Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry?

Received 17 January 2024, accepted 24 January 2024, date of publication 30 January 2024, date of current version 6 February 2024. Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3359913 Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? ANDRÉ PERDIGÃO 1,2, JOSÉ QUEVEDO 2, (Member, IEEE), AND RUI L. AGUIAR 1,2, (Senior Member, IEEE) 1Departamento de Eletrónica, Telecomunicações e Informática (DETI), Universidade de Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal 2Instituto de Telecomunicaçes (IT), 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal Corresponding author: André Perdigão ([email protected]) This work was supported by the European Union’s Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Program through the Project IMAGINE-B5G under Grant 101096452 and by Fundaç˜ ão para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT)/Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior (MCTES) through National Funds and when applicable co-funded EU Funds under Project UIDB/50008/2020-UIDP/50008/2020; and in part by the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER), through the Regional Operational Programme of Lisbon (POR LISBOA 2020) and the Competitiveness and Internationalization Operational Programme (COMPETE 2020) of the Portugal 2020 Framework [Project Augmanity with Nr. 046103 (POCI/LISBOA-01-0247-FEDER-046103)]. ABSTRACT 5G technologies are considered a cornerstone of the advent of the next industrial revolution. Promising performance improvements, along with advanced features and assurances in terms of reliability, flexibility and isolation, are expected to enable the realization of diverse and novel use cases, fostering industrial automation with optimized production lines and manufacturing systems. This document shares the experience and knowledge using a 5G SA network for industrial applications. Concretely, the paper examines whether and how the available technology could fulfil the demanding industry requirements, namely in terms of isolation, flexibility and performance. This gap analysis revealed 5G QoS mechanisms as a key driver towards 5G for industry. Thus, a comprehensive analysis of the existing mechanisms and their impact on the network performance are presented, serving as a reality check of 5G SA Release 15 technologies. Although results showed promising possibilities to support industrial deployments, there is still a gap between what’s achievable and what is expected from 5G that will be gradually filled by the introduction of novel features in the upcoming releases. In general, the contributions and insights presented in this paper are considered to be valuable for industry, standards development organizations, manufacturers, and the wider 5G ecosystem. Moreover, this paper serves as a foundational component within a larger endeavour of automating network slicing mechanisms for industrial applications. INDEX TERMS 5G SA, testbed, NPN, network slicing, release 15, Industry 4.0, QoS, industry. I. INTRODUCTION Industry 4.0 aims to connect everything and everyone within the factory to enhance safety, productivity, product quality, and product customization. A wireless technology capable of meeting the demanding requirements of various use cases deployed inside factories, while ensuring a high level of security and data isolation, can become the main driver of Industry 4.0. With its technological advancements, 5G is expected to fulfil the necessary requirements for implementing this new variety of use cases in a factory [1]. This has also been identified by relevant bodies in the 5G ecosystem, such as 5G-ACIA [2] and 3GPP [3]. Ultimately, the introduction of The associate editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and approving it for publication was Stefano Scanzio . 5G technologies for industry use cases is expected to be advantageous from an economic perspective [4],[5]. Considering this, Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) like 3GPP have recognized the necessity of adapting the technology according to industrial requirements and have included several technologies and concepts in their technical specifications. One of these concepts is the Non-Public Network (NPN) [6], which is a 5G network designed for private entities, such as the industry. NPN includes the following two main deployment strategies: i) Standalone NPN, where the vertical owns and has complete control over the network. This means that verticals bear all costs related to the purchase and maintenance of the network. ii) Public Network Integrated NPN (PNI-NPN), where one or more network slices are created within the operator’s VOLUME 12, 2024 2024 The Authors. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. For more information, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 17651 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? public network for the exclusive use of the vertical. This reduces the vertical cost while providing adequate isolation, security, and control of the vertical network. Several deployment options exist within PNI-NPN, and [6] presents some of the envisioned NPN deployment types. Each deployment has a different level of integration with the public network. The network slices in 5G [7] offer several functionalities, with PNI-NPN being one specific use case. Each network slice may have varying functionality (e.g., priority, charging, policy control, security, and mobility) and performance (e.g. latency, mobility, availability, reliability, and throughput) requirements. In addition, network slices can cater to different user groups (e.g., corporate customers, public network users, or industrial users). Network slices, also, allow the deployment of multiple custom networks on a single network infrastructure. This study focuses on assessing whether 5G technology in release 15 meets the stringent industry demands, ultimately evaluating its readiness for deployment in a factory floor for production. To this end, the work relies on a real-world commercial graded 5G SA Release 15 network and takes insights from: (i) white papers from industrial associations such as 5G-ACIA [2],[6]; and (ii) the requirements of several projects, including H2020 5Growth1[4],[8], Augmanity (Augmented Humanity)2[9], and Horizon-Europe Imagine-B5G.3To provide the reader with a more concrete contextualization of the paper’s insights, examples of the Augmanity project are used throughout the paper. However, it is important to understand that this contextualization does not hinder the generalization of the contributions of paper. The industry requires full control over the production line. To this end, the Manufacturing Execution System (MES) provides a comprehensive overview of the production line. MES provides centralized control to personnel, where is possible to monitor the condition of all assets and optimize resource usage. It stands to reason, that the underlying networking infrastructure should be considered as one of the industry assets. As such, the integration of the 5G network with MES becomes an essential aspect of the Industry 4.0 roadmap. However, existing 5G management endpoints are complex and require specific expertise, making it challenging to integrate with the MES. Hence, an initial step towards the integration of 5G and MES, is to gain a thorough understanding of how the 5G network operates. Allowing the subsequent abstraction of the network management endpoints in alignment with the industry requirements. In this context, the main contribution of this paper is to assess the capability of Release 15 technologies to support industrial scenarios by providing a gap analysis and a technical evaluation of the expected performance of a commercial SA 5G network with R15. This evaluation 1https://5growth.eu/ 2https://www.augmanity.pt/ 3https://imagineb5g.eu/ aims to support the stringent and heterogeneous requirements imposed by industries for deploying such technology in their factories. The lack of support to fulfil the slicing requirements in the current solutions, prompted the need for a comprehensive analysis of the flexibility of the network’s mechanisms that impact communication performance. This leads to the second contribution of the paper, which presents quantitative results on how adjustable the R15 5G network is in terms of communication performance. This not only allows to analyze whether current 5G technology can meet the industry expectations but also is considered to be a cornerstone aspect in the larger endeavour of automating network slice deployment. Furthermore, although not tackled in this paper the results presented could be explored to establish direct comparisons not only with the upcoming releases of 5G technologies but also with other concurrent technologies like Wi-Fi or cabled networks. The remainder of this document is organized as follows: Section II presents relevant related work. Section III makes a brief presentation of the Augmanity project, outlining the main requirements imposed by the industry for the implementation of a 5G network in their facilities. This is followed by a description of the network infrastructure, giving an overview of how the different requirements imposed on the network were addressed. Since the main requirements involve the deployment and control of network slices, the document proceeds to examine the current state of network slicing in a commercial 5G network. The main focus is on the communication performance of a network slice, analyzing the flexibility available in an R15 5G network to adjust the communication performance. This analysis centres on the QoS mechanism present in 5G, as there is no direct mechanism to adjust the communication performance of each network slice. So, Section IV introduces the 3GPP QoS mechanisms for enforcing communication performance in 5G and the configurable parameters available in R15. Section Vprovides an overview of 5G software and configurations, discusses the QoS parameters to be validated, how evaluated parameters can be configured in the 5GAIner network, and the scenarios used to evaluate their effects. Section VI describes the tests performed, presents the results, and discusses the effect of each parameter. Section VII provides the document conclusions by discussing the current state of 5G networks, existing problems, and aspects that require improvement before the adoption of the industry. It also discusses the performance results obtained, considers how configurable a slice is at the moment, and discusses the current limitations expected in an R15 5G network. The section finalizes with a brief vision from the authors about future 5G releases and whether 5G will ever be ready for production deployment in the industry. II. RELATED WORK Numerous 5G testbeds have been deployed worldwide to develop and evaluate 5G technologies and use cases. Such testbeds are essential for 5G development, enabling academia 17652 VOLUME 12, 2024 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? and industry to experiment with the technology, assess new functionalities, and explore potential use cases. For instance, authors in [10] present the comprehensive design and deployment of a 5G standalone infrastructure under the scope of 5G-VINNI, while summarizing experimentation with various use cases across different verticals. Similarly, authors in [11] introduce a non-standalone 5G testbed and analyze its performance. Furthermore, authors in [12] present an industrial standalone 5G testbed, evaluate its performance, and conclude that the deployment’s performance effectively meets the requirements of industrial use cases. There are also developments of open-source solutions within the 5G market offering significant advantages. It streamlines technology development, fostering simpler applicability and interaction while mitigating vendor lockin. This approach enables seamless interconnection and interoperability among various solutions. Moreover, the adoption of open-source solutions provides greater control and configurability over the 5G network, empowered by open interfaces and accessible source code. Concretely, multiple open-source initiatives are tackling open-source 5G solutions such as: free5GC,4Open5GS,5and Open Air Interface (OAI).6 In parallel, O-RAN Alliance7has been actively engaged in standard development and advocated for the development of open solutions. Consequently, considerable research efforts were directed towards the development and utilization of Open RAN solutions, as evidenced by the work in [13],[14], [15], and [16]. Additionally, authors in [8] already evaluate the use of Open RAN solutions in the deployment of vertical use cases. For this later work it can be concluded that despite the benefits associated with open solutions, the technology is still being developed, thus having lower performance when compared with commercial solutions. As such, in this paper we opted for using a top-of-the-line solution to assess a best case scenario on the reality of 5G. Authors in [17] discuss various types of use cases that verticals can deploy with 5G, showcasing the benefits that verticals can derive from this technology. The paper also outlines the network requirements necessary for NPN deployment, encompassing security, privacy, and customization requirements. These requirements signify the necessary conditions that must be met before the technology is deemed ready for operational use. Authors in [18] and [19] also delve into a discussion about security and privacy, offering insights into the development and proposing of new solutions to ensure slice security and isolation. This highlights the ongoing research and development of new solutions aimed at addressing some of the existing challenges that must be resolved prior to technology adoption. 4free5GC, https://free5gc.org/ (December 2023) 5Open5GS, https://open5gs.org/ (December 2023) 6OAI, https://openairinterface.org/ (December 2023) 7O-RAN Alliance, https://www.o-ran.org/ (December 2023) The work in [20] focuses on deploying several use cases with completely distinct requirements, which demands the utilization of the three envisioned types of 5G slices for simultaneous deployment. Although the 5G network can deploy the use cases, network resource usage is not optimized, wasting resources and limiting the number of use cases that can be deployed in a single infrastructure. So, as referred by the authors, an optimization of the usage of 5G resources is necessary, but for this, it is necessary to use mechanisms of quality of service in each slice to adjust the performance of communications to the use case. Extensive research has also been conducted on the utilization, benefits and potential applications of 5G in the industrial sector. Authors in [21] conducted a theoretical analysis of the 5G deployment in the industry, presenting its benefits and functionalities that will benefit the industry. Authors in [22] analyse how the management of network slices can be done and the interactions of different stakeholders, by discussing the strategies that the 3GPP Network Slicing management functions allow for the deployment and control of the network slices that verticals will use. In addition, there are also organizations, such as 5G-ACIA and 5G-DNA,8dedicated to the standardization, promotion and dissemination of 5G for the industry. Even with the extensive material discussing and presenting 5G in the industry, it is only possible to understand the requirements and constraints that exist in the deployment of 5G in industrial facilities by directly working with the industry. Therefore, to properly understand the requirements that 5G needs to fulfil, before being implemented in production inside industrial facilities, several projects like H2020 5Growth, Augmanity, and Horizon-Europe ImagineB5G were created with a focus on the usage of 5G technologies by vertical industries. As a result, it was possible to understand the industrial requirements and adjust 5G technology in accordance. To develop initial proof of concepts that demonstrate the usage of 5G by the verticals and its deployment in the production line, one most first assess the configurability of a 5G network and investigate how to adjust the performance of 5G slices tailored to the concrete use case. However, no relevant information was found in the existing literature regarding this topic. As a result, the focus was enlarged to studies of QoS mechanisms in communication technologies that offer insights into customising performance. Authors in [23] study the use of QoS in a network slice through simulation, but in terms of other communication technologies, exists several studies over the years, such as 802.11 networks [24] and [25], MPLS [26], 4G [27], SDN [28], and 5G [29]. Still, an in-depth study of the existing slicing mechanisms which demonstrate that the 5G network is flexible enough to ensure the requirements of the industry was not found in the reviewed literature. 8https://www.5gdna.org/?_l=en VOLUME 12, 2024 17653 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? As such, this document analyzes the requirements of the industry based on a 5G deployment in industrial environments, examining the capabilities of R15 5G to meet the industrial requirements. Since QoS mechanisms are at the basis of slice implementations, the paper presents a study on the QoS mechanisms to assess the flexibility of an R15 5G network and provides a preliminary understanding of the capabilities that could be expected in a 5G slice implementation. III. 5G INDUSTRIAL NETWORK The conception of the 5G Industrial Network involved various stakeholders including universities, research institutes, operators, industries, IT (information technology), and OT (operation technology) companies. The resulting infrastructure was used for testing, development, and evaluation of the 5G use cases under the scope of different projects, partially leading to the results presented in this paper. A. DESIGN, REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS Since the infrastructure is located in Portugal, it needs to comply with Portugal’s regulations, which forbid anyone besides operators from owning a radio spectrum. This restriction limits the possibility of standalone 5G network deployments, as such deployments become dependent on the operators. From the deployment options discussed by 5GACIA in [6], the 5G deployment is restricted to a PNI-NPN. During the implementation of the 5G network in the different projects, verticals imposed several requirements, but there are two main requirements that recurrently emerged across projects: 1) Security and isolation: Ensuring that any data produced by the vertical must be confined to their premises; 2) Network slicing: Provides mechanisms that allow verticals to control the communication performance of 5G communication in the network slices according to their requirements, and mechanisms to monitor the performance of the different slices deployed on the network. B. IMPLEMENTED SOLUTION To address the two requirements above, for deploying a 5G network in vertical’s facilities, the 5G network was designed and adjusted accordingly throughout the execution of the different projects. This section describes the approach taken to tackle each problem. For providing better contextualization, in the remainder of this section, we will focus on the concrete examples of the Augmanity project. 1) SECURITY AND ISOLATION To provide 5G coverage in the industrial facility, the 5GAIner [30] network was expanded to Bosch ThermoTechnology (TT) premises. 5GAIner is the 5G network used in the Augmanity project and is an integral part of the Portuguese facility of the Horizon-Europe Imagine-B5G project. The design of the infrastructure expansion took into account the above requirements. As a solution, Multiaccess Edge Computing (MEC) was included in the industrial FIGURE 1. 5GAIner infrastructure. deployment, providing a local breakout (LBO) User Plane Function (UPF) to address this requirement by design. The LBO UPF functions as an uplink classifier (UL CL) UPF, as shown in Figure 1. The UL CL UPF controls any traffic crossing the 5G network and redirects it to the respective destination, while also providing isolation and restricting unauthorised communications. This functionality was complemented with a Local Area Data Network (LADN), a different tracking area (TA), and a different Data Network Name (DNN). The LADN ensures that only industrial equipment has access to the Data Network (DN) at Bosch. Industrial equipment needs to access the network through the Bosch TA, accessing through the gNB at Bosch while using the Bosch DNN to gain access to the Bosch DN. If all these requirements are not fulfilled, the end device cannot access Bosch DN. Industrial equipment has no access to the public network, and cannot establish network connection in any other TA using the Bosch DNN. Public users can access the 5G network anywhere but can never communicate with the Bosch DN. The infrastructure deployment at Bosch included 2 routers for redundancy, the MEC, and a RAN solution composed of 3 pRRUs to cover the production area of the factory. With this infrastructure and the MEC providing the LBO functionalities, it was assured that the industrial data plane was confined to the factory premises. As a result, no further assessment is required on this topic, and it can be concluded that the existing features in release 15 are sufficient to satisfy the industrial requirements. 2) NETWORK SLICING To tackle this requirement, the system discussed in [22] would be necessary. However, at the moment, there is no available software that provides this network slicing. As an alternative, having different carriers with distinct communication performance was considered. However, this approach would be similar to using different technologies to implement each use case, with the technology choice based on the specific communication requirements. Therefore, it was realized that 5GAIner does not support any mechanisms of slice implementation from the beginning. Instead, the control of the slice is dependent on QoS flows, and like any R15 5G network, it is restricted to eMBB slices. 17654 VOLUME 12, 2024 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? Since there are no integrated mechanisms for high-level slicing management, it was necessary to rely on QoS mechanisms to adjust the performance of each communication using the 5G network. The QoS mechanisms are based on channels, allowing the differentiation of each channel’s performance. By configuring multiple channels, it is possible to have a specific communication service in each channel with distinct communication performance characteristics. However, these configurations need to be manually configured, and with the R15 network, they are limited to the configurability expected in an eMBB slice. Therefore, even though the slicing that 5GAIner supports is limited to manual configurations, it was possible to implement end-to-end slicing in the network using the QoS mechanisms available. So in an R15 5G network is possible to support slicing, MEC, security, and isolation. Since QoS-based slicing is available in 5GAIner and verticals are highly interested in the configurability that can be obtained in a 5G slice. The rest of the document makes an analysis of the QoS mechanisms available in an R15 5G network. IV. 5G QOS ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS In R15 [31] a network slice includes: Control Plane Functions and User Plane Network Functions in the network core, and for radio, it can include a New Generation Radio Access Network (NG-RAN) or a non-3GPP Access Network with N3IWF (Non-3GPP Interworking Function) functions. Each network slice is identified by a Single Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (S-NSSAI), which is composed of i) a Slice/Service Type (SST), which indicates the expected behaviour of the network slice concerning features and services; and ii) a Slice Differentiator (SD), which is optional and is used to differentiate multiple slices of the same SST. Release 15 introduces the following standard SST values: 1, used for services requiring 5G enhanced Mobile Broadband (eMBB); 2, used for services requiring Ultra-Reliable Low Latency Communication (URLLC); and 3, used for services requiring Massive Internet of Things (MIoT). Each slice type focuses on a set of parameters, where eMBB is on throughput and network efficiency, URLLC is on latency and reliability, and MIoT is on connection density. These different types of slices will be essential for the deployment of the envisioned factory use cases, such as the ones presented in [32]. The requirements can be distinct, such as the synchronization of two machines, which requires a URLLC slice, and the application of predictive maintenance to machines, requiring a MIoT slice. QoS is essential to define distinct communication characteristics for different services and eventually for different slices. This section briefly explains how the QoS process works in 5G. For a simplified understanding of the text, Table 1presents the meaning of some abbreviations used, since there are various abbreviations and acronyms associated with 5G and QoS. TABLE 1. Abbreviations. A. QOS MODEL In terms of QoS, in release 15 [31],[33], the 5G QoS model is based on QoS Flows. Figure 2demonstrates the components of a QoS Flow and the network functions affected by each component. FIGURE 2. QoS model schematic. 5G supports the implementation of Non-Guaranteed Bit Rate QoS Flows (Non-GBR QoS Flows) and GBR QoS Flow, which can be a Delay-critical GBR QoS Flow. Each QoS Flow contains a PCC (Policy and Charging Control) rule and a QoS Profile. QoS Flows also have associated one or more QoS Rules. PCC rules contain the information needed to detect packets in the user plane, apply policy control, QoS, and proper charging for a service data flow (SDF). The PCC rule has a Packet Detection Rule (PDR) for detection. The PDR contains a packet filter set with the information to identify VOLUME 12, 2024 17655 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? packets (for example, expected IP and source interface). As for the rest, PCC rules have the identification of the following rules to be enforced: •QoS Enforcement Rule (QER) defines the bit rate limitations and QoS packet marking; •Forwarding Action Rule (FAR) defines what to do with the packet if drop, forward or buffer them. It also defines packet encapsulation/decapsulation and the forwarding destination; •Usage Reporting Rule (URR) defines how to count packets and report measurements to the control plane. From the PCC rule, the SMF can derive the QoS profile, UPF (User Plane Function) instructions, and QoS rules. PCF provides additional information about the PCC rule. The QoS Profile includes the components shown in Figure 2, which define the QoS parameters of the communication. In addition, the QoS profile is also associated with a QoS Flow Identifier (QFI). Each QoS Flow is associated with one or more QoS Rules and a QoS Class Identifier (QCI). The QoS Rules define how the User Equipment (UE) classifies and marks UL User Plane traffic. While the QCI can be defined by the QoS Rule or PCC Rule, it can also be defined by the 5G QoS Identifier (5QI) in use, which is associated with a specific QCI. QCI value is a scalar that is used as a reference for specific packet forwarding behaviour (e.g. packet loss rate and packet delay budget). Additionally, access network nodes use it as a reference for the parameter values used to control packet forwarding (e.g. scheduling weights, admission thresholds, queue management thresholds, and link layer protocol configurations). Operators are able to configure these parameter values on each access network node (e.g., gNodeB) to adjust communication performance. Considering the protocol stack used by NG-RAN (composed of SDAP, PDCP, RLC, MAC, and PHY). MAC, RLC, and PDCP sub-layers have several features and services that are presented in [34]. Operators can use them to configure communication performance applying QoS Flow differentiation in the access network. The most relevant features and services are presented below. •MAC Sub-layer –Priority handling between UEs using dynamic scheduling; –Priority handling between logical channels of one UE using logical channel prioritization; •RLC Sub-layer –Transmission mode: with (AM) or without (UM) Acknowledgement –Sequence numbering independent of the one in PDCP (UM and AM); –Reassembly of SDU (AM and UM); •PDCP Sub-layer –Maintenance of PDCP SNs; –Timer-based SDU discard; –Reordering and in-order delivery; Besides the RAN configurable protocol services and features, 3GPP has standardized some QoS features in release 15 5G network [31] which are presented in Table 2. B. QOS CONFIGURATIONS Figure 3demonstrates a schematic representing where and how to configure QoS settings. The configurations of a QoS Flow can be static or dynamic. The static configuration types are: •Pre-configured is the configuration of QoS rules, QoS profiles, and PCC rules on the specific device before communications. Most devices come with some preconfigurations already. In RAN comes pre-configured 5QI or QFI mapped to the standardized QoS characteristics, which are given in Table 5.7.4-1 of [31]. In UPF comes a basic PCC Rule pre-configured just for forwarding packets without QoS enforcement. •Subscription values, which define the default Non-GBR QoS Flow of all devices that can access the network. These configurations are done in UDM. •Predefined PCC Rule is configured in the network and cannot be modified at run-time. This can be configured in PCF, or configured in the SMF and UPF. QoS rules can be delivered by SMF, pre-configured, or derived by the UE using Reflective QoS (explained in Table 2). In the case of dynamic configurations, these rules can be changed even during service transmission, but can only be enforced and modified by PCF. FIGURE 3. Configuration schematic of a QoS Flow. SMF (Session Management Function) can configure a PDU (Protocol Data Unit) Session in these ways: •Using default subscription values retrieved from the UDM (subscription values provide the default Non-GBR QoS Flow that UEs use to connect to the network and transmit data), which needs to have an ARP value and a Standardized Non-GBR 5QI value; •Or using a PCC rule, in which the SMF assigns a QFI and uses a PCC (Policy and Charging Control) rule, binding them to the QoS Flow. This binding is based on QoS and service requirements. These rules can be configured in SMF and UPF or in PCF, which then sends the necessary PCC rule information to the SMF. 17656 VOLUME 12, 2024 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? TABLE 2. 5G QoS parameters. In a PDU session establishment with a PCC rule the SMF sends i) the PCC rule identification to UPF, where the other instructions are configured, or all required information in case the rule is configured in PCF; ii) the QoS Profile to RAN; and iii) the QoS rule to UE, if reflective QoS is disabled; if reflective QoS is active, UE derives the QoS rule from the downlink flow. Figure 3presents a more complete list of all information that SMF can send. Where the information for UPF contains: i) QoS-related information, which can be MBR, GFBR, and MFBR for a GBR QoS Flow; ii) the marking value, which can be QFI; and iii) packet marking, which can be the DSCP value. C. QOS ENFORCING Figure 4demonstrates a schematic representing how is the marking and mapping of QoS Flow packets, which is explained next. In DL transmission, the UPF performs the following actions: i) traffic mapping of QoS Flows using PDRs; ii) Session-AMBR (Aggregate Maximum Bit Rate) enforcement; iii) packet marking using SMF QoS Flow indications; iv) packet forwarding through a tunnel belonging to the PDU Session, with the QFI and RQA (if enabled) in the tunnel encapsulation header. The (R)AN maps QoS Flow packets to specific AN resources, based on: QFI, associated 5G QoS profile, and N3 tunnel used by the packet. The UE VOLUME 12, 2024 17657 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? FIGURE 4. Schematic of QoS Flow classification and User Plane marking and AN resources mapping. creates a new derived QoS rule in case of Reflective QoS is active. In UL transmissions, the UE performs the following actions: i) maps the UL User Plane traffic to the QoS flows based on the QoS rules; ii) marks the packets with the QFI of the matching rule; iii) enforces the Session-AMBR; and iv) transmits packets using AN resources based on the provided (R)AN mapping. (R)AN executes as follows: i) forwards packets through the N3 tunnel to the Core Network (CN); ii) places the QFI value in the encapsulation header; and iii) marks UL packets based on: QoS Flow 5QI, priority level, and ARP priority. The UPF checks that the QFIs in packets are correct and enforces Session-AMBR. V. EXPERIMENTATION OF QOS FEATURES IN REAL-LIFE To test and validate several of the 5G QoS features presented above, the industrial 5G network which is a real-world 5G infrastructure based on a commercial SA implementation introduced in Section III is further presented in the following subsection. The rest of this section presents the validation scenario and the QoS parameters to be validated. A. INDUSTRIAL NETWORK The industrial network infrastructure is deployed over several sites as presented in Figure 1, having the core in the Instituto de Telecomunicações (IT) of Aveiro. IT and its project partners use this infrastructure to develop, test, and validate 5G technologies. The control network functions of the infrastructure at the moment are SMF, AMF, AUSF, NRF, NSSF, and UDM. Being these NFs the minimum necessary for supporting the development, testing, and deployment of all industrial use cases envisioned to be deployed in the network, while ensuring its good functionality. The baseline quantitative performance data of this deployment is provided in [30]. But, when experimenting with the network functionalities it was noticed that is particularly hard to: i) use end-toend GBR QoS Flows. ii) and configure the Packet Error Rate of a QoS Flow. These restrictions are due to the specific implementation details of the 5G network. Even so, with this infrastructure is possible to evaluate most of the network functionalities and understand their impact in a real network. The current release of the network used is R15, which is the last release widely available at the moment. So it is necessary to recall that release 15 only supports eMBB slices, not supporting URLLC and MIoT slices and their features. So most of the functionalities focus more on controlling bandwidth than other parameters. Nevertheless, the industrial 5G network is a representation of what today’s commercial infrastructure is, and this network is expected to be improved over time, receiving new features, network functions, and releases. This network is owned by a research institute in Portugal, and the spectrum used in the infrastructure is a reserved band of an operator, Altice. Table 3presents the antenna configurations used during the tests. These values can be used to understand the limitations and maximum values presented in the tests. TABLE 3. gNodeB technical specifications. B. QOS PARAMETER CONFIGURATION In the industrial 5G network is possible to configure several of the QoS parameters presented in Section V. This subsection presents how to configure the evaluated parameters. This information is necessary to fully understand the impact of each QoS parameter. Scheduling priority and Guaranteed Rate are MAC protocol parameters. MAC configurations have a MAC parameter group ID, which is an integer used to identify a specific MAC configuration. This MAC parameter group ID is then associated with a QCI value. Averaging Window, Priority Level, and Packet Delay Budget are directly associated with a QCI value. In gNB, there is a mapping between QCI and 5QI values. The 5QI is associated with a UE in the UDM using subscription parameters. MFBR parameter is configured in a PCC rule in UPF. This PCC rule is associated with a specific DNN (Data Network Name) and a specific UE. Therefore, the PCC rule is only enabled when the specified UE is using the defined DNN. In addition, this rule has a packet filter set associated with it, making it possible to associate the rule with a specific communication. DNN-AMBR is set on UDM using a DNN QoS template. This template is a UE subscription value that is associated with a specific DNN and slice. UE-AMBR is a UE 17658 VOLUME 12, 2024 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? subscription value defined in the UDM, which needs to be set before UE connects to the network. DSCP can be configured by a remark rule, a QoS profile, and a gNB. •The remark rule is a rule available in the network which is similar to the PCC rule in terms of configuration, but in this case, defines the value of DSCP or TOS of the packets. So, it can be linked to a specific UE, DNN, and/or filter. And marks the packets with the defined DSCP value when they leave UPF. •A QoS profile can be configured in the SMF and can be a global QoS profile associated with all DNNs, or a specific profile associated with each DNN. The QoS profile maps a specific set of 5QI and ARP Priority levels to a specific DSCP behaviour. The configured DSCP value can be different for each 5G interface (N3, N6, and N9). The 5QI and ARP values are subscription parameters configured in the UDM for each UE. •The gNB uses the User Data Type (UDT) Number to define the DSCP value of the packets, the UDT number is equal to the 5QI value used in communication. Each user data type number has a specific DSCP value associated with it, which is the value marked on the packets when they leave the RAN. C. VALIDATION Taking into consideration the features above, the functionalities of the following QoS parameters were selected for validation. •Scheduling Priority Weight Factor; •Guaranteed Rate in RAN; •Averaging Window; •Priority Level; •Packet Delay Budget (PDB); •Maximum Flow Bit Rate (MFBR); •DNN-AMBR •UE-AMBR; •DSCP; These QoS parameters are validated in a real-world deployment scenario presented in Figure 5using industrial 5G infrastructure. The tools used in the tests are iperf3,9simple python scripts, and 5G network metrics. Iperf3 is used for throughput tests and to generate traffic interference. The Python scripts can have a ping-like functionality or just send UDP packets. 5G network metrics are the metrics recorded by the 5G network. All tests, unless specifically specified, are performed on the downlink. Therefore, the iperf3 commands are configured as reverse so that the transmission is on the downlink. The UEs used are Huawei 5G CPE pro 2 connected through ethernet to single-board computers that run the software. During the entire test, the UEs are static, indoor with lineof-sight, and within a 10-meter range of the antenna. 9Iperf3, https://iperf.fr/ (July 2022) FIGURE 5. Validation scenario. 1) THROUGHPUT VALIDATION In throughput validation scenarios iperf3 was used to generate data, except for the minimum throughput tests, where iperf3 didn’t work adequately. In these situations, a simple Python script was used. Validation data were obtained with the 5G metrics, which provide throughput on the RAN at the RLC layer, which includes some overhead. When using iperf3, the server in Figure 5has all the iperf3 servers, and the UEs work as iperf3 clients. In the minimum value tests, it was used a simple Python script to send UDP packets, where we can adjust the data in each packet and the packets per second. 2) PACKET LOSS VALIDATION The Packet loss validation scenario is similar to the throughput validation scenario, but the metrics are obtained with iperf3 in this case. For this purpose, iperf3 was configured with UDP, which gives the number of packets lost and packets sent in the transmission, used to calculate the packet loss percentage in the transmission during the test. 3) RTT VALIDATION In RTT (Round-Trip Time) validation scenarios, a Python script with a ping-like functionality using UDP packets is used. Where the UE sends a packet, the server returns it, and the UE calculates the time between sending and receiving the packet, obtaining the RTT value. The validations are performed on both an empty cell and a loaded cell. In the case of the loaded cell, two UEs are used with the basic configuration, which uses the standard configuration of 5QI value 9. These two UEs are using the entire bandwidth, where one uses the entire uplink bandwidth and the other uses the entire downlink bandwidth. VI. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS This section describes the tests performed to validate each of the QoS parameters, presenting the results obtained and discussing the effects of each parameter. All tests were run VOLUME 12, 2024 17659 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? functionalities that any 5G network should support, such as usage of end-to-end GBR QoS Flows, configuration of PER, and dynamic adjustment of communication performance while the UE is transmitting. On the 5GAIner network, only MFBR allows for dynamic configuration. Currently, the network lacks a precisely synchronized common clock among all NFs, UEs, and servers. Suchprecise clock synchronization would be essential for conducting more accurate assessments of the low latencies associated with a 5G deployment. This limitation hinders the ability to conduct an in-depth analysis of communication latency, including the examination of how each network component of the user plane affects communication latency. FIGURE 20. 5GAIner latencies. In the 5GAIner network is possible to implement hardcoded slices, but the R15 is not ready for the industry lacking controllability and an easier way to adjust network performance. A R15 does not have URLLC, so the control of the latency is extremely limited. Even though the latency values obtained in the 5GAIner network are shown in Figure 20, demonstrating that most packets have a latency below 10 ms. C. FUTURE RELEASES Despite the limitations of the current R15, it is evident that commercial equipment already offers flexibility in defining the performance of slices. However, the majority of parameters are limited to influencing communication throughput. It is anticipated that later releases will introduce new parameters that impact other KPIs. Release 16, which incorporates URLLC, already introduces new features in network configurations that enable improved control over the latency performance of slices. Additionally, in release 17, further features are introduced, also affecting low-power communications. The new features expected in upcoming releases will significantly enhance the management of 5G communications, facilitating the establishment of various slices beyond eMBB. Moreover, they will enable superior control over diverse communication parameters crucial to specific vertical use cases. For example, some of the features anticipated in subsequent releases and their impact on specific KPIs include the following: (i) latency - configured grant, PDCP Out-oforder Delivery, and Time Sensitive Communication (TSC); (ii) reliability - PDCP duplication, Multi-TRP, and Low Block Error Rate (BLER) Modulation Coding Scheme (MCS) and Channel Quality Indicator (CQI) table; (iii) energy efficiency - Wake-Up Signal (WUS), Reduce Capabilities (RedCap), Small Data Transmission (SDT), and Mobile Initiated Connection Only (MICO); among other anticipated features and functionalities. Where release 18, should already support most of the problems identified here, and in the meantime, most of the problems identified by other researchers in the literature should be solved. So there is an optimism that in a later release, the 5G network will become ready and much easier to use, allowing verticals to adopt and use the technology without requiring such a deep knowledge of 5G. While later releases will offer enhanced performance and flexibility, it is anticipated that release 15 SA will be the primary offering for operators in the coming years due to the time it takes for subsequent releases to be properly materialized and assessed. D. CONSIDERATIONS ON SECURITY AND ISOLATION 5G brings many security features that are known as key enablers for realizing use cases with different degrees of security risks, 5G-ACIA in [37] delves into four different levels of security which impose different requirements on the network to ensure the data in the 5G network is secure all the time. Considering the functionalities outlined in the document, in terms of security and isolation within release 15, it is possible to define filters Layer 3, Layer 4, and Layer 7 using PCC rules, which define the communications rules for end devices. Layer 3 and Layer 4 filters can define the IPs, Layer 4 protocols, and ports that each PCC rule controls. On the other hand, Layer 7 filters can specify the URLs and method types (such as GET, POST, CONNECT, etc.) controlled by a PCC rule. The PCC Rule defines if the traffic corresponding to that filter can pass or is blocked on the UPF. In subsequent releases, it is anticipated that the 5G network will support at least User Plane (UP) integrity protection and UP confidentiality protection. These features serve to safeguard user plane data during communication. The significance of security and isolation within 5G and network slicing has been extensively addressed by multiple stakeholders. For instance, 5G-ACIA delves into this critical aspect in [37], while 3GPP offers insights into network slice security in 5G and B5G (Beyond 5G) in [38]. Moreover, various cybersecurity agencies highlighted numerous threats associated with 5G network slicing and proposed corresponding mitigation strategies in [39]. Additionally, while exploring private 5G deployments, several design choices can further increase the level of isolation of the 5G network. Ranging from (SNPN) to the various flavours of (PNI-NPN) the network user and control planes can be more or less confined to industrial deployment. Furthermore, since the objective was to test the best performance possible in a 5G network, and since is acceptable in some scenarios, due to the data being limited to the local 17666 VOLUME 12, 2024 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? domain, minimal security measures were used in the 5G domain. E. FUTURE WORK For a broader adoption of 5G technologies by the industry network slicing is of utmost importance. However, the manual deployment of slices, as demonstrated in this work is unfeasible, due to being error-prone, time-consuming, and requiring specialized knowledge in 5G technology. Hence, automating the management of network slices emerges as a necessity. However, to achieve this automation, it is vital to comprehend the underlying mechanisms within the 5G network. This document primarily focuses on elucidating the operational functionality of 5G networks and delves into the exploration of underlying mechanisms that can be used in the realization of network slices. Future works will aim to scrutinize the outcome of this work to establish an automated mechanism for managing network slices in a 5G network for the realization of vertical applications. In doing so, we will follow standardization efforts related to the automation of network slicing mechanisms [40],[41], and [42]. REFERENCES [1] J. Cheng, W. Chen, F. Tao, and C.-L. Lin, ‘‘Industrial IoT in 5G environment towards smart manufacturing,’’ J. Ind. Inf. Integr., vol. 10, pp. 10–19, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jii.2018.04.001. [2] Industrial 5G Edge Computing Use Cases, Architecture and Deployment, 5G Alliance for Connected Industries and Automation (5G-ACIA), Germany, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://5g-acia.org/ whitepapers/industrial-5g-edge-computing-use-cases-architecture-anddeployment/ [3] Service Requirements for Cyber-Physical Control Applications in Vertical Domains, document 22.104, Version 17.7.0, 3GPP, 2020. [4] D. Corujo, J. Quevedo, R. L. Aguiar, P. Paixão, H. Martins, and Á. Gomes, ‘‘An economic assessment of the contributions of 5G into the railways and energy sectors,’’ Wireless Pers. Commun., vol. 129, no. 1, pp. 71–94, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11277-022-10086-5. [5] R. Kiesel, J. V. Roessel, and R. H. Schmitt, ‘‘Quantification of economic potential of 5G for latency critical applications in production,’’ Proc. Manuf., vol. 52, pp. 113–120, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2020.11.021. [6] 5G Non-Public Networks for Industrial Scenarios, 5G Alliance for Connected Industries and Automation (5G-ACIA), Germany, Sep. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://5g-acia.org/whitepapers/5g-non-publicnetworks-for-industrial-scenarios/ [7] S. Wijethilaka and M. Liyanage, ‘‘Survey on network slicing for Internet of Things realization in 5G networks,’’ IEEE Commun. Surveys Tuts., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 957–994, 2nd Quart., 2021, doi: 10.1109/COMST.2021.3067807. [8] D. Corujo, J. Quevedo, V. Cunha, A. Perdigão, R. Silva, D. Santos, R. L. Aguiar, P. Paixão, P. E. Silva, R. Antunes, C. Marques, and Á. Gomes, ‘‘An empirical assessment of the contribution of 5G in vertical industries: A case for the transportation sector,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 15348–15363, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3243732. [9] J. Meira, G. Matos, A. Perdigão, J. Cação, C. Resende, W. Moreira, M. Antunes, J. Quevedo, R. Moutinho, J. Oliveira, P. Rendeiro, P. Oliveira, A. Oliveira-Jr., J. Santos, and R. L. Aguiar, ‘‘Industrial Internet of Things over 5G: A practical implementation,’’ Sensors, vol. 23, no. 11, p. 5199, May 2023, doi: 10.3390/s23115199. [10] M. Ghassemian, P. Muschamp, and D. Warren, ‘‘Experience building a 5G testbed platform,’’ in Proc. IEEE 3rd 5G World Forum (5GWF), Sep. 2020, pp. 473–478, doi: 10.1109/5GWF49715.2020.9221109. [11] Y. Wang, A. Gorski, and A. P. da Silva, ‘‘Development of a data-driven mobile 5G testbed: Platform for experimental research,’’ in Proc. IEEE Int. Medit. Conf. Commun. Netw. (MeditCom), Sep. 2021, pp. 324–329, doi: 10.1109/MeditCom49071.2021.9647461. [12] Y. R. Wei, A. S. Keshavamurthy, R. Wittmann, and A. R. Zahonero, ‘‘A standalone 5G industrial testbed design considerations for industry 4.0,’’ in Proc. 52nd Eur. Microw. Conf. (EuMC), Sep. 2022, pp. 884–887, doi: 10.23919/EuMC54642.2022.9924323. [13] C. Coletti, W. Diego, R. Duan, S. Ghassemzadeh, D. Gupta, J. Huang, and K. Yan, ‘‘O-RAN: Towards an open, software-driven, and intelligent radio access network,’’ RS Open J. Innov. Commun. Technol., vol. 4, no. 9, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://rs-ojict.pubpub.org/pub/ji8c94of/release/2 [14] S. Iqbal and J. M. Hamamreh, ‘‘A comprehensive tutorial on how to practically build and deploy 5G networks using open-source software and general-purpose, off-the-shelf hardware,’’ RS Open J. Innov. Commun. Technol., vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 1–28, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.46470/03d8ffbd.4ccb7950. [15] A. Akman, S. Gu, J. Huang, I. Wong, H. Akhtar, S. Poretsky, and A. Buldorini, ‘‘O-RAN minimum viable plan and acceleration towards commercialization,’’ RS Open J. Innov. Commun. Technol., vol. 4, no. 9, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://rs-ojict.pubpub.org/pub/gsry0u68/ [16] A. Pinchuk, R. Odarchenko, V. Samoilenko, and A. Imanbayev, ‘‘5G network deployment based on open-source projects: A comparative analysis,’’ in Proc. IEEE 12th Int. Conf. Intell. Data Acquisition Adv. Comput. Syst., Technol. Appl. (IDAACS), vol. 1, Sep. 2023, pp. 596–601, doi: 10.1109/IDAACS58523.2023.10348675. [17] S. Guo, B. Lu, M. Wen, S. Dang, and N. Saeed, ‘‘Customized 5G and beyond private networks with integrated URLLC, eMBB, mMTC, and positioning for industrial verticals,’’ IEEE Commun. Standards Mag., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 52–57, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1109/MCOMSTD.0001.2100041. [18] T. Wichary, J. Mongay Batalla, C. X. Mavromoustakis, J. Zurek, and G. Mastorakis, ‘‘Network slicing security controls and assurance for verticals,’’ Electronics, vol. 11, no. 2, p. 222, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.3390/electronics11020222. [19] V. A. Cunha, N. Maroulis, C. Papagianni, J. Sacido, M. Jimenez, F. Ubaldi, M. Gharbaoui, C. Y. Chang, N. Koursioumpas, K. Tomakh, and D. Corujo, ‘‘5 Growth: Secure and reliable network slicing for verticals,’’ in Proc. Joint Eur. Conf. Netw. Commun. 6G Summit (EuCNC/6G Summit), 2021, pp. 347–352, doi: 10.1109/EuCNC/6GSummit51104.2021.9482536. [20] M. Xie, A. J. Gonzalez, P. Grønsund, H. Lønsethagen, P. Waldemar, C. Tranoris, S. Denazis, and A. Elmokashfi, ‘‘Practically deploying multiple vertical services into 5G networks with network slicing,’’ IEEE Netw., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 32–39, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1109/MNET.001.2100361. [21] S. K. Rao and R. Prasad, ‘‘Impact of 5G technologies on Industry 4.0,’’ Wireless Pers. Commun., vol. 100, pp. 145–159, May 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11277-018-5615-7. [22] J. S. Walia, H. Hinen, K. Kilkki, and S. Yrj, ‘‘5G network slicing strategies for a smart factory,’’ Comput. Ind., vol. 111, pp. 108–120, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compind.2019.07.006. [23] Z. Shu and T. Taleb, ‘‘A novel QoS framework for network slicing in 5G and beyond networks based on SDN and NFV,’’ IEEE Netw., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 256–263, May 2020, doi: 10.1109/MNET.001.1900423. [24] S. Perez and H. Facchini, ‘‘An evaluation of QoS for intensive video traffic over 802.11e WLANs,’’ in Proc. Int. Conf. Electron., Commun. Comput. (CONIELECOMP), 2015, pp. 8–15, doi: 10.1109/CONIELECOMP.2015.7086933. [25] H. Zhu and M. Li, ‘‘A survey of quality of service in IEEE 802.11 networks,’’ IEEE Wireless Commun., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 6–14, 2004, doi: 10.1109/MWC.2004.1325887. [26] D. Zhang and D. Ionescu, ‘‘QoS performance analysis in deployment of DiffServ-aware MPLS traffic engineering,’’ in Proc. 8th ACIS Int. Conf. Softw. Eng., Artif. Intell., Netw., Parallel/Distrib. Comput. (SNPD), vol. 3, Aug. 2007, pp. 963–967, doi: 10.1109/SNPD.2007.541. [27] Y. Guo and H. Chaskar, ‘‘Class-based quality of service over air interfaces in 4G mobile networks,’’ IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 132–137, Mar. 2002, doi: 10.1109/35.989773. [28] K. S. Ibarra-Lancheros, G. Puerto-Leguizamón, and C. Suárez-Fajardo, ‘‘Quality of service evaluation based on network slicing for softwaredefined 5G systems,’’ TecnoLógicas, vol. 21, no. 43, pp. 27–41, Sep. 2018. [29] Q. Wang, J. Alcaraz-Calero, R. Ricart-Sanchez, M. B. Weiss, A. Gavras, N. Nikaein, X. Vasilakos, B. Giacomo, G. Pietro, M. Roddy, and M. Healy, ‘‘Enable advanced QoS-aware network slicing in 5G networks for slice-based media use cases,’’ IEEE Trans. Broadcast., vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 444–453, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1109/TBC.2019.2901402. [30] J. Quevedo, A. Perdigão, D. Santos, R. Silva, and R. L. Aguiar, ‘‘5GAIner: Taking the verticals into the 5G road,’’ in Proc. Joint Eur. Conf. Netw. Commun. 6G Summit (EuCNC/6G Summit), Jun. 2023, pp. 514–519, doi: 10.1109/EuCNC/6GSummit58263.2023.10188375. VOLUME 12, 2024 17667 A. Perdigão et al.: Is Release 15 Ready for the Industry? [31] System Architecture for the 5G System (5GS), document TS 23.501, V15.13.0, 3GPP, Mar. 2022. [32] 5G ACIA, Key 5G Use Cases and Requirements, 5G Alliance for Connected Industries and Automation (5G-ACIA), Germany, May 2020. [Online]. Available: https://5g-acia.org/whitepapers/key-5g-use-casesand-requirements/ [33] Policy and Charging Control Architecture, document TS 23.203, V15.5.0, 3GPP, Jun. 2019. [34] NR; NR and NG-RAN Overall Description, document TS 38.300, V15.13.0, Jun. 2021. [35] Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers, document RFC2474, DSCP Field, Dec. 1998. [36] Configuration Guidelines for DiffServ Service Classes, document RFC4594, DSCP Values, Aug. 2006. [37] Security Aspects of 5G for Industrial Networks, 5G Alliance for Connected Industries and Automation (5G-ACIA), Germany, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://5g-acia.org/whitepapers/security-aspects-of5g-for-industrial-networks/ [38] (May 2023). 3GPP. [Online]. Available: https://www.3gpp.org/ technologies/slicing-security [39] ESF Potential Threats to 5G Network Slicing, U.S. Dept. Defense, Dec. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://media.defense.gov/2022/Dec/13/ 2003132073/-1/-1/0/POTENTIAL%20THREATS%20TO%205G%20NETWORK%20SLICING_508C_FINAL.PDF [40] Management and Orchestration; 5G Network Resource Model (NRM), document TS 28.541, V 18.4.1, 3GPP, Jun. 2023. [41] Management and orchestration; Provisioning, document TS 28.531, V 18.3.0, 3GPP, Sep. 2023. [42] Study on Network Slice Management Capability Exposure, document TR 28.824, V 18.0.1, 3GPP, Jul. 2023. ANDRÉ PERDIGÃO received the M.S. degree in electronic and telecommunications from the University of Aveiro, in 2018, where he is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering. He was a Junior Researcher with Instituto de Telecomunicações (IT), in 2016 and 2017. Since 2018, he has been at IT as a Researcher. During this time, he worked with different communication technologies, such as WiFi, LoRa, SDN, 2G, 802.11p, and 5G, and working with different industrial networks and technologies. It was involved in the designing and planning of PASMO and 5GAIner networks. Then, he implemented, deployed, and maintained the 5GAIner networks, during this time contributed to several projects, such as PASMO, 5GASP, 5Growth, Augmanity, Imagine-B5G, and 5GAIner. Work in the last years, he was focused on optimizing industrial communication systems based on 5G. More focused on QoS and slicing, but analysing any functionality of 5G that can be used in I4.0. JOSÉ QUEVEDO (Member, IEEE) received the Ph.D. degree in telecommunications from the MAP-Tele Doctoral Program in Telecommunications, in 2020. His early research activities were focused on information-centric networking (ICN) approaches for supporting the Internet of Things (IoT) scenarios. This work conducted at the Telecommunications and Networking-Av Group (TN-Av), Instituto de Telecomunicações (IT-Av), and the University of Aveiro (UA), Portugal, has been disseminated in book chapters, conference papers and journal articles, and contributions to open-source software. He has been involved in the different stages of several research projects, such as H2020 5Growth, H2020 5GASP, and HE Imagine-B5G. He has been further involved in the academy by working as an Invited Adjunct Professor with the University of Aveiro— Águeda School of Technology and Management (ESTGA). Currently, he is the Executive Manager of the 5GAIner Laboratory and a Senior Researcher with IT-Av, with a focus on networking protocols, network programmability, and 5G and beyond systems. RUI L. AGUIAR (Senior Member, IEEE) was the Founder of the ATNOG Research Group, Advanced Telecommunication Research Group, Universidade de Aveiro. He is currently a Full Professor with Universidade de Aveiro. He is also co-coordinating a research line with Instituto de Telecomunicações, on the area of networks and services. He has been an Advisory for the Portuguese Secretaria de Estado das Comunicações and a member of the task force for 5G cybersecurity. He is a Chartered Engineer and a member of ACM. He has served as the Portugal Chapter Chair for the IEEE Communications Society and has been serving as the Steering Board Chair for Networld Europe, the European ETP representing the telecommunications community, engaged in the discussions of the future European research and development work program for telecommunications. As further community engagement, he has served as the Technical and General (Co)Chair for several conferences, ICNS, ICT, ISCC, Mobiarch, Monami, and NTMS. He is a regular keynote speaker in the future of mobile communications and digital society, with dozens of talks across the whole world. He is an Associate Editor of Emerging Telecommunication Technologies (Wiley) and Wireless Networks (Springer). 17668 VOLUME 12, 2024