New Orleans Marriott

New Orleans, LA

Host: Neustar

Tuesday December 11, 2001 1:00 pm – 5:00 pm

Attendance:

Name	Company	Name	Company
Paul LaGattuta	AT&T	Sherrian Lively		Nuvox
H.L. Gowda	AT&T	Dave Garner		Qwest (phone)
Cindy Sheehan	AT&T Broadband (phone)	Ned Timmer		Ranger Wireless Solutions
Anne Cummins	ATW	David Taylor		SBC
Jill Byers	Bell Canada (phone)	Charles Ryburn		SBC
Ron Steen	BellSouth	Leah Luper		SBC
Dave Cochran	BellSouth (phone)	Linda Meyer		SBC (phone)
Marian Hearn	Canadian Consortium	Kathleen Jedrick		Sprint
James Grasser	Cingular Wireless	Patrick Lockett		Sprint
Jeannie Hatchett	Cox (phone)	Colleen Collard		Tekelec (phone)
Dennis Robbins	ELI (phone)	Adam Newman		Telcordia Technologies
Ron Stutheit	ESI	John P. Malyar		Telcordia Technologies
Maggie Lee	Illuminet	Jean Anthony		Telecom Software
Rob Coffman	Neustar	Robert T. Jones		US Cellular Corp.
Gene Johnston	Neustar	Gary Sacra		Verizon
Jane Quenk	Neustar	Sharon Bridges		Verizon (phone)
Marcel Champagne	Neustar	Linda Godfrey		Verizon Wireless
Richard Scheer	Neustar	Steve Addicks		WorldCom
Jim Rooks	Neustar	Jason Lee		WorldCom
		Dawn Lawrence		XO (phone)

Review of Previous Month’s Minutes:

The team reviewed the November meeting minutes and corrections were made. The group restated a prior agreement, relating to the use of individual's names within the minutes. The group agreed that names would not be included in the minutes unless it relates to a statement for the record or they have responsibility for an action item. They are now marked as final and will be distributed with the draft of the December minutes.

Problem / Issues Management (PIMs):

PIM-1: Porting with Resellers.

The LNPA will revise the NANC flows to add the reseller processes in its January meeting. These flows will then be sent to NANC.

PIM-5: Unilateral Back-out of Inadvertent Port.

We are waiting for an update on the modification to the NIIF guidelines. Also, the NAPM LLC is awaiting legal issues to be cleared on SOW 19.

PIM-6: Modify 911 Record Migration Process & End User Move Indicator (EUMI)

No change since last meeting.

PIM 11: Moving Blocks between Switches

This PIM is in initial closure and CIGRR concurred. The INC has requested the date when the NPAC M&P will be updated for releases 2.0 and 3.0.

PIM 12: Operator Service Functionality

James Grasser provided the current status of the OBF issue and will continue to do so at subsequent meetings. This PIM is for tracking only.

PIM 13: Premature Disconnects

Dave Taylor - SBC Speaking as SBC, not as the Co-chair of the NNPO, presented his companies activity on a trial process for the completion of disconnects (port away). He did say that the NNPO was tracking the LNPA WG activity on this PIM.

At the present time, SBC is working with AT&T Broadband to improve the disconnect process involving a port between service providers. He stated that SBC is willing to extend this process to other CLECs if they are interested in participating in this trial. They do not monitor the NPAC activation notices. Some of the state commissions have requirements/measurements related to this issue. One of the measurements related to the due date (DD), involves the "unlock and lock" of the E911 database. The company will adhere to all of the OBF recommendations related to the disconnect process. They consider the LSR as the authorized document to perform work requested by other companies. SBC will continue to look for the NPAC message that the port has occurred. In the absence of the message, they would place the order in jeopardy some time late on the DD, and advise the other service provider of this action.

During the past few months, SBC has been studying the reasons why the DD is missed. The two major problems are, customer fails to keep their appointment and/or company-related problems; e.g. equipment, cable problems, etc. The company provisioning centers can not react to a change in due date if it is late on the DD. The standard jeopardy process will resolve any problem in stopping the disconnect process.

BellSouth has a mechanized process that looks for the NPAC activation messages received, before sending the disconnect through their systems.

Some of the other service providers said they have a lot of the same issues. In the former Bell Atlantic areas the disconnect is completed on the DD at 11:59 PM. In the GTE areas, the disconnect is completed at 1:00 AM of second day after the DD, e.g. if the DD was 12/11 then disconnect would occur on 12/13 at 1AM.

Verizon urged that no vote be taken on the NANC disconnect process flow's interpretation, with respect to what triggers the old SP's disconnect work, until data could be collected to demonstrate how many premature disconnects occurred simply because the existing LSR Supp process could not prevent the disconnect. AT&T Broadband reported that it has observed (as the old SP) that the new SP fails to port by LSR due date about 12% of the time (this would have resulted in disconnect of customer "prematurely" if Broadband had not been looking for evidence of port having occurred). Some portion of these events, however, might have involved situations that would have permitted timely LSR Supp to change due date and thus reflect the failure of new SP to follow the LSR process.

Cindy Sheehan - AT&T Broadband verbally provided some numbers from her study, which was conducted nationally over a 3 - 4 month period.

Early porting occurred anywhere from 1 to 34 days before the DD. Late porting occurred anywhere from 1 to 21 days after the DD. This delay in completing the connect work, would have resulted in 12% of the customers having been taken out of service. The study included all types of providers, both CLEC and ILECs.

Action Item: All service providers should come to the next meeting prepared to vote on accepting all or some following suggestions:

1. Check on the NPAC notice. Monitor the NPAC as evidence of the port.

2. Use the LSR process. Look at the requirements that are in place in the OBF guidelines as they relate to the New SP.

PIM 14: NXX Codes Ownership Changes

This PIM has been referred to the INC as issue number 295 and is in initial closure.

PIM 15: Disconnect of NXX Code with Ported TNs

This PIM has been referred to INC.

PIM 16 (New) Removing Portability Designation on NXXs in the LERG

Adam Newman, Telcordia Chair of the Common Interest Group on Rating and Routing (CIGRR) Issue Forum provided a draft resolution. CIGRR has proposed that TRA require evidence that there are no actives or pending SVs involving the NXX before the portable mark can be removed. The LNPA-WG suggested instead that the TRA require evidence that the NXX is not in NPAC's network data table. This PIM deals with the clerical error aspect of such changes, not a carrier's conscious choice to remove an NXX from those defined as portable.

Action: Adam Newman will rewrite the solution based on the LNPA WG recommendation and present it to the CIGRR.

Wednesday December 12, 8:30 – 5:00pm

Attendance:

Name	Company	Name	Company
Paul LaGattuta	AT&T	Sherrian Lively		Nuvox
H.L. Gowda	AT&T	Dave Garner		Qwest (phone)
Cindy Sheehan	AT&T Broadband (phone)	Ned Timmer		Ranger Wireless Solutions
Anne Cummins	ATW	David Taylor		SBC
Jill Byers	Bell Canada (phone)	Charles Ryburn		SBC
Ron Steen	BellSouth	Leah Luper		SBC
Dave Cochran	BellSouth (phone)	Linda Meyer		SBC (phone)
Marian Hearn	Canadian Consortium	Kathleen Jedrick		Sprint
James Grasser	Cingular Wireless	Patrick Lockett		Sprint
Jeannie Hatchett	Cox (phone)	Colleen Collard		Tekelec (phone)
Dennis Robbins	ELI (phone)	Adam Newman		Telcordia Technologies
Ron Stutheit	ESI	John P. Malyar		Telcordia Technologies
Maggie Lee	Illuminet	Jean Anthony		Telecom Software
Rob Coffman	Neustar	Robert T. Jones		US Cellular Corp.
Gene Johnston	Neustar	Gary Sacra		Verizon
Jane Quenk	Neustar	Sharon Bridges		Verizon (phone)
Marcel Champagne	Neustar	Linda Godfrey		Verizon Wireless
Richard Scheer	Neustar	Steve Addicks		WorldCom
Jim Rooks	Neustar	Jason Lee		WorldCom
Lisa Marie Maxson	Telecom Software	Dawn Lawrence		XO (phone)

Change Management/Testing – Jean Anthony

A series of documentation-only change orders (NANC 335-343) have been introduced. These are "documentation-only" for the NPAC, but some vendors may find these clarifications trigger a need for software changes in their systems.

Action: Rob Coffman Neustar to review NANC 334 to determine the impacts to the SOW.

NANC Change Order 343 corrects a set of NPAC filters. This is a document change only order to make it compliant to what is there today.

Completed change orders review.

ACTION: Jean Anthony will pull all of the non-implemented change orders (software only). The list will be sent to Industry (12/24). The change orders will be reviewed at the January meeting, along with the business needs and the descriptions. All of the service providers should prioritize the list as developed and be prepared to discuss at the February meeting.

Release 3.1 Update – Project Plan Review:

Neustar reviewed the Project Plan. The availability of the "poke" was discussed. It was not available for testing on the 14^th as expected. Neustar indicated that the hardware was needed in preparation of 3.1 rollout and there is no requirement to provide an infinite number of test beds e.g. a 2.0 and 3.0 test bed. The test bed will be restored ASAP, additionally the LLC/PEs are working on SOW 29 which will help resolve the need for multiple test beds.

Long Term Interface Solution:

The minutes from the November 29^th (see attachment #1) were reviewed.

Questions: The initial perspective of these questions is not whether Neustar has these answers, but rather they are available and Neustar is willing to provide the data given the appropriate request.

a) Does the status roll up timer start with first LSMS that receives a broadcast or when the last receives broadcast? In other words, how does fact that multiple LSMS receives at different rates affect the notifications to the LSOA?

Neustar response - there is a period of time when the SPs receives the download.

b) How many messages can be buffered in the outstanding CMIP buffer? LSMS? LSOA?

Neustar response - it is an internal tunable in the NPAC.

Neustar response - set at 100 +/- messages per association per channel.

c) What is the high water percentage? LSMS? LSOA?

Neustar response - it is not a %; it is 100 +/- messages. (Questions b & c are the same).

d) What is the low water percentage? LSMS? LSOA?

Neustar response - this is a ratio 25 messages. (It reads like 25%).

Is this a good number? Jim Rooks will check.

e) Can the values for buffer size and low water percentage be tunables?

Neustar response - this is tunable. It would need to be an NANC Change Order. Neustar does recommend it.

f) How many TNs does this buffering represent? Min? Max? Typical? Time duration expected during peaks that exceeds the typical?

Neustar response - pick a scenario and we will calculate it. The numbers of scenarios are numerous.

g) Can Neustar provide regular reports comparing the initially provided answers against the reality of production?

Neustar response - additional, reporting will have an impact on the NAPC's performance. The question was raised relating to what we do going forward?

There was considerable conversation on whether the upper bounds for this data should be defined by industry forecasts or behavior or Neustar’s report of what the NPAC system is capable of doing. Most agreed that the data is best defined by the NPAC’s actual capability in production. Furthermore, it was felt that the NPAC should be held to not change that capability without advance notice to the industry of their intention to change that behavior profile.

Neustar response - the local vendors designed to the Exhibit N, now the NAPC is going faster than expected. The vendors don't know the Industry demands. Lots of discussion around "peaking" as the problem v. the demand offered. Exhibit N can be relied on.

2) Essential components of a performance model needed to engineer acceptable implementations. In other words, what parametric items need to have numeric requirements assigned to them in order to allow us to meet the service providers' objectives.

The above questions attempt to identify the needed model.

3) Is there an industry need for such a model and for it to be continuously validated?

There was general consensus for the need of the model and continuous validation.

Neustar response - Float control is the key point. Float control may care for the peaking. Design against Exhibit N -1 and/or 7 TNs per seconds.

Jason Lee of WorldCom offered the following:

“In terms of question #3 (Is there an industry need for such a model and for it to be continuously validated?) If Neustar would not implement changes that would improve throughput without timely notification to the industry, perhaps we would only run the reports to see the net effect of the throughput change instead of validating and distributing reports continuously.”

4) Review of the contents of SOW #27 and its current applicability.

One vendor recommended the separation of the "requests" from the "messages" on a different channel. This is a software separation. Neustar said that this would be significant deviation.

Neustar would like to see a NANC Change Order on "abort".

Action: Make this an agenda for next meeting, "Elimination of association aborts due to timeout in the long term".

Wireless Number Portability Operations Report - James Grasser Cingular Wireless:

· Letters to FCC via NANC are on hold.

· The pooling testing timeline could not be supported.

· Wireless to wireless resellers flows PIM will be sent to the LNPA WG to be incorporated into the NANC official flows.

· Wireless BFR form is completed. The major change is to the bottom section with the addition of CLLI/MSA codes.

· A letter relating to the Release 3.1 rollout schedule will not be sent to the NAPM LLC based on input from some of the LLC members, recommending against it.

· Ron Steen submitted refined trunk conversion that was presented to the WNPO group last month.

· CC26 will be on next month's agenda.

Wireless Taskforce Pooling Committee:

The trial NPAs (303; 724; 641; 804) have been selected for Native Block pooling. Work continues on the Native Block pooling document.

Thursday December 13, 8:00 – 12:00 pm

Attendance:

Name	Company	Name	Company
Paul LaGattuta	AT&T	Sherrian Lively		Nuvox
H.L. Gowda	AT&T	Dave Garner		Qwest (phone)
Cindy Sheehan	AT&T Broadband (phone)	Ned Timmer		Ranger Wireless Solutions
Anne Cummins	ATW	David Taylor		SBC
Jill Byers	Bell Canada (phone)	Charles Ryburn		SBC
Ron Steen	BellSouth	Leah Luper		SBC
Dave Cochran	BellSouth (phone)	Linda Meyer		SBC (phone)
Marian Hearn	Canadian Consortium	Kathleen Jedrick		Sprint
James Grasser	Cingular Wireless	Patrick Lockett		Sprint
Jeannie Hatchett	Cox (phone)	Colleen Collard		Tekelec (phone)
Dennis Robbins	ELI (phone)	Adam Newman		Telcordia Technologies
Ron Stutheit	ESI	John P. Malyar		Telcordia Technologies
Maggie Lee	Illuminet	Jean Anthony		Telecom Software
Rob Coffman	Neustar	Robert T. Jones		US Cellular Corp.
Gene Johnston	Neustar	Gary Sacra		Verizon
Jane Quenk	Neustar	Sharon Bridges		Verizon (phone)
Marcel Champagne	Neustar	Linda Godfrey		Verizon Wireless
Richard Scheer	Neustar	Steve Addicks		WorldCom
Jim Rooks	Neustar	Jason Lee		WorldCom
		Dawn Lawrence		XO (phone)

Meeting Schedule:

2002 Meeting Schedule:

LNPA WG: Host:

January 8 - 10 Cingular Wireless - Orlando, FL

February 12 - 14 Business Edge Solutions - Dallas

March 5 - 7 SBC - St. Louis

April 9 - 11 Sprint - Kansas City

May 14 - 16 AT&T Wireless - Redmond, WA

June 11 - 13 AT&T - Atlanta

July 9 - 11 TBD

August 13 - 15 Canadian Consortium - Vancouver, British Columbia,Canada

September 17 - 19 Verizon - Baltimore, MD

October 15 - 17 ESI - Denver, CO

November 12 - 14 Cox Communications - Atlanta

December 10 - 12 TBD

New Business:

Action Item: Neustar asked that we put HL Gowda's issue (restrictions on mass updates) on the agenda on the first day.

There was some questions as to the correctness of this issue being brought to the LNPA WG. The "large-port" notification includes both pool blocks and service providers' large-ports. Neustar said that there will be a large load on the NPAC when National Thousand Block Pooling starts. One of the service providers expressed concerns relating to the anticipated load on their system.

Action Item: Neustar was asked to report at our next meeting on the feasibility of doing performance testing with vendors, during the interoperability testing phase of the Continued Certification Testing work, rather than waiting until the Users do their Turn-Up testing to verify performance.

Separate SPIDs for Wireless and Wireline Carriers at NPAC

BellSouth asked that separate SPIDs be required for wireline and wireless User profiles. WNPO will submit a write-up of the issue with recommendation that the two SPID arrangement be made a requirement and submit it to LNPA-WG for consideration at its January 2002 meeting. LNPA-WG then will send letter to NAPM LLC asking that wireline and wireless carriers be identified with different SPIDs at NPAC, even when both carriers are the same service provider entity, and that this be made a requirement.

Mass Update Volume Limitation

We asked Neustar to report at our next meeting on root cause of the apparent severe restriction on mass update transactions. Currently, Neustar reports that only about 1,000 such transactions can be handled per hour, even in very low load periods. This issue is separate from the problem found in the Northeast region with a vendor's LSMS product; that particular problem has been addressed.

Minority Opinion

Robert T. Jones, US Cellular Corporation asked that the following minority opinion statement be added to the minutes regarding the Continuing Certification Process:

“Some carriers, for a variety of reasons, will not have "lab" systems (LSMS and/or SOA) to undergo new software version release(SVR) testing with NPAC. The matter of SVR changes was made even more "difficult" (even for carriers WITH "lab" systems) at the LNPA WG in KC. It was decided (my understanding) that ANY change to either ASN 0.1 OR the GDMO constitutes the basis for re-certification. If that understanding is correct, I believe it's VERY BAD NEWS for all customers of Neustar/NPAC.”