3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2503262
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19 – 23, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	Huawei, HiSilicon
Title:	On subband full duplex random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
For RACH configuration Option 2, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs or from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure, there is no RAN1 consensus to support a power offset to compensate the power ramping difference
Proposal 3: For determination of Msg3 PUSCH transmission power, support separate configuration of msg3-DeltaPreamble for non-SBFD symbols and SBFD-symbols for RACH configuration Option 2
msg3-DeltaPreamble configured for legacy-ROs is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in non-SBFD symbols;
msg3-DeltaPreamble configured for additional-ROs is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 4: For determination of Msg3 PUSCH transmission power,  is provided by MAC layer and is the amount of power ramping applied to the latest Random Access Preamble transmission, regardless of the used RO types, the used symbol type of Msg3 PUSCH and RO type switch.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121                                                   R1-2503328
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Source:	ZTE Corporation, Sanechips
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion and Decision
 

Conclusion
According to the discussion above, we have the following observations and proposals.
Separate initial UL BWP for SBFD aware UEs
Observation 1: Some cell common downlink signals/channels are transmitted within the frequency range of CORESET#0, e.g., SSB, SI message and paging, etc. Overlapping between CORESET#0 and UL subband would cause impact for all UEs for receiving the these cell common downlink signals/channels. 
Observation 2: Configuring a separate initial UL BWP for SBFD aware UEs can avoid the impact on the reception of DL common signals/channels due to the introduction of UL subband. 
Observation 3: According to the existing rules (i.e., Alt-2), the Msg3 FDRA range determined in SBFD symbols in the non-initial UL BWP may not overlap with the UL subband, and thus the Msg3 PUSCH transmission cannot be scheduled within SBFD symbols. 
Observation 4: By reinterpreting the RB numbering to be from the first RB of the UL usable PRBs for Msg3 PUSCH can ensure the effective FDRA range of Msg3 PUSCH within UL subband. 
Observation 5: Configuring a separate initial UL BWP for SBFD aware UEs is helpful to ensure the effective FDRA range of msg3 PUSCH within UL subband while following the existing resource allocation rules. 
Proposal 1: A separate initial UL BWP should be supported for SBFD aware UEs for determining UL usable PRBs and range of FDRA for Msg3 PUSCH.
Other issues related with Msg3 PUSCH transmission
Observation 6: The MSB(s) of the frequency domain resource allocation information is used to indicate the frequency offset for 2nd hop, which will seriously affect the scheduling flexibility of Msg3 PUSCH. 
Proposal 2: For frequency domain resource allocation of the Msg3 PUSCH transmission within the UL usable PRBs, the following method should be supported,
For initial transmission: the number of bits actually utilized for frequency domain resource allocation can be determined based on the size of UL usable PRBs and these bits occupy the LSBs of the 14 bits FDRA field. The MSB(s) of the 14 bits FDRA field can be employed for indicating the frequency offset for the 2nd hop. 
For retransmission: the FDRA field size is determined according to the size of the initial UL BWP. The number of bits actually utilized for frequency domain resource allocation can be determined based on the size of UL usable PRBs and these bits occupy the LSBs of the FDRA field. The MSB(s) of the FDRA field can be employed for indicating the frequency offset for the 2nd hop.
Proposal 3: Support separate msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble configurations for Msg3 PUSCH transmission when msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 4: For H configuration Option 2 and UE switches among different RO types, of Msg3 PUSCH transmission power is the amount of power ramping applied to the latest Random Access Preamble transmission. 
RO validation rules under Option 1 with Alt 1-1
Proposal 5: For RACH configuration Option 1, the RO validation determination for SBFD aware UEs can be performed according to the following steps, 
Firstly, legacy valid ROs are determined based on legacy RO validation rule. 
Secondly, additional valid ROs are obtained within all configured ROs in SBFD symbols in addition to the legacy valid ROs according to the new RO validation rule.
RRC parameters
Proposal 6: Endorse the following RRC parameters for RACH configuration Option 1:

Proposal 7: Parameters in rach-ConfigCommon except for rsrp-ThresholdSSB-SUL can be included in the additional RACH configuration for RACH configuration Option 2. If a parameter is not provided in the additional RACH configuration, UE uses the corresponding parameter in the legacy RACH configuration.

 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		R1-2503356
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Source:	vivo
Title:	Remaining issues on random access for Rel-19 SBFD
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we make discussions on random access for Rel-19 SBFD and have the following observations and proposals. 

Proposal 1: For determination of the Msg3 PUSCH transmission power for RACH configuration Option 2, separate msg3-DeltaPreamble configuration for non-SBFD symbols and SBFD-symbols is not supported.
Proposal 2: For RACH configuration Option 2, separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations can be supported.
Proposal 3: For RACH configuration Option 2 for determination of Msg3 PUSCH transmission power, the interpretation of ΔP_rampup_requested,b,f,c is based on the PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP associated to latest Random Access Preamble transmission when UE switches RO types
Proposal 4: The RB numbering for Msg.3 transmission in SBFD symbols follows the existing spec without further optimization.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2503425
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source: 	LG Electronics
Title: 	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and decision

Summary
In this contribution, we discussed on the subband non-overlapping full duplex. 
Observation 1: Currently the power ramping counter configured for SBFD aware UE increases by applying powerRampingStep configured for initially selected RO until the end of the RACH procedure without compensating power offset caused by power ramping difference between two separate powerRampingStep parameters configured for legacy-ROs and additional-ROs.
Observation 2: Depending on the network configuration it is not necessary to always support RO type switching operation especially for RACH configuration Option 2 under coverage-limited circumstance since switching into legacy-RO with short preamble does not help for successful PRACH transmission. 
Currently RAN2 is discussing about choosing the range of a threshold (configured as a new parameter to allow RO type switching) same as from either msgA-TransMax and preambleTransMax-Msg1-Repetion or preambleTransMax configured for legacy-ROs. 
In case the threshold value is configured same as the value in either msgA-TransMax and preambleTransMax-Msg1-Repetion or preambleTransMax, RO type switching is virtually not conducted for SBFD aware UE. 
It is open to discuss the case if the threshold parameter is not present, and it could mean not to allow RO type switching.
Observation 3: Depending on location the UL subband and initial UL BWP, all or partial UL usable PRBs could be out of addressable range of frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 in SBFD symbols.

Proposal 1: For PRACH power control of RACH configuration Option 2, use separate power control parameters, preambleReceivedTargetPower, powerRampingStep and preambleTransMax configured with sbfd-RACH-DualConfig which is newly defined to configure random access parameters in SBFD symbols by setting up one additional RACH configuration for additional-RO in Rel.19.
Proposal 2: For PRACH power control of RACH configuration Option 2, RAN1 to support Alt 2.
Alt 1: Common powerRampingStep with unified solution as RACH configuration Option 1.
In case RO type switching is not conducted, support sub-optimal PRACH transmit power control procedure in SBFD symbols.
Alt 2: Separate powerRampingStep up to network configuration depending on when RO type switching operation is applied or not
If RO type switching is not configured (e.g., a threshold parameter is not present, or the same as the value in either msgA-TransMax and preambleTransMax-Msg1-Repetion or preambleTransMax), 
Separate powerRampingStep values can be configured.
otherwise, 
Same values configured in two separate powerRampingStep for legacy-ROs and additional-ROs.
Proposal 3: When a SBFD-aware UE switches from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure for RACH configuration Option 1 and Option 2, increase the power ramping counter.
Proposal 4: For determining the frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols, the RB numbering starts from the first RB of the UL usable PRBs.
Proposal 5: For determining the frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols, either of two alternatives is preferred.
Alt 1: the maximum number of RBs for frequency domain resource allocation equals the number of UL usable PRB
Alt 2: the maximum number of RBs for frequency domain resource allocation equals min (number of UL usable PRB, number of RBs in the initial UL BWP)

TDoc file unavailable

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2503513
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025
Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Spreadtrum, UNISOC
Title: 	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we made the following proposals.
TP#1 can be adopted to  in 38.211
TP#2 can be adopted tofirst and second PRACH occasions.
TP#3 can be adopted to the validation rule of first and second PRACH occasions.
TP#4 can be adopted to MSG3 transmission.
TP#5 can be adopted to MSG4 HARQ-ACK PUCCH transmission.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2503564
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	Samsung
Title:	Random access on SBFD resources
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusion
In this contribution, we made the following proposals:
No specification impact is necessary when for CBRA, if a SBFD-aware UE transmits Msg1 in legacy-RO, the UE follows the legacy behavior during the random access procedure.
For RACH configuration Option 2, the association period and association pattern period of additional ROs are configured an integer multiple of the association period and association pattern period of the legacy ROs.
The existing RACH Msg.2 (RAR) reception procedure is reused for random access in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 4: For determining the frequency domain resource allocation for Msg.3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols, the RB numbering starts from the first RB of the UL usable PRBs and the maximum number of RBs for frequency domain resource allocation equals the number of RBs in the initial UL BWP.
Proposal 5: For RACH configuration Option 2, interpretation of  is based on the latest RO type, regardless of symbol types for Msg.3 PUSCH.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2503624
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
                                    
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	InterDigital, Inc.
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we discussed issues on random access procedures in SBFD systems. From the discussions, we made following observations and proposals:
[2.2 Legacy ROs, Spec Impact]
Proposal 1. No specification change is necessary, if a SBFD-aware UE transmits Msg1 in legacy-RO.

[2.3.1 Power ramping in switching between SBFD and non-SBFD ROs]
Observation 1. In determining the power ramping value for Msg3 PUSCH, in case the symbol type for Msg3 is different from last RO’s symbol type, resetting the power ramping could result in inconsistency in transmission power in the random-access procedure.
Proposal 2. In determining the  for Msg3 PUSCH transmission, in case the symbol type for Msg3 is different from the latest RO’s symbol type, consider calibrating the power ramping counter, based on power ramping steps in legacy and additional symbols. 

[2.3.2 Mask index indication in additional-ROs]
Observation 2. The mask index specific to additional-ROs can be used for configuring limitations on selecting ROs based on different conditions, such as PRACH UL power.
Observation 3. Performance of received PDSCH signal in an SBFD slot is impacted by the location of a RO within the UL sub-band. The closer the RO is to the edge of the UL sub-band, the greater the degradation, in terms of BLER, to the PDSCH signal in the DL sub-band.
Observation 4. SBFD-aware UEs may need to fallback to use legacy-ROs, for example due to PRACH power limitations in FDM-ed additional-ROs in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 3. With separate PRACH mask index indications for additional ROs and legacy ROs, support indicating limitations on using the FDM-ed ROs in association with PRACH UL power thresholds.
Proposal 4. For SBFD-aware UEs support additional condition(s) for RO selection in FDM-ed ROs in SBFD symbols.
[2.3.3	UL Power Control Parameters]
Proposal 5. Support configuring different PRACH power control parameters in addition to preambleReceivedTargetPower, including preambleTransMax and PcMax, for PRACH transmission in legacy-ROs and additional-ROs.
[2.3.4 Early Indication of support for SBFD]
Observation 5. During random access procedure, the SBFD-aware UE can indicate its capability and support for SBFD operation via Msg3.
Proposal 6. Support early indication for SBFD-aware UE in RRC-Idle/Inactive modes to indicate UE’s  support of SBFD operation as part of random-access, for example, via
Indication as part of Msg3. 
[2.4 Performance analysis for repetition based PRACH transmissions across SBFD symbols]
Observation 6. PRACH preamble repetition in SBFD symbols enhances RACH detection performance in both contention-based and contention-free RACH occasions, where the RACH detection performance improves as the number of PRACH repetition occasions increases.
Proposal 7. Support PRACH repetition in SBFD symbols, for both contention-based and contention-free RACH occasions.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #121                                                                         R1-2503626
Malta, 19th – 23rd May, 2025
Agenda item:         9.3.2
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation 
Release:	Rel-19		
Source:	Korea Testing Laboratory
Document for:	Discussion
1. 

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provided our viewpoints.
[Msg3 PUSCH power control]
Observation 1: Under the current RAN1 agreement, Msg3 PUSCH power control is based on the symbol type. However, this approach does not account for mismatches between the UE’s actual Msg1 preamble format and the format implicitly assumed by the gNB when configuring preambleReceivedTargetPower, potentially leading to inaccurate Msg3 power levels.
Proposal 1: To resolve this mismatch without introducing explicit δ signaling, it is proposed that the gNB indicate the assumed preamble format to the UE. The UE can then compute the offset correction by comparing its actual preamble format against the assumed one, thereby ensuring accurate Msg3 power control.
Observation 2: Symbol-type-based power control provides a reasonable baseline alignment for Msg3 transmission under SBFD conditions, reflecting general uplink interference patterns.
Observation 3: Residual power mismatches may still occur due to preamble format differences between Msg1 and the symbol type used for Msg3 transmission.
Observation 4: Effective CLI mitigation and robust Msg3 decoding performance require a format-aware delta compensation mechanism that reflects both symbol type and preamble format variations.
Observation 5: Even when the correct symbol-type-based preambleReceivedTargetPower is applied, residual mismatch remains. Accurate UE-side compensation is possible if the gNB indicates the reference preamble format index it used when configuring the Msg3 power baseline. 
Proposal 2: To improve CLI mitigation and ensure consistent Msg3 decoding performance, it is proposed to configure separate msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble values for SBFD and non-SBFD symbols, enabling symbol-type-specific baseline offset control.
Proposal 3: To avoid explicit δ signaling while enabling format-aware Msg3 power compensation, the gNB may indicate the preamble format index it assumed when setting preambleReceivedTargetPower. The UE can then apply implicit correction using the standard deltaPreamble values defined for both the assumed and actual formats.

Observation 6: RACH configuration Option 2 allows for different preambleReceivedTargetPower and ramping parameters for additional-Ros and legacy-Ros. However, this flexibility shouid not compromise the historical consistency of  .

Proposal 4: Maintain  strictly as a MAC-layer record based on the latest Random Access Preamble transmission, regardless of RO type or symbol type.
Proposal 5: Preserve the integrity of power ramping history and maintain a clean, decoupled MAC-PHY interface, even when applying RO-type-specific power control under RACH configuration Option 2.
[RO type Indication]
Observation 7: For SBFD-aware UEs, using separate PRACH mask configurations help avoid ambiguity in non-DCI CFRA scenarios. In such cases, RRC-based RO type indication is preferred over table-based methods due to its greater flexibility and simpler implementation.

Observation 8: In CFRA scenarios without DCI signaling, ambiguity exists in determining the RO type (legacy or additional), and explicit indication via RRC is required to enable robust and interference-aware RO selection for SBFD-aware UEs.

Proposal 6: It is proposed to complement Alt-2 with explicit RO type indication via RRC signaling based on the separated PRACH mask index configuration for legacy-ROs and additional-ROs. 

Proposal 7: Extend SI-RequestConfig and BeamFailureRecoveryConfig to include RO-Type and symbol-Type fields, enabling UEs to unambiguously determine applicable RO types and associated PRACH transmission domains.

4. 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #121                                                                     R1-2503630
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19 – May 23 2025


Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	TCL 
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and Decision 

Conclusion
In this contribution we discussed random access operation in SBFD symbols for both RRC and connected states, and idle/inactive states, and made the following observations and proposals.  
Observation 1: The following parameters have a direct impact on the UL power control of PRACH transmission in SBFD symbols: 
PreambleReceivedTargetPower 
PowerRampingStep
PowerRampingStepHighPriorit 
DeltaPreamble
PCMAX

Observation 2: By using the existing specification table (Table 9.2.1-1 in TS 38.213) for the transmission of HARQ-ACK of Msg4/MsgB in SBFD symbols, the PUCCH for HARQ-ACK of Msg4/MsgB will be located outside of the frequency resources of the UL subband.

Proposal 1:  Support a separate configuration of msg3-DeltaPreamble for Msg3 PUSCH transmission power in SBFD symbols. 
Proposal 2: Define a new table for "cell-specific PUCCH resource common" that can be used for the transmission of HARQ-ACK for Msg4/MsgB in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 3: For cell-specific PUCCH in SBFD symbols, consider a separate intra-slot frequency hopping (intra-SlotFH) configuration in PUCCH-configCommon. 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121   							          R1-2503707
Malta, MT, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source: 	Tejas Networks
Title: 	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Document for: 	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
Proposal 1: No modifications to existing specifications are necessary for Msg1 transmission in legacy RO for a SBFD aware UE.
Proposal 2: Use the existing association period between SS/PBCH block and PRACH occasion mentioned in TS38.213 to SBFD slots as well.
Proposal 3: No new rule is required for SBFD RO to SS/PBCH mapping pattern in RRC_CONNECTED mode.
Proposal 4: Introduce separate  parameters as an offset-based configuration through RRC signaling.
Proposal 5: Introduce a power offset compensation mechanism for PRACH re-attempts when switching RO types.
Proposal 6: Delegate the definition of detailed conditions and prioritization, including switching criteria, to RAN2 for finalization.
Proposal 7: For FR1, introduce new parameter “time offset to RACH subframe” to determine the subframe number for ROs in SBFD symbols and time offset will have granularity of slot.
Proposal 8: Indicate valid RO created by the additional RACH configuration using bitmap using bit packer. 
Proposal 9: Consider repetition pattern and invalid RO in non-SBFD symbols to have a shortened bitmap.
Proposal 10: Alt-3 (bitmap using bit packer) is preferred option compared to other options, as the valid ROs are clearly indicated by the base station in the additional RACH configuration.
Proposal 11: If the RACH is initiated in the SBFD slots, the available Slot counting for MSG3 PUSCH repetition will count only SBFD slots.

Proposal 12: For Msg3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols, adopt the Alt-1 approach, wherein: 
RB numbering starts from the first RB of the initial UL usable PRBs.
The maximum number of RBs for FDRA shall be set equal to the number of RBs in the initial UL BWP.
Proposal 13: A separate ‘msg3-DeltaPreamble’ is preferred in RACH configuration option 2, over reusing the legacy ‘msg3-DeltaPreamble’.
Proposal 14: Separate ‘msg3-DeltaPreamble’ can configured under PUSCH-Config IE for SBFD.
Proposal 15: preambleReceivedTargetPower, msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble and TPC Command in RAR are required for MSG3 in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 16: If separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP is allowed, then  is the amount of power ramping applied to the latest Random Access Preamble transmission.
Proposal 17: Reinterpret initial UL BWP   as initial UL usable PRBs   for cell specific PUCCH transmission in SBFD symbols and reuse the Table 9.2.1-1 in TS 38.213 for determining PUCCH resource sets in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 18: To determine the lowest PRB indies of the PUCCH transmission in the first hop and second hop in SBFD symbols, reinterpreting initial UL BWP  as initial UL usable PRBs .

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2503732
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – May 23th, 2025

Agenda item:		9.3.2
Source:		Ofinno
Title:			Discussion on SBFD random access operation 
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
This contribution has discussed the remaining issues related to the physical layer aspects of SBFD random access operation. The following are our observations and proposals: 
Observation 1. Cases covered in overlapping ROs between additional ROs and legacy ROs need some clarification to avoid potential RA-RNTI collision.
Observation 2. RA-RNTI collision or confusion may occur if “overlapping” only considers physical resource overlapping. 
Proposal 1. To address the case where two ROs have the same s_id, t_id, and f_id regardless of physical resource overlapping, support one of the following options:
Option 1. Revise a conclusion by adding a note
NOTE: An additional RO is considered to be overlapping with a legacy RO when the physical resource partially or fully overlaps or s_id, t_id and f_id of the two ROs are same.
Option 2. Clarify that two ROs overlapping also include two ROs having the same s_id, t_id and f_id regardless of physical resource overlapping. 
Proposal 2. Support separate value of msg3-DeltaPreamble for Msg3 transmission in SBFD symbols.
Observation 3. Similar to additional-ROs and legacy ROs, channel conditions for Msg3 PUSCH occasions in SBFD symbols and non-SBFD symbols may be different even with the same RSRP of the downlink pathloss reference. 
Proposal 3. Support separate configuration of rsrp-ThresholdMsg3 for Msg3 repetitions in SBFD symbols. 
Observation 4. For the case when UE establishes RRC connection using 2-step RA, P0 is determined by PUSCH transmission occasion located in non-SBFD symbols regardless of whether the corresponding PUSCH is located in SBFD symbol or not. 
Proposal 4. PUSCH transmission power calculation must be enhanced when PUSCH transmission occasions are in SBFD symbols, UE establishes RRC connection using 2-step RA, and UE is not configured with P0-PUSCH-AlphaSet. 
Observation 5. The timing on when an SBFD-aware UE, which transmits PRACH using a legacy RO, can start applying SBFD configuration and/or behavior needs to be clarified.
Proposal 5. Clarify the timing on when an SBFD-aware UE, which transmits PRACH using a legacy RO, can start applying SBFD configuration and/or behavior:
Option 1: Upon transmitting a capability message indicating that the UE is an SBFD-aware UE.
Option 2: Upon determining a successful reception of the capability message at the network side.
Option 3: Upon receiving a dedicated RRC reconfiguration message in response to transmitting the capability message.
Observation 6. RA-SDT is already supported according to RAN 2’s working assumption. 
Proposal 6. Supporting CG-SDT should be addressed in AI 9.3.1, if it is not already supported. 
Proposal 7. SBFD is supported with LTM.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		R1-2503791
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Source:	CATT
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we share our views on SBFD random access operation. The observation and proposals are summarized as follows:
Observation 1: For RACH configuration 2,  can be uniquely determined when the same PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configuration is used for additional ROs and legacy ROs.
Proposal 1: For RACH configuration Option 1, not support separate configurations of msg1-RepetitionTimeOffsetROGroup for PRACH transmission with preamble repetitions within additional-ROs and PRACH transmission with preamble repetitions within legacy-ROs.
Proposal 2: For RACH configuration Option 1 and Option 2, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure, support Alt-1: Increase the power ramping counter.
Proposal 3: For RACH configuration Option 2, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure, power offset to compensate the power ramping difference is not supported.
Proposal 4: For RACH configuration 2, the same PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configuration is used for additional ROs and legacy ROs.
Proposal 5: For RACH configuration Option 2, separate msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble for Msg3 PUSCH transmitted in SBFD symbols and non-SBFD symbols is not supported.
Proposal 6: TPC Command in RAR can be used to adjust the Msg3 PUSCH transmission power in both SBFD symbols and non-SBFD symbols.
Proposal 7: For RACH configuration Option 2, the interpretation of  is as follows if separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations for different RO types is supported,
powerRampingStep configured in legacy RACH configuration is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in non-SBFD symbols;
powerRampingStep configured for additional RACH configuration is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 8: For SBFD aware UE, if Msg1 starts from additional RO, for determining the frequency domain resource allocation for the Msg3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols within the active UL BWP, the RB numbering starts from the first RB of the UL usable PRBs and the maximum number of RBs for frequency domain resource allocation equals the number of RBs in the initial UL BWP
Proposal 9: Update the following agreement made in RAN1#120-bis in red:
Agreement
For CBRA, if a SBFD-aware UE transmits Msg1 in legacy-RO, the UE follows the legacy behavior during the random access procedureRACH attempt.
FFS: Whether specification change is necessarySpecification change is not necessary.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2503828 
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Source: 	CMCC
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion & Decision
1	

Conclusions
In this contribution, we discussed random access operation in SBFD, and the following proposals are made.
Proposal 1. For RACH configuration Option 1 and Option 2, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure, support Alt-1: Increase the power ramping counter.
Don’t support a power offset to compensate the power ramping difference.
Proposal 2. For RACH configuration Option 2, support separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations for legacy-ROs and additional-ROs.
Proposal 3. For determining the frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols, the RB numbering starts from the first RB of the UL usable PRBs and the maximum number of RBs for frequency domain resource allocation equals the number of RBs in the initial UL BWP.
Proposal 4. For determination of the Msg3 PUSCH transmission power for RACH configuration Option 2, don’t support separate msg3-DeltaPreamble for non-SBFD symbols and SBFD-symbols.
Proposal 5. For determination of of Msg3 PUSCH transmission power when separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations are configured for different RO types in RACH configuration Option 2:
When switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs: equals N1 × PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP_AdditionalRO + (N2 - N1 -1) × PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP;
When switches from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs:  equals N1 × PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP + (N2 - N1 -1) × PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP_AdditionalRO;
where N1 is the power ramping counter when RO type switching, N2 is the power ramping counter of latest PRACH transmission, PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP is the parameter configured for legacy-ROs, PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP_AdditionalRO is the parameter configured for additional-ROs.
Send LS to RAN2.
Proposal 6. Send LS to RAN2 to inform the following agreements:
Agreement (in RAN1#120)
For determination of the Msg3 PUSCH transmission power and when separate preambleReceivedTargetPower for additional-ROs is configured for RACH configuration Option 1 
preambleReceivedTargetPower configured for legacy-RO is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in non-SBFD symbols;
preambleReceivedTargetPower configured for additional-RO is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in SBFD symbols.
FFS: Option 2
Agreement (In RAN1#120bis)
For determination of the Msg3 PUSCH transmission power for RACH configuration Option 2:
preambleReceivedTargetPower configured for legacy-RO is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in non-SBFD symbols;
preambleReceivedTargetPower configured for additional-RO is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in SBFD symbols;
FFS whether/how to support separate msg3-DeltaPreamble for non-SBFD symbols and SBFD-symbols.
Proposal 7. For SBFD-aware UEs, when separate p0-nominal for PUCCH on SBFD symbols is not configured, p0-nominal configured for PUCCH on non-SBFD symbols is used if PUCCH is transmitted in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 8. Endorse the following RRC parameters for SBFD RACH operation:

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121                                R1- 2503880
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Xiaomi
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Decision

Conclusion 
In this contribution, we provide our views on SBFD operation to support random access in SBFD symbols. We have the following observation:

There is no need to support separate msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble for Msg3 PUSCH transmission on non-SBFD symbols and SBFD-symbols for RACH configuration Option 2.

Based on the aforementioned discussion and observation, we have the following proposals:
For determining the frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols, Alt 2 is supported.
Alt-2: no enhancement
Do not support separate msg3-DeltaPreamble for non-SBFD symbols and SBFD-symbols.
For RACH configuration Option 2, for deltaPreamble, the same value is configured in legacy RACH configuration and additional RACH configuration.
Support separate configurations of preambleReceivedTargetPower for additional-ROs and legacy-ROs in both legacy RACH configuration and additional RACH configuration for RACH configuration Option 2.
For RACH configuration Option 2, when separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations for different RO types and UE switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs, , which is the amount of power ramping applied to the latest Random Access Preamble transmission, equals to , where  is the powerRampingStep configured for the RO type of current RA attempt.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121										   		R1-2503936
St Julian‘s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
Source:	NEC
Title:	CLI Handling for NR duplex operation
Agenda item:	9.3.3
Document for:   Discussion and decision
1 

Conclusion
Based on the discussion in the previous sections, this contribution is concluded with the following proposals:
Proposal 1:
Consider the CSI report size enhancement for SBFD operation and different types of CLI interference.
Consider the non-uniform CLI bandwidth in inter-subband CLI measurement/report. 
Proposal 2:
Differentiation of the BFR caused by CLI with the beam blockage is needed. 
BFI triggered CLI measurement and report can be defined.  
Dedicated PRACH/SR resources can be configured to UE to report the BF caused by CLI.
Proposal 3:
CLI caused failures should be separately identified for all failure types and should be indicated as such.

4 

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2503971
St Julian's, Malta, 19th – 23th May, 2025

Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Kookmin University
Title: 	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusions
In this contribution, the remaining issues on the random access procedures for SBFD were discussed. The following proposals were made:

Proposal 1: RAN1 to conclude that the explicit indication for additional-RO or legacy-RO is not supported for CBRA triggered by PDCCH order.

Proposal 2: For CFRA triggered by PDCCH order, the explicit indication for additional-RO or legacy-RO is invalid if SUL is indicated.

Proposal 3: For RACH configuration Option 1 and Option 2, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure, reset the power ramping counter.

Proposal 4: Support separate msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble configuration for Msg3 PUSCH transmission in non-SBFD symbols and SBFD-symbols. 

Proposal 5. For msg2/msg4 PDSCH, the solutions made in AI 9.3.1 are reused.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121		R1-2504010
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	Panasonic
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda Item: 		9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusion
In this contribution, we made the following proposals. 
Proposal 1: For CFRA, if a SBFD-aware UE transmits Msg1 in legacy-RO, the UE follows SBFD behavior during the random access procedure (e.g., the UE follows separate configurations for SBFD symbol).
Proposal 2: For determination of the Msg3 PUSCH transmission power for RACH configuration Option 2, support separate msg3-DeltaPreamble.
Proposal 3: For separate msg3-DeltaPreamble, legacy msg3-DeltaPreamble is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in non-SBFD symbols; additional msg3-DeltaPreamble is used if Msg3 PUSCH is transmitted in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 4: For RACH configuration Option 2, support separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations.
Proposal 5: For RACH configuration Option 2,  is the amount of power ramping applied to PRACH transmission.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504045
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025
Agenda item:		9.3.2
Source:	China Telecom
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:		Discussion

Conclusions
In this contribution, we discuss SBFD random access operation and have following proposals:
Proposal 1: For RACH configuration option 2, since two separate RACH configurations are used, all the parameters in the RACH configurations are naturally separately configured. No further discussion is needed.
Proposal 2: Update the following Agreement/Conclusion achieved in RAN1 #120bis as follows (in red):
Agreement
For RACH configuration Option 1 and Option 2, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs or from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure, support Alt-1: Increase the power ramping counter.
Conclusion
For RACH configuration Option 2, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs or from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure, there is no RAN1 consensus to support a power offset to compensate the power ramping difference.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2504087
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Fujitsu
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:		Discussion and decision

Conclusion
According to the discussions above, we have the following proposals. 
Proposal 1: For SBFD aware UEs, for the PUSCH scheduled by RAR and the Msg3 PUSCH retransmission scheduled by DCI format 0_0 with CRC scrambled with TC-RNTI on a non-initial UL BWP, to extend the range of addressable usable PRBs in SBFD symbols, the RB numbering for RIV provided in the FDRA field in the RAR/DCI starts from the first RB of UL usable PRBs for the active UL BWP.
UE does not expect that the PRBs for the PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols to be overlapped with PRBs outside UL usable PRBs for the active UL BWP.
Proposal 2: For SBFD aware UEs, for the PUSCH scheduled by RAR, to extend the range of addressable usable PRBs in SBFD symbols, truncate/insert bits in the FDRA field in the RAR according to the size of UL usable PRBs for the active UL BWP.
Proposal 3: For uplink power control for Msg3 PUSCH and PUCCH, 
If msg3-Alpha-sbfd is not configured, msg3-Alpha is used for Msg3 PUSCH in SBFD symbols.
If p0-nominal-sbfd is not configured, p0-nominal is used for PUCCH in SBFD symbols.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2504106
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Lenovo
Title: 	SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In summary, we have following proposals for SBFD random access operation:
Proposal 1: Do not support separate preambleReceivedTargetPower configurations for different FDMed additional-ROs.
Proposal 2: For RACH configuration Option 1, do not support separate configurations of msg1-RepetitionTimeOffsetROGroup for PRACH transmission with preamble repetitions within additional-ROs and legacy-ROs.
Proposal 3: For frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 PUSCH in SBFD symbol, the RB numbering starts from the first RB of the UL usable PRBs and the maximum number of RBs for frequency domain resource allocation equals the number of RBs in the initial UL BWP.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504118
St Julian's, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
	
Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Hyundai Motor Company
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, the following conclusions were made:
RACH triggered by PDCCH order
Observation #1:  
If the existing rules for determining duplicate PDCCH orders are applied directly to SBFD UE, the following issues are observed:
Even if the gNB initiates a CFRA for a different RO type by using a RO type indicator, if the preamble index and PRACH mask index are identical to those of an ongoing RACH procedure, the SBFD UE would incorrectly interpret this as a duplicate PDCCH order and the RACH procedure cannot be initialized.
Proposal #1:  
RAN1 should agree that, for the determination of whether a PDCCH order is a duplicated, the ‘RO type’ also should be considered, in addition to the preamble index and PRACH mask index in the current procedure as shown in below.


FDRA for msg3
Observation #2:  
Depending on the location of UL subband in frequency domain, the maximum number of RBs for FDRA of msg3 may be smaller than that of the initial UL BWP.
Proposal #2:  
Considering that the case may occur where the maximum number of RBs for Msg3 transmission is smaller than that of the initial BWP, RAN1 should agree to support one of the following two options: 
Option #1: SBFD UE does not expect to transmit Msg3 in SBFD symbols when the maximum number of RBs for FDRA of Msg3 is smaller than that of the initial UL BWP.
Option #2: SBFD UE does not expect to be configured with a UL subband such that the maximum number of RBs for FDRA of Msg3 is smaller than that of the initial UL BWP.

RO type selection and enhancement for latency reduction
Observation #3:  
For SBFD UE, enabling parallel preamble transmission on each RO type  is a more suitable solution to facilitate faster UE access to the gNB.
Proposal #3:  
RAN1 should discuss and subsequently agree to support that an SBFD UE is allowed to transmit preambles in parallel on each RO type.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	R1-2504122  
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Agenda item:		9.3.1
Source:				Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell
Title:					SBFD random access operation
Document for:		Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, the following observations are noted:
Observation 1 For Option 2, some parameters configuring the legacy ROs and the additional ROs can have the same values.
In addition, the following are proposed:
Proposal 1 For Option 2, in case the legacy ROs and the additional ROs have the same value for one of the RACH configuration mandatory parameters. Only the legacy RACH configuration will be configured with this parameter.
Proposal 2 For Option 2, in case the SBFD aware UEs did not receive a dedicated mandatory parameter in the additional RACH configuration, the SBFD-aware UEs determine this dedicated parameter from the legacy RACH configuration.
Proposal 3 RAN1 should support a separate initial BWP for SBFD aware UEs.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121						   R1-2504137
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Source: 	ETRI
Title: 	SBFD random access operation
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion

Conclusion
We address our view about supporting random access for SBFD operations.
Proposal 1: DCI format 1_0 for PDCCH may reserve the field regarding the RO type indicator if the preamble index field has zero value.
Proposal 2: If PDCCH order indicates RO type, then UE chooses the indicated RO type.
Proposal 3: Introduce distinct ramping step value per RO type.
Proposal 4: Introduce distinct msg3-DeltaPreamble per RO type.
Proposal 5: Before dedicated PUCCH resources are configured, support HARQ-ACK repetition as Configuration 1.
Proposal 6: A common ramp-up value for Msg3 and for Msg4’s HARQ-ACK can be applied.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1#121                              R1- 2504175
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th - 23rd, 2025

Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	Transsion Holdings
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion and decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we focus on the SBFD random access operation, including including random access in Connected mode. Based on the discussion in section 2, we provide the following proposals:
Proposal 1: Separate msg3-DeltaPreamble configurations for SBFD symbols and non-SBFD symbols should not be supported .
Proposal 2: For determination of  of the Msg3 PUSCH transmission power, when the used RO type of at least one PRACH attempt and the used symbol type of Msg3 PUSCH are different: the PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_COUNTER can be reused regardless of the used RO types;
Proposal 3: For PRACH resource selection for SBFD aware UEs, the gNB can enable the SBFD-aware UE to use additional RO resources by RRC signaling.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121                                       R1-2504210
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Source:	OPPO
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion and Decision

Conclusions
This contribution concludes with the following observations and proposals:
Proposal 1: For RACH configuration option 2, support separate configuration of msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble for Msg3 PUSCH in SBFD symbols and non-SBFD symbols.
Observation 1: For RACH configuration option 2, separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations are supported by default unless some restrictions are agreed, i.e., PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP is not included in the additional RACH configuration and the PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configured in legacy RACH configuration is applied for PRACH transmission in additional ROs.
Proposal 2: For RACH configuration Option 2, for interpretation of  when separate PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP configurations for different RO types when UE switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs, consider the following alternatives:
Alt-1: the PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP corresponding to the RO type of the latest PRACH transmission is applied, that is, when UE switches from additional ROs to legacy ROs, the PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP corresponding to the legacy ROs is used for interpretation of ;
Alt-2: if Msg 3 PUSCH transmission is in SBFD symbols, PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP corresponding to additional RO is used; if Msg 3 PUSCH transmission is in non-SBFD symbols, PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP corresponding to legacy RO is used.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504316
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	Apple
Title:	Views on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provided our views on random access operation in the SBFD sub-band. Our proposals are as follows:
Proposal 1:  Msg3 PUSCH repetition in SBFD symbols is an independent UE feature for SBFD-aware UE.
Proposal 2:  Separate preambles are configured in additional-RO for SBFD-aware UE to request Msg3 PUSCH repetition in SBFD symbols. 
Proposal 3: Separate RSRP threshold is configured for SBFD-aware UE to determine whether Msg3 PUSCH repetition in SBFD symbols is required.
Proposal 4: Separate repetition numbers are configured Msg3 PUSCH repetition in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 5: Separate MCS candidate indexes are configured Msg3 PUSCH repetition in SBFD symbols.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504392
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025
Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Qualcomm Incorporated
Title: 	SBFD Random Access Operation
Document for:	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we provide our views on SBFD random access operation with the following observations and proposals:
Proposal 1: The RO-type indicator in the PDCCH order is applicable for CBRA triggered by PDCCH order. 

Proposal 2: SBFD-aware can be configured with a separate initial UL/DL BPWs with non-aligned center frequency. 

Proposal 3:  For preamble transmission in a valid RO starting in SBFD symbols and ending in non-SBFD symbols, SBFD-aware UE is switching from SBFD to non-SBFD mode within a transition period before or after the RO. 
Proposal 4: No enhancement for determining the frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 PUSCH transmission scheduled by RAR UL grant in SBFD symbols.
Proposal 5: The number of repetitions, K, is determined similar to legacy based on whether the higher-layer parameter numberOfMsg3-RepetitionsList is configured and is determined based on the 2 MSB of MCS bitfield
Proposal 6:  For PRACH configurations, when a SBFD-aware UE switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs and from legacy-ROs to additional-ROs (if supported) in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure,  corresponds to the combined power ramp-up across the two RO types.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504479
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	Sharp
Title:	SBFD Random Access Aspects
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion and Decision
Corrections of the endorsed draft CR
Msg3
The TR38.213 draft CR was endorsed in [1]. Below is the relevant part related to Msg3 frequency hopping.

The above sentence suggests that definition of  changes for Table 8.3-1 in PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbols, meaning that the new definition applies both to determination of the number of hopping bits and the value of frequency offset for the 2nd hop. However, the agreement shows that the new definition should apply to the frequency offset for the 2nd hop only. We have not made agreement to apply the definition to determine the number of hopping bits. Below shows the agreement at RAN1#119 meeting [2].

The endorsed CR does not reflect the current agreement. Therefore, we suggest the following TP to correct it.
Proposal 1: Adopt the following TP#1.

PUCCH before dedicated PUCCH resource configuration
The TR38.213 draft CR was endorsed in [3]. Below is the relevant part related to PUCCH before dedicated PUCCH resource configuration.

The above says that the PUCCH resource is determined such that it is confined with the UL usable PRBs when the PUCCH transmission is not associated with the first PRACH occasions (i.e., legacy ROs). However, it is not aligned with the agreement. The agreement says that the new rule is used when the PUCCH resource is in SBFD symbols.

Therefore, we suggest the following TP to correct it.
Proposal 2: Adopt the following TP#2.

Msg3 FDRA issues
Potential enhancements have been discussed at the last meeting. The proposed enhancements discussed was to make the RB numbering starting from the first RB of the UL usable PRBs. Figure 1 shows an example in which the proposed enhancement is effective. In Figure 1, the active BWP is wideband from f1 to f5, the UL subband is at the middle from f3 to f4, and initial UL BWP is at the lower edge from f0 to f2.

Figure 1: The active BWP is wideband from f1 to f5, the UL subband is at the middle from f3 to f4, and initial UL BWP is at the lower edge from f0 to f2
This case falls into the condition that initial UL BWP does not include all the RBs in the active UL BWP. Therefore, the schedulable RB range for msg3 as in legacy is only within f1 to f1+f2-f0 according to TS38,.213, copied and highlighted below.
TS 38.213V15.15.0

The proponent of the enhancement discusses that in such a case the UE cannot be scheduled msg3 in the UL subband due to the limitation of the legacy specification. That is why they propose to update the start of RB numbering from the first RB of the active UL BWP to the first RB of the UL subband.
However, first of all, why such a configuration needs to be provided is unclear. In our understanding, there is no issues if the gNB configures the initial UL BWP to include the UL subband. Why we need such a configuration like in Figure 1 where the initial UL BWP is completely outside of the UL subband should be clarified first.
Furthermore, the enhancement will cause another issue, as described in Figure 2. In Figure 2, the active BWP is the initial UL BWP from f2 to f4, the UL subband is at the middle from f1 to f3, and the other UE-specific wideband UL BWP is from f0 to f5. In this case, since the initial UL BWP is active, the RB numbering starts from the starting RB of the initial UL BWP and the maximum number of RBs schedulable for msg3 is the size of the initial UL BWP. If the proposed enhancement is taken, the scheduled RB range is from f1 to f1+f4-f2, which is completely outside of the initial UL BWP which is active. 

Figure 2: The active BWP is the initial UL BWP from f2 to f4, the UL subband is at the middle from f1 to f3, and the other UE-specific wideband UL BWP is from f0 to f5
In summary, we think it’s better to keep the legacy FDRA procedure for SBFD. Furthermore, potential issues should be solved by gNB configuration.
Proposal 3: No enhancements for msg3 PUSCH FDRA.
Proposal 4: Conclude that the gNB can configure an initial UL BWP properly to include the UL sub-band in the initial UL BWP.
Conclusion
In this contribution, we have the following proposals:
Proposal 1: Adopt the following TP#1.
Proposal 2: Adopt the following TP#2.
Proposal 3: No enhancements for msg3 PUSCH FDRA.
Proposal 4: Conclude that the gNB can configure an initial UL BWP properly to include the UL sub-band in the initial UL BWP.
References
R1-2503169, Introduction of evolution of NR duplex operation: Sub-band full duplex (SBFD), Samsung, May 2025
RAM1 chairman’s note at RAN1#119 meeting, November 2024
R1-2503480, Introduction of evolution of NR duplex operation: Sub-band full duplex (SBFD), Nokia, May 2025

TDoc file conclusion not found

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504499
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Source:	NTT DOCOMO, INC.
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Document for: 	Discussion and Decision		

Conclusion
In this contribution, we discussed SBFD operation for random access. We have the following proposal:
Proposal 1: For RACH configuration option 2, when separate power ramping steps are configured in the legacy RACH configuration and additional RACH configuration,
The power ramping step configured for legacy-RO is applied for Msg 3 PUSCH on non-SBFD symbols.
The power ramping step configured for additional-RO is applied for Msg 3 PUSCH on SBFD symbols.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504537
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025
Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	ITRI, Acer Incorporated
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Document for:		Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
This contribution discuses some details for the SBFD random access operation. We have following proposals:
Proposal 1: 
Separate msg3-DeltaPreamble/deltaPreamble for additional RACH configuration options 1 and 2 should not be supported.
Proposal 2:
For RACH configuration Option 2, when different PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP settings are used for various RO types and the UE switches from additional-ROs to legacy-ROs, the  should be interpreted as a combined ramp-up across both RO types.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121                                                  R1- 2504590
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025


Source: Google
Title:	On SBFD random access operation
Document for: Discussion and Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we have presented several proposals to share our views on the random access in SBFD operation for UEs in RRC_CONNECTED mode and UEs in RRC_IDLE/INACTIVE mode:

Support the same power control offset msg3-DeltaPreamble for Msg3 PUSCH for Option 2. 

 The requested power ramping for RACH configuration Option 2 is calculated as:
 = (PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_COUNTER_LEGACY – 1) × PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP + (PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_COUNTER_ADDITIONAL – PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_COUNTER_LEGACY – 1) × PREAMBLE_POWER_RAMPING_STEP_ADDITIONAL

 No enhancement needed for determining the frequency domain resource allocation for Msg3 PUSCH transmission in SBFD symbol

If a parameter is not provided in the additional RACH configuration, UE uses the corresponding parameter in the legacy RACH configuration with restrictions on the set of parameters to inherit from rach-ConfigCommon

3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #121	R1-2504610
St. Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd 2025

Agenda Item:	9.3.2
Source:	Ericsson
Title:	SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion, Decision

Conclusion
In the previous sections we made the following observations: 
Observation 1	There is no need to define a separate RA-RNTI for additional ROs.
Observation 2	Since RAN4 has agreed on explicit and unambiguous guard periods, there is no reason why a UE should not leverage the same guard period for its own reconfiguration.
Observation 3	Reusing the repetition counter for different preamble formats with different preambleReceivedTargetPower configurations will reduce PRACH capacity.
Observation 4	Reusing the repetition counter or performing frequent switching between RO types in a capacity constrained network will reduce PRACH capacity.
Observation 5	A UE may apply PRACH repetitions and RO type switching within one RACH procedure.
Observation 6	PCMAX not only affects PRACH but also other UL signals and channels why a change in PCMAX must not be done without considering the consequences of these other signals and channels.
Observation 7	PRACH is an infrequent transmission and any change in PCMAX will have negligible effect on UE-to-UE CLI compared to other, more frequent UL transmissions.
Observation 8	RAN2 has agreed to support fallback, implying UE have already attempted transmitting PRACH with different RO types, i.e., no additional preambleTransMax is necessary.
Observation 9	For the range limited scenario, power ramping using the legacy preamble format may increase transmit power far beyond the level that is required to successfully receive the additional preamble format.
Observation 10	A too high PRACH preamble transmit power may cause gNB saturation and excessive UE-to-UE interference or inter-cell PRACH preamble interference.
Observation 11	There is no significant benefit in using different power ramping steps for legacy and additional ROs.

Based on the discussion in the previous sections we propose the following:
Proposal 1	Leave to RAN2 to decide the spec impact on SBFD-aware UEs transmitting Msg1 during CBRA in a legacy RO.
Proposal 2	For Msg3 PUSCH in SBFD symbols, the UL usable PRBs are determined as the intersection between the [cell-specific] UL subband and the UL active BWP.
Proposal 3	In an RO across SBFD and non-SBFD symbols, a UE is not expected to transmit a PRACH preamble in the guard (transient) period immediately preceding UL symbols.
Proposal 4	A UE use separate repetition counters for each RO type.
Proposal 5	No SBFD-specific instances of PCMAX or preambleTransMax are introduced.
Proposal 6	Reset the power ramping counter (Alt. 2) when switching from legacy ROs to additional ROs [for Option 2].
Proposal 7	No separate msg3-DeltaPreamble-SBFD is specified for Msg3 power control.
Proposal 8	A UE may assume the same power ramping step for the additional RACH configuration as for the legacy RACH configuration in determining ΔPrampup_requested,b,f,c within the same RACH procedure.
Proposal 9	Update RRC parameter list to also include the updated interpretation of msg1-FrequencyStart, i.e., offset of lowest PRACH transmission occasion in frequency domain with respective to the lowest PRB of the UL usable PRBs.
Proposal 10	Include sbfd-RACHTypeIndication into RACH-ConfigDedicated and BeamFailure- RecoveryConfig.
Proposal 11	Include separate msg3-Alpha for SBFD symbols in RRC parameter list.
Proposal 12	Include separate p0-nominal for SBFD symbols in RRC parameter list.
 

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121			R1-2504616
St. Julians, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Source:	WILUS Inc.
Title:	Discussion on SBFD random access operation
Agenda item:	9.3.2
Document for:	Discussion/Decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we discussed SBFD random access operation of UEs and summarized our views as the following:
Proposal 1: Regardless of which RACH configuration option is used (i.e., RACH configuration Option 1 with Alt 1-1 or RACH configuration Option 2) is used, the starting symbol for PRACH slot should be also reinterpreted as the starting symbol of the semi-statically configured UL subband in the time domain.
Proposal 2: For RACH configuration Option 2, it may be advisable to include parameters such as msg1-FrequencyStart, msg1-FDM, ssb-perRACH-OccasionAndCB-PreamblesPerSSB, which require reinterpretation in Option 1, and prach-ConfigurationIndex for configuring RO resources in the time domain in the additional RACH configuration.
Proposal 3: For RACH configuration Option 1, we propose to have separate SSB index to RO mapping for validated additional ROs in SBFD symbols for SBFD aware UEs, regardless of being configured as downlink or flexible by tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon.
Proposal 4: Regardless of the RACH configuration option applied, in addition to the agreed conditions at RAN1#118 and RAN1#118-bis, which relate to the Ngap required for the validation of additional ROs after the last DL non-SBFD symbol and/or after the latest SSB symbol, we propose to further discuss the additional condition for the validation of additional ROs.
Additional condition: A valid RO starts at least Ngap symbols after a last SBFD symbol with DL reception for a given UE.
Proposal 5: Regardless of which RACH configuration option (i.e., RACH configuration Option 1 with Alt 1-1 or RACH configuration Option 2) is used, we support Option 2 (i.e., Select one type between legacy-ROs and additional-ROs based on certain specified/configured conditions/prioritizations) for initial PRACH transmission attempt in one random access procedure for SBFD-aware UEs.
Proposal 6: Regardless of which RACH configuration option is used, we support Option 2 (i.e., First use ROs of the same type as the earlier PRACH transmission for a certain number of times, and if certain conditions are met, then use ROs of the other type for the rest of the random access procedure) for PRACH transmission re-attempt in one random access procedure.
Proposal 7: RAN1 needs to further discuss the PRACH power ramping and whether/how to increase power ramping counter from legacy ROs to additional ROs in PRACH transmission re-attempt in one RACH procedure
At least for RACH configuration Option 2, it may be desirable to reset the power ramping as initial ramping counter when transmitting PRACH in a valid RO with a different symbol type from legacy ROs to additional ROs in in PRACH transmission re-attempt when different PRACH formats are used for PRACH transmission on different RO types .

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121	        		R1-2504627
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23rd, 2025

Agenda Item: 	9.3.2
Source: 	Sony 
Title: 	SBFD RACH operations
Document for: 	Discussion / decision

Conclusion
In this contribution, we discuss some operations issues on PRACH in SBFD, and we observe the following:
Observation 1: Having common PRACH parameters for the two separate PRACH configurations in PRACH configuration Option 2 for SBFD would reduce configuration flexibility.  If the motivation of having some common PRACH parameters is to reduce RRC signalling, then PRACH configuration Option 1 can be used.


We therefore propose the following:
Proposal 1: For PRACH configuration Option 2 (i.e., Use two separate PRACH configurations, including one legacy RACH configuration and one additional PRACH configuration), all the parameters currently in rach-ConfigCommon are included in the additional PRACH configuration.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121																						R1-2504708
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Moderator (CMCC)	
Title: 	Summary#1 on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion/decision

Conclusion
There is no RAN1 consensus on the following proposal:
For RACH configuration Option 1 with Alt 1-1, for determination of lowest RO of additional-ROs in SBFD symbols, the parameter msg1-FrequencyStart in rach-ConfigCommon is reinterpreted as the frequency offset of lowest RO in frequency domain with respective to the lowest PRB of UL usable PRBs ONLY if there is no legacy-RO configured in SBFD symbols configured as flexible by tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon.

3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #121																						R1-2504709
St Julian’s, Malta, May 19th – 23th, 2025

Agenda item:	9.3.2
Source: 	Moderator (CMCC)	
Title: 	Summary#2 on SBFD random access operation
Document for:	Discussion/decision

Conclusion
There is no RAN1 consensus on the following proposal:
For RACH configuration Option 1 with Alt 1-1, for determination of lowest RO of additional-ROs in SBFD symbols, the parameter msg1-FrequencyStart in rach-ConfigCommon is reinterpreted as the frequency offset of lowest RO in frequency domain with respective to the lowest PRB of UL usable PRBs ONLY if there is no legacy-RO configured in SBFD symbols configured as flexible by tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon.