Best Place To BuildHow IIT Professors created India's own 5G Tech | Prof. Radha Krishna Ganti, EE, IITM on BP2B S2 Ep.6
CHAPTERS
- 0:00 – 0:25
Cold open: EE math, AI/ML, and the decade-long 5G grind
A quick teaser frames electrical engineering math as foundational to modern AI/ML, and hints at the long time horizons needed to build telecom systems. Prof. Ganti positions indigenous 5G as a “now-or-never” effort requiring sustained dedication.
- •EE math underpins much of AI/ML, making the transition natural for EE students
- •5G development is a multi-team effort spanning ~10 years
- •Motivation for attempting indigenous 5G: otherwise it stays a “distant dream”
- 0:25 – 0:55
Show setup: Is IIT Madras really “theoretical,” or a place that builds?
The host introduces the podcast’s mission—meeting builders at IIT Madras—and flags a common perception that IITM is overly theoretical. This sets up the episode’s central theme: translating deep theory into real-world systems.
- •Parents’ concern: IITM perceived as “theoretical”
- •Podcast premise: what people are building and what it takes to build
- •Positioning IIT Madras as a builder-centric campus
- 0:55 – 2:23
Meet Prof. Radhakrishna Ganti: wireless communication researcher and Bhatnagar awardee
Prof. Ganti is introduced along with his research focus in wireless communications and recognition via the Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize. He shares the surprise and timing behind the award announcement.
- •Introduction to Prof. Ganti’s role and research area (wireless communication)
- •Bhatnagar Prize experience: delayed announcement and unexpected email
- •Reflections on recognition in academic life
- 2:23 – 5:22
Wireless communication basics: moving data reliably through noise, motion, and crowds
Prof. Ganti explains what wireless communication is and where we encounter it daily—from Wi‑Fi and Bluetooth to cellular and radio. He breaks down the core technical challenge: reliably moving information despite distortion, interference, and mobility.
- •Everyday wireless examples: cellular, Wi‑Fi, Bluetooth, FM, satellite TV
- •Core problem: reliable data transfer without wires under noise and channel distortions
- •Mobility and interference make delivery hard (e.g., trains, dense events)
- •Analogy: party conversation interference mirrors multi-user wireless interference
- 5:22 – 7:48
What a 5G system contains: base stations, radios, signal processing, and the core network
Before discussing IITM’s 5G testbed, Prof. Ganti lays out the anatomy of a 5G system. He emphasizes the complexity of base stations and the core network, and why only a handful of global firms can build them end-to-end.
- •Two sides of 5G: the network infrastructure and user devices
- •Base station components: antennas, RF chips, processing units, signal-processing software
- •Core network scale: huge aggregate throughput across regions
- •Global supplier landscape: a few major vendors with decades of R&D
- 7:48 – 9:50
Why India built a 5G “testbed”: eight institutions, modular ownership, and integration at IITM
Prof. Ganti explains how Indian institutions collaborated to build indigenous 5G components when local industry capability was limited. IIT Madras took responsibility for radio development and final integration, requiring large cross-disciplinary teams.
- •Motivation: lack of Indian vendors for full 5G infrastructure
- •Consortium approach: 8 institutions splitting responsibilities by subsystem
- •IIT Madras role: radio development + overall integration
- •Need for coordinated hardware, software, embedded, RF, and antenna teams
- •Rebuilding requires recreating many protected design elements end-to-end
- 9:50 – 12:14
From lab testbed to near-field-ready product: TRL jump and real deployments
The project began as a lab-scale testbed for experimentation, but evolved into something closer to a deployable system. Prof. Ganti describes adopting industry interfaces, doing “customer surveys,” and achieving a campus-wide 5G deployment used by startups and researchers.
- •Original goal: lab-scale platform for testing algorithms and products
- •Shift to TRL ~7–7.5 (near field-deployable, not just lab demo)
- •Industry alignment: interfaces and practices modeled after real vendor ecosystems
- •IITM campus has its own 5G deployment for ongoing experimentation
- •Startups/companies used the platform to test and fine-tune products
- 12:14 – 13:22
India’s first 5G call: the tense demo, blocked signals, and an on-the-fly power boost
Prof. Ganti recounts the high-pressure moment when the Communications Minister placed India’s first 5G call using the homegrown system. A sudden crowd blocked the signal path, forcing a quick decision to raise transmit power—after which the system temporarily went down.
- •First 5G call in India made in IITM’s lab using indigenous tech
- •Unexpected crowd in a small room caused signal blockage
- •Student’s rapid response: increasing transmit power to complete the call
- •Successful call followed by a brief system crash—illustrating real demo risk
- 13:22 – 14:23
Why Airtel/Jio still use foreign gear: TRL limits, productization, and required investment
The conversation turns to why commercial networks still depend on Ericsson/Nokia-like suppliers. Prof. Ganti explains where academia typically stops, what it takes to reach full commercial readiness, and which Indian entities are attempting the next step.
- •Commercial operators still largely deploy foreign equipment
- •Academia can reach near-deployment TRL, but not full commercial scale alone
- •Productization demands large investments and sustained engineering
- •Indian efforts mentioned: C‑DOT, Tejas Networks, and Reliance’s build capability
- 14:23 – 18:41
What “G” really means: ITU, spectrum harmonization, KPIs, and the 2G→5G evolution
Prof. Ganti explains that “G” is generation and that each generation spans roughly a decade. He introduces the ITU’s role in spectrum regulation and defining 5G via performance indicators like bandwidth, speed, latency, device density, and mobility.
- •G = generation; each generation cycle ~10 years
- •ITU (UN body) harmonizes spectrum globally and defines generation requirements
- •5G qualification via KPIs: data rates, latency, device support, mobility
- •Bandwidth progression example: ~2 MHz (2G) → 20 MHz (4G) → 100 MHz (5G)
- •Technology enablers: massive MIMO, improved error-correction coding
- 18:41 – 21:11
5G use-cases and verticals: eMBB, massive IoT, and ultra-reliable low-latency links
The discussion expands beyond speed to the range of 5G application categories. Prof. Ganti outlines enhanced mobile broadband, massive machine communications, and ultra-reliable low-latency requirements for factories, gaming, and telemedicine-like scenarios.
- •eMBB: higher throughput for streaming and broadband-like experiences
- •Massive IoT: supporting millions of low-data sensors and smart meters
- •Ultra-reliable communications: factory floors and critical links
- •Latency/jitter matters for interactive applications (e.g., gaming)
- •Mobility KPIs: 4G vs 5G targets and how requirements arise globally
- 21:11 – 25:03
Who defines India’s 5G needs: pushing rural coverage into global standards (LMLC)
Prof. Ganti describes how countries negotiate requirements into ITU standards, and how India advocated for rural coverage as a primary need. He explains the multi-year effort to introduce “Low Mobility Large Cell” to enable broader coverage from fewer base stations.
- •Countries bring national priorities into ITU standardization discussions
- •India’s focus: rural coverage in a price-sensitive market with low rural revenue
- •Proposal: base station at Gram Panchayat covering multiple nearby villages
- •Standardization is political/commercial as well as technical
- •Outcome: LMLC (Low Mobility Large Cell) accepted after sustained negotiations
- 25:03 – 29:03
BSNL’s indigenous 4G story: security decisions, PoCs, consortiums, and the chosen stack
The episode dives into why BSNL’s 4G rollout took time and how geopolitics shifted procurement priorities. Prof. Ganti explains the move toward fully Indian technology, proof-of-concept trials, and how consortiums formed to deliver a complete network solution.
- •BSNL 4G delays involved non-technical (political/process) issues
- •Security-driven pivot toward fully homegrown network equipment
- •Need for PoCs because no single Indian company had full end-to-end capability
- •Consortium model to pool technology + investment capacity
- •Deployment stack mentioned: Tata/Tejas for radios & infra; C‑DOT for core
- 29:03 – 34:41
Why choose Electrical Engineering: information world, deep math, and the “hard branch” myth
Shifting to student advice, Prof. Ganti argues EE sits at the center of the digital world—information propagation, storage, and processing. He reframes EE’s difficulty as rigorous foundational training in math that unlocks many adjacent careers.
- •EE spans power to wireless to quantum—broad and foundational
- •Wireless/EE as the backbone of the information economy
- •Perceived difficulty comes from probability, linear algebra, calculus requirements
- •Rigorous math training pays off for ML, CS, and even quant finance pathways
- •Focus and enjoyment matter more than “intensity”
- 34:41 – 40:13
Lineage of builders at IITM: WLL history, Prof. Bhaskar’s influence, and a culture of depth
Prof. Ganti reflects on the department’s legacy of building real telecom systems, tracing mindset and capability to earlier faculty efforts like wireless local loop (WLL). He shares anecdotes illustrating Prof. Bhaskar’s technical depth and mentorship impact.
- •Professors Ashok and Bhaskar shaped a build-oriented wireless culture
- •WLL efforts proved world-class building possible with limited resources
- •Technology competitions (WLL vs GSM/2G) and how global backing influences outcomes
- •Alumni and groups carried competencies into later 4G/5G efforts
- •Anecdote: “easy” exam questions from deep experts can still be very hard
- 40:13 – 45:55
Prof. Ganti’s IITM journey and shifting from pure theory to practical systems building
Prof. Ganti recounts his student path (branch change, dual degree, hostel life), PhD abroad, and early exposure to software-defined radios. He explains how hands-on system implementation reshapes theoretical work by introducing real-time constraints and richer problem formulations.
- •IITM student life: hostel, activities, branch change to EE, dual degree
- •PhD at Notre Dame + added master’s in applied mathematics
- •Early systems exposure via software-defined radios (SDR) during postdoc
- •Theory vs systems: implementation constraints (latency/compute) reshape algorithms
- •Collaboration across faculty domains helps bridge math and hardware realities
- 45:55 – 54:58
IITM as “Best Place to Build”: EE vs EEE vs ECE, interdisciplinary design, and AI/ML in wireless
In the closing stretch, Prof. Ganti rejects the idea that IITM is only theoretical and describes growing systems-building momentum. He clarifies department naming (EE/EEE/ECE), highlights interdisciplinary engineering in real radios, and explains AI/ML’s role—bounded by Shannon’s limits.
- •IIT Madras builds extensively, with increasing systems focus in recent years
- •EE/EEE/ECE naming: IITs often unify under EE while covering power-to-communication breadth
- •Interdisciplinary reality: mechanical + thermal management needed for radio hardware
- •AI/ML in wireless: useful tool, but domain knowledge is essential
- •Shannon capacity as a hard bound: innovations are judged by closeness to limits
