LNPA Working Group Meeting Schedule
September13 - 16
Chicago

 

 

LNPA Working Group

Tuesday, 9/14, 1 pm to 5 pm,

· Introductions and Agenda Review

On Bridge:

Colleen Collard

Dennis Robbins

· Approve minutes of previous meeting.

During discussion of the recommendation to the cross regional forum, the subject of how to enforce the recommended testing arose. Steve Addicks suggested that this be taken to the NANC to provide enforcement. Dave Garner informed the group that the Southwest LLC was reviewing the contracts to determine if they could enforce the testing through the existing contracts. This will be discussed further under New Business. The minutes were accepted with no changes.

Anna reported that the WNP section went very well and did not receive any action items. The GTE contribution suggesting that the 2nd report be rejected was not accepted. NANC wants a third integration report addressing the 911 concerns and slamming issues that were raised in GTE’s contribution. At the meeting the co-chairs gave the NANC a tentative date for a third report of end of first quarter. The group felt that that was too ambitious considering the amount of work necessary for release 4.0. It was decided that we would tell NANC that the third report would be completed by Second quarter of 2000.

NANC stated that they were the appropriate body to consider sanctions in regards to the Slow Horse Issue and for the subcommittee to continue developing a solution to the Slow Horse issue.

The test plan sub-working group met for 3 days and has identified 90 inter-carrier scenarios and are well into test plan development. That test plan is scheduled to be completed and published for usage in June 2000. The reseller issue has been closed with no changes to the existing wireline process. Anne Cummins (ATT Wireless) was elected as the new wireless co chair. There was discussion of NIIF issues that dealt with the wireless portability. For further details, please refer to the Wireless Number portability minutes

The LSMS performance and availability requirements were not completed. They should be ready for review at the next LNPA WG meeting. They have requested further information from LM to assist in the root cause analysis. There was agreement that the slow horse sub team was evaluating the "slice" which consists of the portion of interface between the LSMS and the NPAC. It did not extend further into the distribution of the information from the LSMS and the network elements. The end to end issue would need to be dealt with in another forum. It was requested by the WNP that the slow horse meeting be held at a time that would not overlap with the WNP meeting. Both are currently being held on Tuesday mornings. Due to the extension of the WG meeting to 5:00pm on Thursdays this may not be possible. For further details, please refer to the Slow Horse minutes.

 

 

Numbers are being pooled. LM is completing the test plan for 3.0. It will be provided to the sub committee for approval. It will be completed by 11/24/99. Steve Addicks (MCI Worldcom) had a question regarding the download of pooled blocks to service providers with release 2.0. Donna stated that she thought the problem had been corrected when LM altered the time frames when pooled blocks were activated. LM did not comment.

PIM Issue 0001

Jackie Klare (Pacific Bell) presented the changes to the process flows and text that were proposed by the SW/WC operations team. The WG reviewed the changes and presented additional changes. Jackie was tasked to take the suggested changes to the SW/WC operations team for further development. Jackie will present the new flows and text at the next meeting.

PIM Issue 0002

Shelly Shaw (Nextlink) presented a new issue to the WG. The issue presented was the formal establishment of a Service Provider Maintenance window. This issue was accepted to be worked by the WG. She will present further information regarding this issue at the next meeting.

 

Issues arose with the implementation of 2.0 in the Midwest region. This was discussed at the last NANC meeting. The WG was directed by NANC to review these issues and evaluate the impact of service providers not testing with release 2.0 and the relationship to those issues. Donna Navickas (Ameritech) gave a brief description of what occurred to the WG. The following action items resulted from the discussion.

Action item: Marcel Champagne (LM) is to respond to the WG as to the impact of service providers not testing with 2.0 and the relationship if any with the issues that arose with the implementation of 2.0 in the Midwest region. He is also to supply a write up on the implementation issues that LM encountered during the turn up of Release of 2.0 in the Midwest region.

Action item: Donna Navickas is to supply a write up of the issues that arose with the implementation of 2.0 in the Midwest region and the actions taken to resolve the issues.

 

It was brought to the attention of the WG that the NANC website contains inaccurate and outdated information. Steps have already been taken to make the LNPA WG information more readily available by having the WG added to the NPAC website. Jeannie Grimes from the FCC has been contacted and has agreed that changes need to be made to the NANC website. The proposed changes will add a link from the NANC site to the NPAC site for current LNPA WG information and archive all of the existing information on the NANC site. This has been sent to the persons responsible for the NANC site so that all changes can be made. An update will be provided at the next meeting on the status of this change.

The Backwards compatibility definition was reviewed with the information provided by LM in reference to their numbering scheme for releases. There was new discussion regarding the difference between functional backward compatibility and mechanical backward compatibility. Based on this discussion, John Malyar (Telcordia) revised the proposed definition. This was distributed to the team for review. No objections to that definition have been presented.

Original Proposed Definition:

A release and associated point releases (e.g., 3.0, 3.x.x, 3.x.x.x, and so on) must be backwards compatible to the prior major release (e.g. 2.0). Only a major release will contain functional interface changes between NPAC and SP SOA/LSMS.

Proposed Definition by John Malyar:

It was suggested that subsequent releases of a major release (e.g., 2.0, 2.1, 2.1.1, etc.) must support Pure Backward Compatibility. Also, major releases should support at least one version of Functional Backward Compatibility, i.e, R3.0 should be Functional Backward Compatible to R2.0. It is suggested that the objective should be that all releases remain Functional Backward Compatible, if possible.

The WG has come to consensus that under the new release schedule, new releases (i.e. 4.0) will require milestone management within the LNPA WG. This would involve making sure that all LNPA WG activities are completed on schedule to maintain the proposed two release per year cycle. The project management would consist of oversight of all activities required to produce a release package. Marcel Champagne (LM) has agreed provide this role and to incorporate this into the Lockheed Martin update. This will become a standing agenda item.

Originally the LNPA WG Number Pooling sub team stated that they did not support porting pooled blocks assigned to the LERG code holder. This was conveyed informally to the INC, through Donna Navickas chair of the pooling sub team. INC guidelines however, recommend that all pooled blocks should be ported to the assigned carrier regardless of the donor code assignee. Certain scenarios create a problem with this guideline. If there are no pooled blocks available when a carrier requests blocks, a new NXX must be assigned. The NXX is then assigned to the carrier but all 10000 numbers are pooled and then pool ported to the new assignee. This is an inefficient and costly method of assigning numbers to the requesting carrier. Steve Addicks (MCI Worldcom) recommends that a formal response be sent to the INC indicating the recommendation of the WG. The recommendation of the working group is that pooled blocks not be pool ported to the LERG assignee. The Co-chairs of the WG will send a letter (which will be drafted by Donna Navickas) to INC with this recommendation.

 

Wednesday 9/15, 8:30 am - 5 pm,

On Bridge

Colleen Collard

Dennis Robbins

See Change Order Document provided by John Nakamura for updates to open change orders.

The following LLC’s have returned a response to the letter sent out after the last WG meeting.

Mid-Atlantic LLC - approve with no changes

Western LLC - agrees with the Midwest proposal

Midwest(LNP) - LLC proposed change that shows increased LLC involvement in process

Southwest LLC - agrees with the Midwest proposal

Northeast LLC - No response

West Coast LLC - No response

 

 

The co-chairs will alter the flows and text and distribute to the WG. The revised flows and text will be sent with a letter to the LLC’s to indicate that the new block (LLC/LNPA review of prioritized change orders) will be held immediately prior to the LNPA WG meeting during which the development of requirements for the change order will occur. This will necessitate the combined meeting to be held on the Monday prior to the regularly scheduled LNPA WG meeting. This will be held simultaneously with the wireless testing sub team meeting and the WNP sub group meeting. Scheduling the meeting at this time is the only way to include increased LLC involvement without extending the time necessary to complete all tasks.

John Nakamura and Lisa Marie Maxon led discussion and tracked change orders. Refer to John’s document for information.

 

Thursday, 9/16, 8:30 am – 5 pm,

On Bridge

Colleen Collard

Dennis Robbins

John Nakamura and Lisa Marie Maxon led discussion and tracked change orders. Refer to John’s document for information.

TABLE 1: High Priority Change Orders

High Priority Change Orders

Change Order Number

Change Order Description

NPAC Effort

SOA/LSMS

Effort

ILL 130 Application Level Errors High High/High
NANC 187 Recovery Linked Replies Medium Med/Med
NANC 191 DPC/SSN Value Edit

Should be grouped with 291.

Low N/A / N/A
NANC 192 NPA Split Load File Medium N/A / N/A
NANC 200 NPA Split Notification

Some SPs may have zero effort on this if 192 is implemented, and those SPs also take the input from the LERG (thereby ignoring this new M-EVENT-REPORT).

Medium Low Med/Med
NANC 217 Mass Update SPID High! High/High
NANC 291 SSN Edits (000)

Should be grouped with 191.

Low N/A / N/A
NANC 219 NPAC Monitoring of Associations

Should be grouped with NEW change order for heartbeat.

Low N/A / N/A
NANC 227

NANC 254

Failed TN Problems High Med-Low / N/A
NANC 230 Donor SOA PTO Medium Med / N/A
NANC 232 First Port Notification on Web BB Low N/A / N/A
NANC 240

(related to NANC 198)

No SV Cancel on T2 Expiration Medium High ? / N/A (depends on implem)
NANC 249 Modification Disconnect Pending Date Low Med / N/A
NANC 285 SOA/LSMS Query Size Low Med-High / Med-High
NANC 294 Due Date Edit (7 PM) Medium N/A / N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 2: Medium Priority Change Orders

Medium Priority Change Orders

Change Order Number

Change Order Description

NPAC Effort

SOA/LSMS

Effort

ILL 23 Detailed Integrity Report Low (Audit Impl) N/A / N/A
NANC 179 TN Range Notification Medium Med-High / N/A
NANC 218 Conflict Timestamp Broadcast SOA Low Low / N/A
NANC 169 Delta Bulk Data Download for Subscription Versions Medium N/A / N/A
NANC 193 Split Problems (Medium High) High! N/A / N/A
NANC 198 (related to NANC 240) Unique Cancellation Notifications (Medium High) Medium ? / N/A
NANC 287 ASN1. Notification Recovery - Recompile Only –Almost Documentation Only Low! Low/Low

 

TABLE 3: Low Priority Change Orders

Low Priority Change Orders

Change Order Number

Change Order Description

NPAC Effort

SOA/LSMS

Effort

ILL 5 Round Robin Broadcast to LSMS (Medium Low) Low N/A / High
NANC 87 Viewing of Cancelled Subscription Versions by Old and New SPID Only Medium Low Low/Low
NANC 103 Increase of OSI Selector Size Medium Low/Low
NANC 122 Enhanced Key Expiration Strategy Medium Med/Med
NANC 138 Definition of Cause Code (Medium Low) Low Low/Low
NANC 151 Add TN to the Attribute Value Change Notification Low Low / N/A
NANC 204 NANC 235 Inter Service Provider Communication High  
NANC 246 Filter BDD – Subset of NANC 169 Low N/A / N/A

TABLE 4: Not Yet Prioritized Change Orders

Not Yet Prioritized

Change Order Number

Priority

Change Order Description

NPAC Effort

SOA/LSMS

Effort

         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         

TABLE 5: Rejected Change Orders

Change Orders Rejected for Next Release

Change Order Number

Priority

Change Order Description

NPAC Effort

SOA/LSMS

Effort

NANC 204 NANC 235 Low Inter Service Provider Communication (Wireless) High  
         
         
         
         
         
         
         

 

 

 

Test call for 2.0 this afternoon, group testing is to start within the next few weeks. System design for release 3 created assumptions by LM, these will be provided by Marcel Champagne and distributed with the minutes. The USA’s will monitor partial failures and will try to determine the cause of the partial failures for the next three weeks beginning Monday September 20th 1999, and will provide a report to Steve Addicks Slow Horse committee sub-chair, of all partial failures within the three week period.

Marcel will bring a general summary integrity sample report to the next meeting for August and September.

Month Date Location Host
January 10-13 Vegas Nextlink
February 14-17 California Pacific Bell
March 6-9 Denver ESI
April 10-13 Kansas City Illluminet
May 8-11 Atlanta MCI
June 12-16 Chicago Ameritech
July 10-13 Portland (Tentative)
August 14-17 Baltimore BA
September 11-14 Banff Canadian Consortium
October 9-12 Vienna, Va Winstar
November 13-16 Altamonte Springs Sprint
December 11-14 Phoenix US West

 

There were no un-addressed action items.

Updates were made to the issues matrix

Line Level Splits of Pool TN’s in an EDR Block –

The FCC has mandated that any new NPA Splits that occur will occur along rate center boundaries. There will no longer be any geographic splits. Rate centers will not be split during NPA splits. The associated proposed

 

 

PIM Letter Conference Call –

A conference call was scheduled to prepare the letter to the NANC and the industry to socialize the PIM process.

Quiet Period Implications –

There was discussion of the quiet time period and the implications and limitations that might be observed by a new service provider during that time period. The LLC’s have approved the quiet period and are aware of the implications. NANC approved the recommendation that was sent to them. It is not clear to this group that NANC fully understands the implications that are involved in the quiet time. It was proposed that the WG send an advisory to NANC alerting them to the fact that the quiet period will begin shortly and its impact. It was also suggested that the NPAC alert any new service provider of the Y2K quiet period and its implications upon them as a service provider. The clarification that was provided in the minutes last month will be included in the report to NANC by the co-chairs.

The LNPA WG recommends that there be no changes to the NPAC/SMS production hardware or software from 11/1/1999 until 3/1/2000, except corrections for specific Y2K problems or production impacting problems (i.e., Severity 1).

This would have the following implications; new service providers would only be able to access the NPAC via dial up access to the LTI or through an existing service bureau’s connectivity. This would limit the ability of new service providers to implement and test any new connectivity during the quiet time.

Process Flows 2nd Report –

The flows and text need updating. NANC is requesting a 3rd Report. The flows and text will be updated for inclusion in that report. The 3rd Report will contain the most current and accurate flows and text.

Pooling of Packet DTN’s –

There is no impact on pooling since the Packet DTN’s would be considered contaminated numbers and if the block did become a contaminated pooled blook, an intra-service provider port to the correct switch would correct any issue.

Documentation from LNPA WG on minimal set of regression tests –

It was suggested that the LNPA WG send a letter to the LLC’s asking that the recommendation regarding testing that was supplied to the cross regional forum become a contractually required part of a new release. LM will supply details regarding the type of testing, minimal set, time frames etc. This will be prepared at the next LNPA WG meeting.

LNPA PIM

Letter

Wireless/Wireline Integration

3rd report will be due 2nd Quarter 2000

NPAC/SMS Release Status

Y2K Quiet period Implications

Prioritization of change order

LM/Ameritech

Slow Horse Update

Steve Addicks will supply the report.

Next Meetings … October 11 – 14 Kansas City host Sprint


lmclogo_s.gif (1902 bytes)

 

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

Copyright © 1999 Neustar, Inc.
Last modified: January 20, 2000