# 3 GPP Evolution from 5G to 6G: A 10-Year Retrospective
## 8 What Should 6G Standardization Do Differently? In the previous sections, we have reviewed the evolution of 3 GPP from Release 15 to Release 20. This decade-long evolution journey in 3 GPP has provided valuable lessons for future mobile network standards and technologies. This section presents five key lessons, informed by standardization experience and intensive discussions with key players in the telecommunication industry. Table 2 summarizes the lessons and their implications for 6G. Lesson #1: Overly complicated 5G design with excessive options led to fragmentation and limited deployment of features. As reviewed in this retrospective, 5G evolution has unlocked a wealth of innovative ideas and features, aiming to address diverse use cases and deployment needs. However, the overly complicated 5G design, where multiple options are provided for each functionality, has resulted in fragmentation and inefficiencies. The flexibility increased complexity in the device and network implementation and led to fragmented adoption, with some features only implemented for specific regions or industries, and with high testing and deployment costs for vendors and operators. For example, sidelink evolution in 3 GPP introduced multiple configurations and features across different 3 GPP releases, but its commercial deployment is yet to take off. 6G standardization should focus on technical excellence to achieve simplicity and scalability. The 4G LTE standard achieved widespread success by emphasizing technical excellence and global alignment without excessive fragmentation. Standards for 6G should follow this example, aiming for high-quality solutions rather than compromising with overly flexible or fragmented approaches. Moreover, standards should avoid adding excessive layers of complexity to features across releases. For enhancements, features that have clear use cases with high demand and significant commercial potential should be prioritized;  
**Lesson #2: Focusing on impractical 5G performance requirements led to complex features that were not deployed. **  
The focus on achieving extreme performance metrics in 5G, such as URLLC with sub-millisecond latency and near-perfect reliability, resulted in features that were technically impressive but not deployed. This is due to a number of factors, including the high complexity in implementation, lack of immediate commercial demand, and limited practical use cases that justify the cost and effort of deployment. Furthermore, pursuing air \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{|p{142.3 pt}|p{142.3 pt}|} \hline \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{**Lessons Learned from 5G Evolution**} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{**What Should 6G Standardization Do Differently?**} \\ \hline
**Lesson \#1: Overly complicated 5G design with excessive options led to fragmentation and limited deployment of features.** & 6G standardization should focus on technical excellence to achieve simplicity and scalability. \\ \hline
**Lesson \#2: Focusing on impractical 5G performance requirements led to complex features that were not deployed.** & 6G standardization should focus on realistic and meaningful performance improvements. \\ \hline
**Lesson \#3: Multiple architecture choices in 5G created unnecessary complexity and delayed adoption.** & 6G standardization should focus on standalone architecture from the start. \\ \hline
**Lesson \#4: Bit transport alone limits telcos to “dumb pipes” and restricts growth opportunities.** & 6G standardization should focus on integrating computing, AI, and sensing to enable multi-tenancy. \\ \hline
**Lesson \#5: The traditional 3 GPP release-style enhancements have difficulty keeping up with the increasing pace of innovation.** & 6G standardization should enable continuous enhancements and innovations. \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: A summary of lessons learned from 5G evolution and their implications for 6G.