||Local Number Portability
||May 06, 1997
Review Meeting Title: LNP National Billing
Meeting Date: May 05, 1997 Next Meeting Date:
May 22, 1997 11-1 PDT
Next Meeting/Conference Call to be held 5/22
from 11-1 PDT. Meet me line is 510-824-5647.
||Copy of Ca
R&B Task Force Delta Document to be faxed to all call
FDAFs to be faxed to all call participants
"Issues with Non LNP Access Tandems" 3/26
document from John Rollins to be faxed to all call
participants after receipt from Jill.
||Call to Bill
Krall - Bellcore SPID work proposal available to all?
See Comments from Bill Krall below.
attached list of forum members. Highlighted names
participated on call.
All names on forum list.
Record significant Topics, Presenters,
- Expectations of this forum
- Each regional area has a billing
forum that has been addressing their local needs
- Each regional area may have
specific needs that require vendor changes.
- This forum is to be a means to an
integrated approach to vendors for a collective
- This forum will allow billing
groups to informally share industry-level
information, problems and solutions with each
other with the goal of ensuring billing
- Relationship with other forums
- There was some confusion about an
LNP meeting that will be held in Canada and
whether that had anything to do with this forum.
That meeting is an offshoot of the OBF Message
Processing Team and is specific to LNP message
processing OBF issues.
- The forum that we are setting up
is an informal information sharing body, not an
officially sanctioned team.
- Agenda reviewed which included discussion
around the following topics. The purpose of this initial
discussion was to ensure that everyone understood the
issues. These issues will be discussed at future meetings
in more detail.
- Service provider id (SPID) -
- OBF has decided on
SPID being a 4 byte alphanumeric
field in the EMR/EMI records
- SS7 network is not
designed for alphanumeric
- End office
protocol doesnt allow for
- Has everyone
accepted that SPID will equal
OCN? Most but not all.
- If SPID is
signaled as 7 digits, then how
will it get down to 4?
2936GR has SPID as 8 byte.
- Most vendors
arent supporting module
719, they are supporting module
720 which has a 10 byte SPID
- Ericsson will
provide an option to create
either the 719 or the 720 module.
arent ready to populate
SPID in the AMA.
- TCAP parameter
changes would be required.
- What will SPID
represent? Currently we will see
LRN which is representative of
switch vendor (facility
provider). We will have to
convert LRN to SPID in the
- There are many
needs for SPID information
including, LNP, N-1 provider
Unbundling and Operator
- Bellcore has a
work proposal available in 1997
to help to develop requirements
for SPID. The need that was
identified by the California Task
Force was to come up with one
module that could meet all of the
SPID needs, rather than include
SPID fields in other modules.
- Host/Remote network configuration
- Need the ability
to record proper LRN for
InterLATA access (CC110).
- Send LRN in JIP
parameter to the host. Our
understanding is that JIP and LRN
are separate data elements on the
switch. If a company wants the
same NPA/NXX used for both the
JIP and LRN, they need to specify
that with their Network/Switching
- Lucent will derive
a unique LRN for the remote based
on the JIP provisioned on the SM.
This JIP will be used to populate
the LRN field on the AMA when it
needs to be derived for
originating access records.
- One participant
mentioned that one of the switch
vendors will not have the ability
to generate originating
LRNs in the access records
with the initial LNP software.
- To get a unique
LRN on a terminating recording, a
unique LRN for the remote should
be put into the ISCP.
- JIP on terminating
end is not being recorded/passed.
California Delta Item # 9
requests the capability of
appending an Originating LNP
module to a Terminating record,
in order to help identify a
ported originating number for
mutual compensation purposes. Per
Lucent and Nortel, this is a case
where the JIP being signaled from
the originating switch might be
used to create an originating LNP
module/LRN at the terminating
- Nortel noted they
will be putting a patch back to
their 007 release to allow for a
unique LRN for remote switches.
The availability date has not
- Portability outside the rate
agreed that they are familiar
with the PORC effort.
- PORC concerns will
be discussed at a later meeting.
- Database queries, and resulting
- On a terminating
call, we will only get a record
if call completes (based on
translations) in some companies.
Other companies are recording
attempts, so they will have AMA
records to use for query billing.
- We need to discuss
different types of queries. Ex.
Default route with last resort
query. It was noted that the CNAT
option is mutually exclusive from
marking a terminating trunk as
FGB/FGD/2A or 2B, since they all
produce Structure Code 625
records. You have to mark the
trunk as one or the other, you
cannot get CNAT records in
addition to any existing 625
structure code AMA records.
- AMA Module 719 (Bellcore) vs AMA
Module 720 (ICC)
- Noted differences
between the Bellcore and ICC
- The 720 module
includes space for SPID and
Location information, which will
not be populated for Service
- Should we ask for
the ability to switch over to the
719 module, for
- Incompatibility of network
requirements with AIN services
- Lucent has
concerns around serial
triggering. If an LNP trigger is
encountered after other triggers
have been processed, how far back
do they need to go to supply LRN
- What LRN do we
need and from where?
- We need feedback
from the AIN meeting.
- Further work
around the Billing implications
needs to occur. The biggest
concern is on open transactions.
- Network deployment
- Refer to Ca.
Change request #4 in the Delta
Doc. This item requests that
switch vendors attach LNP modules
to ALL calls from ported numbers
(not just access AMA records). In
the case of serial AIN triggers,
will the "derived" LRN
be available in all cases?
- Operator services/LIDB
- Who owns the
- Billing will be
required to do a look up to
answer the preceding question.
- An issue is that
not everyone is moving forward
with the same
- LIDB is currently
not planning to handle Alpha RAO.
- What OCN will be
actually populated? Where do you
- When a default RAO
of 998 is received, a look up
will have to be made in the TPM,
based on the NPA/NXX. This will
not give accurate information if
the number was ported.
- Even if LIDB has
OCN information, when will the
switch vendors be able to
populate it in the AMA?
- Local calling scope
- We need to look
into the impacts of LNP on EMS
(Extended Metro Service), ELC
(Extended Local Calling) and EAS
(Extended Area Service).
- Is EMS (Extended
Metro Service) considered
eligible for porting?
- Rate center
definition not consistent across
- Notes published by
John Rollins are considered quite
good. Jill will send copy to
Marie for distribution.
- Area of Portability/Wire center
portability within the rate center
- This needs to be
defined in context of
between rate center and exchange
need to be clarified.
- Most people agreed
that you cannot port across a
Rate District within a Rate
Center, but things werent
so clear when porting across wire
centers was discussed within a
Rate District or Rate Area.
- Some companies
have end user rate plans that
vary based on wire center. Will
customers be allowed to port
across LEC/ILEC wire center
- Decided to
incorporate this item with #3.
- LSMS and billing
- Issues will vary
based upon vendor dependencies.
- Some companies are
bringing copies of SMS data into
billing in order to be able to
look up missing LRN information.
- If we have common
LSMS interface needs, we might be
able to leverage them with the
vendors in order to get a common
- Impact of LNP on Resale and
- Mutual comp. needs
to be discussed. How will we
provider correctly for
Originating LRN information is
not required on non-Access
records in the ICC Requirements.
- Ported numbers can
be resold or unbundled. Its
important for the billing groups
to recognize any additional
billing system impacts or switch
vendor requirements as a result
of these combinations.
- After discussion was completed around each
topic, the team rated and grouped each topic for future
discussions. The initial focus will be on those items
which received a high (H) rating.
provider id (SPID) - Module 338
Host/Remote network configuration
Portability outside the rate center (PORC)
queries, and resulting compensation issues
|5. AMA Module
719(Bellcore) vs AMA Module 720 (ICC)
Incompatibility of network requirements with AIN services
|9. Area of
Portability/Wire center portability within the rate
|10. LSMS and
|11. Impact of
LNP on Resale and Unbundling
- Delta Document
- Any regions that have completed
work of assessing the changes between the ICC
documentation and Bellcores GR2936 agreed
to share information.
- Currently Ca. R&B task force
has a document that many have seen. This document
is referred to as the Delta Document.
- The team agreed they want
information from OBF (message processing and
billing) sub-committees and other standard bodies
shared across all regions. Its critical for
the LNP billing experts to stay in close
communication with their OBF reps to ensure that
they are in sync.
- FDAFs - Feature Definition
- This form used by Lucent. Other
vendors may call their forms something else.
- Once completed, these forms are
used by the vendors to T&C each request.
- The California Task Force
submitted FDAF documents to all of the switch
vendors requesting time and cost estimates for
Delta Items 4-11, 13 and 14. These documents
officially request that the switch vendor
estimate the cost of making the requested change.
- Bellcore and SPID Work Effort
- Tom Santos contacted Bill Krall
(Bellcore) to get clarification on who can
participate on the Bellcore SPID Work Effort.
Bill Krall response was that "... the
Bellcore effort on SPId is
"industry-wide"!!! Please point them to
the Bellcore Digest for February, 1997. If they
cannot get hold of this document, I can fax them
an extract of the Digest Article. This effort is
definitely for ALL industry players. Under the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TA96), Bellcore
Clients are now defined as any entity that is
willing to fund Bellcore. It has nothing to do
with Bellcore's present owners or future owner.
Under TA96, generic requirements must be opened
to everyone and anyone who pays is entitled to an
equal say in the shaping of the requirements
work. If at all possible, could you please
communicate this to them. If you can, please give
me their number and I or Sara Knapp will
commiunicate this to them. It is critical to the
eventual acceptance of the requirements by the
industry as a whole that the process be seen as
completely and unequivocally OPEN."
- Bill Kralls number is
908-758-4296. His e-mail id is
- Next Meeting/Conference Call to be
held 5/22 from 11-1 PDT. Meet me line is
- Jill Blakely will be the
host for the call.
- Goal of the 5/22 call is
for the team to put together a list of
issues that are not covered by the
California Delta Doc and to discuss any
issues around the suggested solutions.
- Each member is to list
different solutions to each issue, if
they dont agree with the Delta
Document. The purpose of this effort is
to share information and different
- A 3 day working session was
scheduled for: June 17, 18 and 19th in San Ramon
to be hosted by Pacific Bell. Specific
information to be sent out under separate cover.
1. California Rating and Billing Subcommittee
3. Issues with Non LNP Access Tandems