LNPA Working Group Meeting
August 14-16, 2001    Seattle, Washington

West Coast Grand Hotel

Seattle, Washington

Host:  AT&T Broadband

 

Tuesday August 14, 2001     1:00 pm – 5:00 pm 

Attendance:

Name

Company

Name

Company

Cindy Sheehan

AT&T Broadband

John P. Malyar

Telcordia Technologies

H.L. Gowda

AT&T

Jean Anthony

Telecom Software

Anne Cummins

ATW

Colleen Collard(phone)

Tekelec

Paul LaGattuta

AT&T

Gene Perez

TSI

Dave Cochran(phone)

BellSouth

Marian Hearn

Canadian Constortium

Ron Steen

BellSouth

Dave Garner (phone)

Qwest

James Grasser

Cingular Wireless

Gary Sacra

Verizon

Jan Dempsey

Illuminet

Richard Bell (phone)

Verizon

Maggie Lee

Illuminet

Sharon Bridges

Verizon

Gustavo Hannecke

Neustar

Jason Lee

WorldCom

Richard Sheer

Neustar

Steve Addicks

WorldCom

Rob Coffman(phone)

 

Neustar

Patrick Lockett

Sprint

Barry Bishop

Neustar

Marcel Champagne

Neustar

Leah Luper

SBC

Jim Alton (phone)

SBC

Charles Ryburn

SBC

Dennis Robbins (phone)

ELI

Monica Dahmen

Cox

Jamie Sharp (phone)

XO

Mike Panis

ESI

Jill Byers

Bell Canada

Ron Stutheit

ESI

Linda Godfrey

Verizon Wireless

Gene Johnston

Neustar

Chris Cuckett-Brown

Verizon Wireless

Anna Miller

VoiceStream Wireless

Cory Seidel

Illuminet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review of May Minutes:

The team reviewed the July meeting minutes and corrections were made.  They are now marked as final and will be distributed with the draft of the August minutes.

 

Wireless Number Portability Operations

Neustar gave a presentation on the new entrant testing.

 

Two service providers (SP) completed their testing and a 3rd SP has started.  The group completed modifications to the test plan.

 

Barry Bishop Neustar's Director of Pooling Administration gave a detailed presentation on pooling.

 

It was stated that the wireless SPs have decided to use the BFR forms and process as their method for Code Opening.  Anne Cummins from AT&T Wireless (ATW) stated that there will be a web site operation which will require minimal involvement of personal to process a request.

 

For more detail, see the WNPO Committee meeting minutes.

 

Problem / Issues Management (PIMs):

 

PIM-1:   Porting with Resellers. 

 

This topic concerns the question of whether a wireline reseller can be involved in the LSR/FOC negotiation process.

 

Ultimately, OBF approved the use of two mutually exclusive approaches where reseller is involved in a customer moving to new service provider.  One approach (option A) has reseller involved in LSR/FOC negotiation as the new LSP.  The other approach (option B) has network service provider involved in LSR/FOC negotiation as if the new LSP.  This matter goes to final closure at OBF in a few weeks and the two options are expected to be included in the LSOG 6 processes.

 

Meanwhile, the National LNP Operations (NNPO) has recommended that the NANC flows reflect only option B (network service provider is involved in LSR/FOC negotiation).  The LNPA-WG voted today whether to accept the OBF recommendation (options A & B) or the NNPO recommendation (option B only.  The LNPA-WG vote was overwhelmingly in favor of the NNPO approach with 8 votes cast for the NNPO's approach, 1 vote cast for the OBF approach (Cox), and 4 abstentions (wireless SPs and Bell Canada).

 

The PIM is closed and will be reported as such to NANC.  With consensus to adopt the NNPO flows, the next steps are to (1.) notify the OBF of our action, (2) do final proofing of NNPO's flows, and (3.) revise the NANC wireline process flows to reflect NNPO's no-reseller-involvement approach in LSR/FOC negotiation process.

 

We will need to revisit this issue in the future from a wireless perspective.

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

  

The LNPA is awaiting feedback from the NIIF on its liaison requesting modification of NIIF guidelines, and from the NAPM/LLC on Revised SOW 19.

 

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

 

NENA is still working the issue.

PIM-9:  Inter-Carrier Trouble Reporting

 

This PIM is under discussion at NIIF.

 

PIM 11: Moving Blocks between Switches

 

This has been forwarded to INC and CIGRR. No reply has been received at this time.

 

PIM 12: Operator Service Functionality

 

This topic is being addressed in the OBF's Messaging Processing Subcommittee.  It was introduced as a PIM at LNPA-WG, but only to solicit comment from the LNPA-WG participants on whether Operator Services System should eliminate NPA-NXX screening of wireless codes and launch LIDB queries on wireless numbers or the Operator Services System should launch LNP query first and then screen as usual on NPA-NXX of bill-to number's LRN (or NPA-NXX of bill-to number if it's not ported).  Today, AT&T, Bell Canada, Qwest, and Sprint indicated a preference for the LIDB query on all calls approach.  Verizon and WorldCom indicated a preference for the initial LNP query approach.  SBC was concerned about the development required for the LNP query approach, so SBC guessed it probably would prefer the LIDB query approach.  In any case, this PIM exists only to track the issue, not to resolve it.

 

PIM 13:  Premature Disconnects

 

A specific complaint about premature disconnects (disconnect before midnight of due day) or disconnects done when cutover is delayed (with or without an LSR Supp having been sent) was raised by AT&T several months ago as PIM 13.  The equivalent issue, expressed as clarification of what the NANC flows mean with respect to timing of old SP disconnect activity, was raised by WorldCom.  (The flow's interpretation requires more than the current language describing what the flows explicitly state.)

 

Our review of July's meeting minutes highlighted the dispute on whether the old SP should await NPAC activation before doing its disconnect work.  BellSouth, Qwest, SBC, Sprint, and Verizon objected to the characterization of the problem as being a violation of the NANC flow, with the flow indicating that old SP should wait for NPAC broadcast.  Cingular, Cox, AT&T Wireless, WorldCom, XO and others voted to retain the text in the minutes as written.  A small majority of wireless and CLECs prevailed and the July minutes were left essentially unchanged.  The word "clearly" was deleted and "premature disconnect" was changed to read "premature disconnect/delayed activation."

 

BellSouth does its disconnect work based on receipt of NPAC broadcast.  SBC reported that SBC and AT&T are in negotiations on an approach that has old SP query NPAC before starting disconnect.  Verizon does due date + one approach, (i.e., disconnect independent of actual port).

 

A related discussion was the meaning of the two NANC flows that describe the activation and disconnect processes.  The "without 10-digit trigger" flow includes the disconnect step as being concurrent with new SP activation. Thus argument that old SP must do something "after" the NPAC activation is weak.  But in the more common "with 10-digit trigger" flow, the disconnect step is outside the group of steps labeled as possibly concurrent.

 

The ILECs effectively argue that the NANC flows' sequence of steps showing NPAC activation step followed later by old SP disconnect step merely describes the happy path and is not intended to mean that the latter action is triggered by the former, that is, the disconnect is triggered on the LSR due date, not the reality of the cutover.  Verizon has not designed its systems to implement disconnect subject to the NPAC activation having been done and is very concerned that it could be faced substantial outlays to modify systems to delay disconnect until NPAC activation occurs instead of on LSR's due date. 

 

Action Item - Bring contribution on how the flow should be worded.  Steve Addicks will bring in re-worded process flows in two versions, one to reflect the interpretation that disconnect can occur before customer is ported and the other to make explicit the need to verify that port actually has occurred. 

 

 

 

 

PIM 14:  NXX Codes Ownership Changes

PIM - 14 Disconnect of NXX Codes with Ported:

 

One of the SPs reported INC was actively working the issue.  HL Gowda - AT&T stated that his INC representative would like to have the LNPA WG officially refer this PIM to the INC.  Gary Sacra stated that his INC representative was bringing a contribution to INC at their next meeting.  The LNPA WG agreed not to cancel PIM 14, as stated in the July LNPA WG minutes, and instead will send it to the INC for their action.

 

Action:  Charles will refer PIM 14 to the INC.

 

Steve Addicks - WorldCom suggested that all of the NXX thousand blocks could be pooled as a way of protecting TNs that have been ported.  A specific example was used and it involved a non-pooled NPA, which raised another concern.  Barry Bishop - Neustar suggested that the numbers could be ported in blocks of one thousand.  He will investigate if this can be done in a non-pooled area and Paul LaGattuta - AT&T will advise NAPM LLC that this proposal will be presented at the August 29th meeting.

 

Action:  Barry Bishop - Neustar will draft a proposal to be presented to the NAPM LLC and Paul will add this to the August agenda.

 

           

PIM 15:  Disconnect of NXX Code with Ported TNs

 

This issue has been referred to INC.

 

These NXX Codes may be part of an NPA split(e.g. Minnesota NPA 612).  Gary Sacra said he investigated one of these codes, from a bankrupt company, and did not find any working customers, so they removed the code from the LERG as portable code notation.

 

Gene Johnston - Neustar said that if an SP, in a pooled environment, requests a thousand block,  they are designated as the code holder and are assigned an NXX from NANPA.  Subsequently other SPs requesting blocks are assigned thousands blocks from that NXX.  At some later date, the SP that was originally assigned as the code holder finds that they did not need the block, it is returned to the PA, and the NXX is returned to NANPA. The original code holder removes the code out of the LERG as portable. 

 

 

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

 

Sprint has been finding NXXs that were noted as portable "Y" in the LERG have been changed to portable "N".   See the above notes from PIM 15 as to some possible reasons for this happening.  The LNPA WG accepted this issue as a new PIM (number 16).

 

Action: Patrick Lockett - Sprint will submit this as PIM 16 and we will refer it to the correct industry forum for resolution.

 

 


 

Wednesday August 15,  8:30 – 5:00pm

Attendance:

Name

Company

Name

Company

Cindy Sheehan

AT&T Broadband

John P. Malyar

Telcordia Technologies

H.L. Gowda

AT&T

Jean Anthony

Telecom Software

Anne Cummins

ATW

Colleen Collard(phone)

Tekelec

Paul LaGattuta

AT&T

Gene Perez

TSI

Dave Cochran(phone)

BellSouth

Marian Hearn

Canadian Constortium

Ron Steen

BellSouth

Dave Garner (phone)

Qwest

James Grasser

Cingular Wireless

Gary Sacra

Verizon

Jan Dempsey

Illuminet

Richard Bell (phone)

Verizon

Maggie Lee

Illuminet

Sharon Bridges

Verizon

Gustavo Hannecke

Neustar

Jason Lee

WorldCom

Richard Sheer

Neustar

Steve Addicks

WorldCom

Rob Coffman(phone)

 

Neustar

Patrick Lockett

Sprint

Barry Bishop

Neustar

Marcel Champagne

Neustar

Leah Luper

SBC

Jim Alton (phone)

SBC

Charles Ryburn

SBC

Dennis Robbins (phone)

ELI

Monica Dahmen

Cox

Jamie Sharp (phone)

XO

Mike Panis

ESI

Jill Byers (phone)

Bell Canada

Ron Stutheit

ESI

Linda Godfrey

Verizon Wireless

Gene Johnston

Neustar

Chris Cuckett-Brown

Verizon Wireless

Anna Miller

VoiceStream Wireless

Cory Seidel

Illuminet

Kayla Sharbaugh

TSE

Jane Quenk

Neustar

Lonnie Keck

ATW

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Release 3.1 Change Orders

 

Charles Ryburn reported that the / LLC did not approve the SOW 28 as planned but there is a meeting scheduled for 8/17 for further discussion.

 

Jane Quenk, Neustar reviewed the proposed 3.1 project plan.

 

Release 3.1 Test Case Review

 

New ITP test cases presented only for NANC 179; rest of test cases due August 24th.  Today's test case review was just the first of several likely to occur. Another review of additional draft test cases will be done.  Unclear today how much time will be devoted to test case reviews.

 

ITP testing was done with DSET for release 3.0.  In the future, however, the ITP testing will be done with Neustar.  In response to question about experience level of Neustar's testers, Neustar explained that it plans to bring their testers on board a couple of months ahead of the testing start dates to allow ample time for training.  SP concern was that in past, there was often disagreement over purpose of a test case and time was lost training the tester.

 

Neustar suggested using the weekly Thursday conference calls as vehicle for testing discussions.  Telcordia pointed out that  ITP and Turn-Up testing involve different audiences and the current weekly testing calls, with audience focused on Turn-Up rather than ITP testing, may not be best vehicle for this purpose.

 

Future ITP test case review will be done by subcommittee by conference call as follows:

ITP test cases draft published - August 24th

LNPA-WG subcommittee review draft ITP test cases - September 5th

ITP test cases version 2 published - September 10th

LNPA-WG subcommittee reviews version 2 - September 17th

ITP test cases final version published - September 24th

            note: ITP test case discussion is relevant only to mechanized users.

 

There are about 60 new Turn-Up Testing test cases.  A subcommittee approach also will be used (some what different make-up from that of the ITP subcommittee), but a conference call approach will not be feasible.  The

TUT test cases draft published   8/24

LNPA-WG subcommittee draft TUT test cases - September 6th-7th

TUT test cases version 2 published - September 24th

TUT review of version 2 - October 1st

TUT test cases final version published - October 8th

note: TUT test cases are relevant to both LTI and mechanized users.

 

Project Plan Review

 

Milestones - More need to be added, such as information package on use of new test lab.

 

Test Case Reviews - Project Plan will be modified to provide for additional LNPA-WG test case reviews.

 

Test Bed Availability - Project Plan will be modified to indicate test bed will be available at least one week before scheduled testing begins.  This allows SPs to set up with the test bed without using the allocated test time.

 

Testing Interval - The plan shows 20 days allocated for this activity.  About 7-9 User vendors will be involved in the testing.  Considering the 32 new test cases and regression tests,

including re-tests of found problems, it appears that each vendor will require about 2 weeks, with an additional week for retest of any different version of that vendor's software.  If Neustar can support only four simultaneous testing entities, the testing seems likely to require about 18 weeks versus the 20 days allowed in the project plan.  Also, no time is included to deal with problems found.  Neustar will consider internally whether to expand the testing interval or increase their capacity to handle simultaneous vendor testing.

 

Internal Schedule for ITP testing arrangement - Asked that Neustar show internal plan dates for setting up their ITP testing lab in the project plan.

 

Analysis of Test Results and Northeast's 4-week soak is desired to demonstrate to the LLC that 3.1 can be implemented smoothly in the other regions.  This may extend the schedule somewhat.

 

Updated project plan will be released later this week.

 

Action:  Jane - Neustar needs to add in addition testing information and send out an advance package on how ITP testing will be done.

Suggestion that this be added to the Project Plan.  Prepare an advance package for the vendors.  Additional milestones need to be added to the Project Plan.

 

 

Action: Richard Scheer - Neustar will consider internally whether to expand the testing interval or increase their capacity to handle simultaneous vendor testing.

 

 

            Impact of change order NANC 179 - notifications in ranges

 

During discussion of Release 3.1, it became clear the impact of change order NANC 179 will be less than expected, at least for a while.  This is because if either SP involved in a port fails to support (and use) ranges, the NPAC notifications to "other" SP that result from the non-range messages sent to NPAC will not be in ranges. (They will be in "range" format, but NPAC notification would be issued TN by TN.)  This SP behavior reduces the benefit of change order NANC 179 by preventing the consolidation of some notifications into single range notification.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Thursday August 16, 2001, 8:00 – 12:00 pm

Attendance:

Name

Company

Name

Company

Cindy Sheehan

AT&T Broadband

John P. Malyar

Telcordia Technologies

H.L. Gowda

AT&T

Jean Anthony

Telecom Software

Anne Cummins

ATW

Colleen Collard(phone)

Tekelec

Paul LaGattuta

AT&T

Gene Perez

TSI

Dave Cochran(phone)

Bell South

Marian Hearn

Canadian Constortium

Ron Steen

BellSouth

Dave Garner (phone)

Qwest

James Grasser

Cingular Wireless

Gary Sacra

Verizon

Jan Dempsey

Illuminet

Richard Bell (phone)

Verizon

Maggie Lee

Illuminet

Sharon Bridges

Verizon

Gustavo Hannecke

Neustar

Jason Lee

WorldCom

Richard Sheer

Neustar

Steve Addicks

WorldCom

Rob Coffman(phone)

 

Neustar

Patrick Lockett

Sprint

Barry Bishop

Neustar

Marcel Champagne

Neustar

Leah Luper

SBC

Jim Alton (phone)

SBC

Charles Ryburn

SBC

Dennis Robbins (phone)

ELI

Monica Dahmen

Cox

Jamie Sharp (phone)

XO

Mike Panis

ESI

Jill Byers (phone)

Bell Canada

Ron Stutheit

ESI

Linda Godfrey

Verizon Wireless

Gene Johnston

Neustar

Chris Cuckett-Brown

Verizon Wireless

Anna Miller

VoiceStream Wireless

Cory Seidel

Illuminet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jean Anthony summarized yesterday’s discussion of NANC change orders for release 3.1.

New Business:

Steve Addicks requested a discussion of NANC Flows as described under PIM 13 for August meeting.

There have been several changes to upcoming meeting locations and dates.  These are all tentative at this time and my change by the August meeting.  Currently the changes are as follows:

 

LNPA WG:                                                        Host:

 

September        18 - 20*                                     Verizon, Baltimore, MD

October               9 - 11                                      SBC, San Antonio, TX

November          13 -15**                         Qwest, Phoenix, AZ

December         11 -13**                         Neustar, New Orleans

 

* Date change ** Location change.


neustarlogo_s.gif (1902 bytes)

 

Send mail to Web Content with questions or comments about this web site.

Copyright 1999, 2000, 2001 Neustar, Inc.
Last modified: September 10, 2001