives

4 IPR issues

9.1.2.4.4 Continuation of UGG discussions

Mr Tom Lindstro¨m and Mr Gunnar Sandegren had prepared a revised Project RequirementsDefinition which took into account the comments made during the last meeting and thosereceived subsequently

The Group focused on the matter of partnerships and memberships of the proposed ETSIPartnership Project There were differing views expressed concerning the relationshipbetween partners and members and whether each member should be required to be associatedwith a partner After some discussion a clear view emerged that the ETSI Partnership Projectshould be established with one or more partners who must be a recognised standards body to

be eligible It was understood that the term ‘‘recognised’’ meant different things in differentregions but the intention was clear Members could be any entity that wished to contribute tothe work of the ETSI Partnership Project but must be members of a partner organisation, withthe fall back position that they would in any case be eligible for ETSI associate membership

and could through that route obtain membership of the new activity It was agreed that theprinciples of the two terms ‘‘member’’ and ‘‘partner’’ should be included within the ProjectRequirements Definition It was understood that the formation of an ETSI Partnership Projectwould not require the creation of a new legal entity since the existing ETSI structure provided

a suitable framework to operate within

It was understood that a literal reading of the terms ‘‘member’’ and ‘‘partner’’ could excludebodies such as the GSM MoU Association and the UMTS Forum Dr Adriana Nugter and MrThomas Beijer agreed to consider how best their organisations could be included within theproposed organisational scenario

A brief discussion took place on how voting could be conducted within the new activityand a clear preference for one member one vote was expressed It was agreed that consensusshould be the normal method of decision-making

At UGG meeting #4, Mr Tom Lindstro¨m presented a revised Project Requirements tion for the ETSI Partnership Project which took into account the comments received fromUGG members Mr Kari Lang proposed a complementary pictorial representation of theproposed ETSI Partnership Project which was noted

Defini-Also proposed were methods for funding the ETSI Partnership Project A long discussionfollowed during which the advantages of member or partner funding were considered At thisstage it was not clear what the funding was required for, nor what magnitude of funding wasrequired, but some difficulties were envisaged with the concept of individual member fund-ing It was believed that the funding requirements were low and were probably restricted toadditional secretariat assistance and a small STF After full discussion it was agreed that thestarting point should be that ETSI is prepared to absorb the cost of running this PartnershipProject for a duration of say 2 years This starting point could be re-discussed on the basis ofunexpectedly high costs, or the wish of potential partners to take part in funding the activity

It is interesting in this context to note – looking back with hindsight and without anger –that the costs for the Mobile Competence Centre within ETSI reached the order of magnitude

of 5 million EUR already in the year 2000 and will exceed 6 million EUR in the year 2001…

A short discussion took place on the voting principles to be applied within the ETSIPartnership Project It was basically agreed that one member one vote should be applied,but some precaution should be included to stop decisions being taken which were unlikely to

be acceptable to specific regions It was not proposed that regional voting should be applied,but some care be taken to ensure that decisions were generally acceptable to all participatingregions

By the way, the topic of voting has been discussed with changing focus during nearly allUGG meetings as well as during the meetings with the 3GPP partners

9.1.2.4.5 Further Discussions with the Japanese Partners

During the meeting with ARIB and TTC on 28 and 29 May 1998, the talks had centred aroundtwo proposals; one prepared by ARIB/TTC and the other prepared by ETSI based on theresults of UGG#5 After a long discussion, all three parties agreed to base their furtherdiscussions on the ETSI proposal which had been modified during the meeting to takeaccount of concerns raised by the ARIB/TTC The proposal was endorsed in principle bythe three parties subject to final approval

UGG discussed whether a task force should be created to accelerate the technical work

pending the creation of the partnership project However, it was felt that the existing SMGstructure provided a good basis for the technical work to proceed until overtaken by thepartnership project.

UGG noted that whilst the ETSI proposal had been endorsed by all three parties thereremained a significant amount of work to be done in defining clearly the work to be under-taken and the working rules under which that would be done

Nevertheless, this meeting with the Japanese partners was a kind of first breakthrough inthe direction of 3GPP and led to unofficial and official contacts with the SDOs of the US,Korea and China

9.1.2.4.6 Back to UGG discussions

Within UGG meeting #6 it was agreed that a collective letter should be sent to the ship informing them of the progress made so far and the expectations for the future Thisshould include a request for support from the membership and an invitation to provideconstructive comments

member-Furthermore, it was concluded that the SMG representatives to the UGG would keep ETSI

TC SMG fully informed of the progress being made, i.e something self-evident

The UGG chairman agreed that the ETSI secretariat would prepare a draft 3GPP ship agreement, but sought guidance on the format that should be used It was thought thateither a common agreement signed by all partners could be used or a declaration could beestablished which each joining partner could sign Finally, the chairman volunteered toprepare a draft based on ideas presented by UGG members Well, whether we talk hereabout the ETSI secretariat or later about the chairman preparing some drafts, in plane English

partner-it basically meant that the UGG secretary, Mr Adrian Scrase, did an excellent job in ing all these and other tasks!

perform-Furthermore, it was agreed that Mr Adrian Scrase would undertake to prepare draft ing procedures based on the ETSI Directives In addition, it was concluded that votingprocedures would be contained within the draft working procedures and that optionswould be provided, where necessary, for decision at a later stage

work-9.1.2.4.7 Discussions with ARIB and TTC in London

During the meeting with the Japanese partners in London on 29 and 30 July, the draft 3GPPproject description and the remainder of the draft 3GPP documentation was discussed,reviewed and further refined

Regarding the meetings of ETSI’s UMTS Globalisation Group representatives with thefuture 3GPP partners, one has to state with great satisfaction and relief that they have alwaysbeen – in quite some difference to the tough ETSI internal discussions within UGG – guided

by great openness, a lot of trust and a very good spirit of co-operation!

A big compliment and expression of gratitude is extended to all who participated in thesefruitful discussions!

9.1.2.4.8 Looking Back at UGG Discussions – Without Anger

Back to reality, in UGG meeting #9, four contributions were presented proposing different3GPP scopes and different work areas to be included in 3GPP

During the presentation of these documents, UGG considered whether the 3GPP scopeshould include all of the work currently within ETSI TC SMG The inclusion or exclusion ofVHE was also considered This led to the development of two different basic opinions:

1 that 3GPP should contain only those work items falling within the ‘‘three bullet points’’ asper document ETSI/BOARD-Global#9(98)08:

– UTRA – wideband CDMA in FDD mode and TD-CDMA in TDD mode

– GSM core network evolution

– Terminals for the above, and

2 that 3GPP should include the majority of the work currently being performed in SMG butexcluding those items of a European regulatory nature

It was not possible to reach consensus on either of these views UGG also consideredkeeping ETSI TC SMG in its current form but opening up the membership to include otherplayers by means of associate memberships and co-operation agreements

UGG was unable to reach consensus on any of the views expressed but agreed to raise theissue to the Board for resolution

Commenting on this today with hindsight and the knowledge of the further evolutionwithin 3GPP, we can only smile… But at that time, i.e August/September 1998, the matterwas discussed like the question within Macbeth: ‘‘…to be or not to be?’’

9.1.2.4.9 An Extraordinary ETSI GA was Needed

Not only UGG, but the ETSI Board, too were unable to solve these problems This situationnecessitated calling for an extraordinary meeting of the ETSI GA to decide on the structureand scope of the Partnership Project That meeting took place at the ETSI headquarters on 29September 1998

After explanations of the current situation on third generation mobile systems by the ETSIBoard chairmen, Mr David Hendon, and a number of documents related to the proposed3GPP by the ETSI director-general, an intensive discussion on the proposed PartnershipProject followed

Afterwards, the ETSI GA chairman, Dr Antonio Castillo, put the following three questions

to a vote:

Vote #1: Are you in favour of the principle of the creation of an ETSI Partnership Projectfor a Third Generation Mobile System (3GPP)?

Result: 92.62% of the votes cast were in favour

Vote #2: Do you agree with the creation of an ETSI Partnership Project (3GPP) thatincludes: GSM core network evolution towards a third generation mobile system?

Whilst 63.4% of the votes cast were in favour, vote #2 failed to reach the required 71%.Vote #3: Do you agree with the creation of an ETSI Partnership Project (3GPP) thatincludes UTRA (W-CDMA in FDD mode and TD-CDMA in TDD mode)?

Result: 95.9% of the votes cast were in favour

The GA chairman then stated that in view of the fact that Vote #2 had failed to reach thenecessary 71%, the Assembly had to return to that question for re-discussion and to try andreach an agreement on that point.

An interesting discussion ensued and the GA chairman then asked the ETSI TC SMGchairman, Mr Friedhelm Hillebrand, to convene an ad-hoc group with those ETSI membersconcerned to reach a compromise proposal, which might achieve a successful vote result

Mr Hillebrand reported back that the ad-hoc group had reached an agreement by sus, based on BT and Ericsson contributions and combining the ideas of those who looked for

consen-a short-term solution with those who looked towconsen-ards the longer term He stconsen-ated thconsen-at they hconsen-adachieved a strategy statement and that the final (detailed) decisions were to be taken at futurenormal General Assemblies with the full 3GPP documentation available

The GA chairman then put the following question for a vote:

Vote #4: Do you agree that the GA endorses the following principles for the forthcomingnegotiations:

1 to recommend ETSI to initiate an ETSI Partnership Project (EPP) to be known as ‘‘3GPP’’for third generation mobile system specification work

– The 3GPP will be a partnership between ETSI and recognised Standards DevelopingOrganisations and other partners; industrial entities are members of 3GPP and providethe technical input

– The 3GPP will develop specifications for the initial phase of a complete third tion mobile system based on UTRAN and evolved GSM core network (a ‘‘G-UMTS’’system)

genera-2 To initiate the setting up of an ETSI Project (EP) for UMTS:

– the new ETSI Project UMTS will collect current and future ETSI activities relevant toUMTS outside those G-UMTS areas to be handled in the 3GPP

3 Furthermore it is agreed that:

– Work on GSM standardisation needs to continue, for example, for those networkoperators who do not get a UMTS licence It is proposed that this work should remain

in ETSI itself for the time being at least For this and other reasons, it is proposed thatETSI SMG should continue to exist

– No duplication of work between 3GPP and ETSI EP UMTS, new SMG

Result: 94.5% of the votes were cast in favour Thus, a solution for the scope and furtherpursuit of 3GPP was, eventually, found… What a heavy birth!

9.1.2.4.10 Back to UGG

Despite these ETSI GA decisions, the next UGG meeting #12, immediately following was notvery effective – owing to some personal polarisation…

9.1.2.4.11 Discussions with Nearly all the Partners in Tokyo

For the period from 7 to 9 October 1998 all six 3GPP Organisational Partners (OPs), ARIB,

CWTS, ETSI, T1, TTA and TTC, had been invited to a preparatory OP meeting in Tokyo.Unfortunately, the Chinese partners were unable to join The other OPs met for the first time

in this 3GPP context A TIA delegate and a delegate from the European Commission acted asobservers

After a detailed review of 3G related activities of each SDO, an in-depth discussion andfurther detailed elaboration of the recent draft 3GPP documentation took place

The following results were achieved:

† The formation of the 3GPP was approved by ARIB, ETSI, T1, TTA and TTC

† The draft Partnership Project Description was written and was agreed upon by the OPs as aframework document subject to formal confirmation

† The principles for a Draft Partnership Project Working Procedures were agreed upon bythe OPs

† The project start date was set to 7 December 1998

For the final preparatory meeting in Copenhagen from 2 to 4 December 1998, the followingsteps were agreed:

† The head of SDO delegations (HoDs) to get together to produce the Terms of Referencefor Technical Specification Groups (TSGs) prior to the next meeting and this proposal wasapproved

† Project Co-ordination Group (PCG) meetings will be rotated among different regions tominimise the burden on one region

† When created, the 3GPP website will be open to all members

† PCG will be formed on 2–4 December and TSG meetings will start on 7–8 December1998

9.1.2.4.12 UGG Fine-tuning

During UGG meeting #12, some further fine-tuning of the basic 3GPP documentation wasdone In addition, in the presence of SMG Technical Subcommittee (STC) chairmen andvice-chairmen, an exchange of views on the 3GPP start-up took place, such as:

† Responsibilities of 3GPP and ETSI TC SMG

† Co-operation between 3GPP TSGs and ETSI SMG STCs

† Achieving a smooth work transfer

† Future TSG chairmanships

9.1.2.4.13 Approval by the ETSI GA

During ETSI GA meeting #31 on 19 and 20 November 1998, the following decisions related

to 3GPP were taken as a briefing for the ETSI delegation:

The ETSI GA:

† unanimously approved the creation of an ETSI Partnership Project for the third generationmobile system (to be known as 3GPP);

† unanimously endorsed the draft Partnership Project Description;

† unanimously requested the ETSI Board (through its UMTS Globalisation Group) tocomplete the negotiations with potential partners and to oversee the creation of the Part-nership Project;

† unanimously requested the ETSI Board to agree and maintain on behalf of ETSI the finalversions of the Partnership Project Description, the Partnership Project Working Proce-dures, and the Partnership Project Agreement;

† unanimously authorised the director-general to sign the Partnership Project Agreement

9.1.2.4.14 Happy End in Copenhagen

It was in Copenhagen where the last 3GPP preparatory meeting with all six OPs took place on2–4 December 1998

Here, the final fine-tuning of the 3GPP documentation was achieved In addition, the 3GPPagreement8was signed (in a nice framework provided by the host, TeleDenmark) by thefollowing OPs: ARIB, ETSI, T1, TTA, and TTC

Unfortunately, the partners from CWTS (China) were not authorised to sign the 3GPPagreement yet Furthermore, owing to the fact that the UMTS Forum was unable to partici-pate in Copenhagen, they were prevented from co-signing the 3GPP agreement as a firstMarket Representative Partner (MRP)

During that Copenhagen meeting, another discussion ensued about the role the MRPsshould play Finally, it was concluded that the high competence of MRPs should be used

in order to identify market requirements, thus enabling 3GPP standardisation to meet theneeds of the market An MRP is an organisation invited by the OPs to participate in 3GPPwith the objective of offering market advice to 3GPP and to bring into 3GPP a consensus view

of market requirements

9.1.3 What is 3GPP?

The 3GPP is a global standardisation initiative created in December 1998 Its task was todevelop a complete set of globally applicable Technical Specifications for a third generation(3G) mobile telecommunications system based on the evolved GSM core network and aninnovative radio interface known as UTRA The Project is based on a concept devised byETSI aimed at facilitating better co-operation between regional standards organisations, foraand other industry groupings 3GPP is a collaborative activity between officially recognisedSDOs, with the participation of other industry groups and individual members

Partnership in 3GPP is open to all national, regional or other SDOs, irrespective of theirgeographical location – within the project the participating SDOs are referred to as OPs TheOPs may invite MRPs to participate: these may be any organisation from anywhere in theworld that can offer market advice to 3GPP and bring a consensus view of market require-ments that fall within the project’s scope Individual membership is open to companies andorganisations within the communications industry that are active members of one of the OPs.The truly global nature and the breadth of the market interest in the task of specifying this 3Gsystem is evident from the identity of the 3GPP partners (see further in sub-paragraph 9.13.2)and all agree that 3GPP is proving a highly successful initiative

8 The 3GPP Agreement and the 3GPP Project Description can be found on the attached CD-ROM in folder C1.

The 3GPP has no legal status Ownership (including copyright) of the specifications andreports it produces is shared between the partners The 3GPP process includes a conversion(transposition) of the project’s output into official standards and reports by one or more of theOPs.

The specifications being prepared by 3GPP are evolved in part from the enormouslysuccessful GSM standard, which is currently (February 2001) serving over 400 millionsubscribers in more than 140 countries Building on this massive installed base, the systembeing specified by 3GPP will be an attractive upgrade path for existing operators and users Italso has an assured compatibility with GSM – good news for both operators and users who areunable, or unwilling, to upgrade to 3G

Paramount among the 3GPP specifications is the definition of UTRA, the innovative radioaccess technology that is the key to the new system’s high data rates and dramaticallyimproved performance UTRA is spectrum-efficient and supports FDD and TDD modes.This interface has been accepted by ITU as a member of the IMT-2000 family – or morecorrectly, as two family members: IMT-DS, the FDD mode; and IMT-TC, the TDD mode.IMT-2000 family membership requires the ability for users to roam globally and seamlessly,which implies interoperability with other family members: 3GPP thus co-operates closelywith the 3GPP2 project which is specifying another family member, a 3G CDMA systembased on an evolution of the ANSI-41 architecture

9.1.3.1 How Does 3GPP Work?

3GPP has been designed to minimise delays and inefficiencies As a result, it has a ‘‘flat’’organisational structure and a large degree of distributed autonomy Overall project planningand co-ordination is the responsibility of the PCG, with input primarily from the OPs, guided

by the MRPs It is mainly at this level that regulatory requirements, provided by the communications administrations and governments around the world, are taken into account.The development of the specifications is performed by TSGs and their subordinate workinggroups Here, the main participation is by technical experts from the individual members ofthe OPs Individual members in their capacity as ITU members are also responsible forcarrying the results of the 3GPP work to the ITU

tele-At the time of the creation, 3GPP had structured around four principal aspects of the 3Gsystem being defined as TSGs:

† TSG CN: core network

† TSG RAN: radio access network

† TSG SA: services and systems aspects

† TSG T: terminals

Each TSG is authorised to develop and approve specifications and reports within its scope,and TSG SA also has a role of co-ordinating the work of the TSGs at a more detailed levelthan the PCG The result is a process that is able to rapidly produce and approve specificationsand reports in response to the needs of the market, although it is important to note that thedeliverables do not have a formal status until they have been transposed by one or more of theOPs

The formal status is necessary for regulatory and other purposes in the various regions, andall the OPs have committed themselves to complete this process rapidly Each OP will apply

its own procedures, appropriate to their respective regions As the official European SDOwithin 3GPP, ETSI recognises the 3GPP output as ETSI Technical Specifications and ETSITechnical Reports without a need for any further endorsement within the Institute Thismeans that the 3GPP documents are published – within a matter of a few weeks – as identicaltext directly as ETSI deliverables In addition, ETSI is transposing, i.e adapting, a few of theinitial 3GPP specifications into ENs for specific European regulatory requirements This ishappening in parallel with the publication of the initial Technical Specifications and will notimpede the implementation of 3G in Europe.

9.1.3.1.1 Electronic Working

3GPP has taken a leading role in changing the traditional ways of standards making A veryheavy dependence is now placed on electronic working, both outside and within meetings,advancing a trend that started in ETSI a year or two ago This means that paper copies of draftdocuments have been almost entirely eliminated, saving time and expense, and making asignificant contribution to the environment

Given that 3GPP has participants from all over the world, the use of the Internet, e-mailexploders and other such facilities have proved invaluable for distributing and sharing infor-mation, working drafts and so on Delegates to meetings had already become used to down-loading working documents from the Internet and having updates to the documentsdistributed in meetings on CD-ROM But in recent months, in meetings around the world,participants have experienced the benefits of a local area network (LAN) solution as the lateststep in improving working methods ETSI’s headquarters premises already have LANs in allits meeting rooms, but most other venues currently rely on temporary LANs (wired or radio),using equipment and support kindly donated by individual members

Such facilities permit delegates to access all the meeting documents electronically fromtheir laptop computers As a result, the huge burden of producing paper copies (as many as 10

000 pages per delegate for some meetings) can be eliminated Delegates can access newdocuments as soon as they are available, rather than having to wait for paper copies to bemade or for the documents to be distributed by other means, such as diskette or CD-ROM

9.1.3.1.2 Project Support

For administrative and support purposes the 3GPP Partners have established a MobileCompetence Centre (MCC) which is hosted by ETSI at its premises in Sophia Antipolis,Southern France The MCC was created in March 1999 to provide support not only to the3GPP but also to ETSI’s own studies in mobile technologies A full description of MCCincluding the financing is given in Chapter 15, Section 3

9.1.3.2 Who are the Stakeholders in 3GPP?

3GPP has attracted a very strong commitment from organisations and companies around theworld, reflecting the truly global nature of the project There are currently six OPs (inalphabetical order):

† The Association of Radio Industries and Businesses (ARIB), Japan