Beth Watkins (ATT)
Donna Navickas (Ameritech)
Charles Ryburn (SBC)
Shelly Shaw (Nextlink)
Dave Garner (Sprint)
John Nakamura (TSE)
Bob Angevine (GTE)
Ron Steen (Bell South)
Gustavo Hannnke (MCIWorldcom)
Gary Sacra (Bell Atlantic)
Dan Collier
Mike Panis (ESI)
Ron Grove (Bell South)
Barbara Wilson (DSET)
Kayla Sharbaugh (TSE)
Richard Bell (GTE)
Jim Rooks (ESI)
Marcel Champagne (LM)
John Malyar (Telcordia)

This is being re-discussed due to the fact that some members of the WG originally thought that there was no workaround to the problem and that if there is a workaround the priority might be changed. Jim Rooks stated that there was a manual workaround for this issue. The team wanted to have this revisited to evaluate the priority of the issue. Summary of the issue: after 7:00 PM central the NPAC which is based on GMT, the date is tomorrow. If a subscription is created after 7:00 PM the date generated is the next day’s date, and both service providers would have to create a subscription with the next day’s date. This can be activated if the new service provider’s SOA can support activating a subscription that appears to be the next day. If the SOA will not allow a subscription to be activated in this situation, it is a local SOA issue.

This breaks down into two issues.

1. A SOA will not allow a subscription to be activated if the local system sees the subscription to be in the future. This is a local SOA issue that does not exist in the LTI.
2. If a SP needs to create a subscription to match an existing SV and it is after 7:00 PM Central the dates will not match and the concurrence will fail. The first SP has to go back and modify their SV so that the second SP can concur.

General consensus of the issue was that this is still a priority issue. Its ranking has not changed.

Linked replies issue, Beth stated that DSET needed to be involved in making this type of change. She spoke to DSET and per that discussion if this was to be implemented as currently stated, it would be a violation of CMIP standards. There are ways to work around making the CMIP PDU smaller. Beth and Jim will take this back and do further research on implementation of 187. This change needs not to break a toolkit. Barbara Wilson of DSET stated that she will gather further information on this issue and will bring it to the next meeting in November. Donna still has an issue as to whether or not this is a defect or a change. Donna’s issue will be discussed at a later date. The change order is still valid and a solution must be developed.