Blockchain’s possible role in network infrastructure
Realizing 5G’s full potential requires confidence in the security, resilience and performance of the underlying infrastructure. The UK government’s decision to ban Huawei from UK 5G networks has highlighted the current resilience of having few suppliers for critical network equipment and infrastructure. Addressing this requires a comprehensive strategy to encourage innovation for new and existing suppliers, open interface solutions and diversified interoperable supply chains from the ground up.
Mobile network operators (MNOs) are using disaggregated network models to facilitate the deployment of 5G by lowering the total cost of ownership. Network disaggregation involves breaking down traditionally “bundled” network components provided by one vendor into smaller and provisioned more efficiently, including using software-defined configurations. Improved hardware vendor competition, innovation and interoperability promise more efficient and flexible, and therefore cheaper, network deployment and better coverage. MNOs can then focus on using what exists more effectively.
A version of this is already happening with an entirely different type of network operator: the fully decentralized (not just disaggregated) wireless networks made up of peer-to-peer individuals hosting small, compliant cells that earn cryptocurrency rewards for “proof of coverage” and transport data packets.
While the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee is told that blockchain “innovations” too often seem to offer solutions to problems that don’t need to be solved, this new application of decentralization to digital infrastructure could be a significant use case for blockchain that isn’t finance or trading in digital assets.
BYO base stations
Decentralized wireless networks are up and running today. Hosts provide their own compatible antennas, broadband connectivity and earn cryptocurrency rewards for providing coverage and data. Customers pay for data transmitted over the network through their connected devices using cryptocurrency, which constitutes the reward to hosts responsible for transmitting these data packets. Pollen’s network focusing on LTE and Helium’s network supporting LoRaWAN for internet-of-things (IoT) devices in the UK are examples of operational decentralized networks.
This potentially offers an alternative solution to the last mile problem where new infrastructure is prohibitively expensive, for example new 5G cell sites in urban environments. Decentralized networks address resilience risks by involving interoperable antennas from multiple vendors combined with a cryptominer that can use any broadband connection (wired or wireless) for backhaul. The use of a blockchain ensures transparency, security and reliability. Hosts mine crypto via “proof of cover” to concretely support the spread of a working network, rather than proof of work or effort.
So why hasn’t this happened everywhere already?
By removing centralized infrastructure from the equation, the model raises several legal, regulatory and commercial challenges.
Compliance with GCEs: Providers of Electronic Communications Networks (ECN) and Electronic Communications Services (ECS) in the UK must comply with the General Conditions (GCE). GCE compliance is cumbersome, difficult to maintain or simply impossible on a decentralized basis.
Use of retail broadband services for wireless backhaul: Retail providers may prohibit their customers from using a residential broadband service to provide backhaul for a third-party network, such as a decentralized wireless network. Doing so puts customers at risk of violating their ISP’s terms of service or fair use policy. ISP policies may require customers to take up more expensive enterprise-grade services for this purpose.
Privacy, Security and Resilience: Networks, including those serving IoT devices, must be highly robust, resilient and meet minimum security requirements. This is far more challenging for a decentralized network involving multiple hardware vendors, a multitude of hosts, and greatly reduced centralized control functions. Proposed IoT cybersecurity rules in the UK highlight regulatory concerns about protecting consumer IoT devices from hackers.
Lawful interception: Encryption and aggregation applied to network traffic traversing decentralized networks means that hosts are unable to identify individual data packets. Such networks will still need to maintain the ability to comply with legal interception requirements.
Spectrum: Decentralized networks currently rely on using license-exempt spectrum. In the UK, spectrum for LTE and 5G frequency bands is subject to expensive and exclusive licenses held by MNOs. Spectrum availability will therefore have a significant impact on potential decentralized wireless network functionality.
Disaggregated network architecture is already revolutionizing how mobile network operators operate, fundamentally changing how resources are deployed, using technology to achieve efficiency and encouraging vendor collaboration to achieve interoperability. Decentralized networks are a step forward towards truly fluid network functionality, but require greater coordination and there are management and oversight challenges to overcome. Given how other sectors are adopting blockchain technology and decentralisation, it is easy to see these networks gaining further traction in the UK.
