NANC Future of Numbering Working Group

Document Sample
NANC Future of Numbering Working Group Powered By Docstoc
					              NANC Future of Numbering Working Group
                                       - FoN -




TITLE: Proposed actions for resolving and reporting to the NANC on NANC change
orders 399 and 400




DATE: April 4, 2005




SOURCE: Mike Whaley and David Garner
        Qwest
        700 W. Mineral Ave.
        MND19.28
        Littleton Colorado
        303-707-7039
        Mike.Whaley@qwest.com or David.Garner@qwest.com



ABSTRACT: This contribution suggests a solution for responding to the North
American Numbering Council’s request for review of the issues surrounding LNPA WG
change orders 399 and 400




                                       NOTICE:


This document is offered to the NANC Future of Numbering Working Group as a basis
for discussion and is not a binding proposal on Qwest. Qwest specifically reserves the
right to amend or withdraw the statements contained herein.
Based on the information provided at the joint FoN and LNPA WG meeting in Franklin,
TN, and the discussion of NANC change orders 399 and 400, this contribution offers
that a course of action for the FoN to respond to NANC can be done by answering the
following set of questions and by answering them. By asking and answering these
questions, the answers should provide the information necessary to craft a response to
the NANC request.


Questions:
   1. Does the FoN need to make a recommendation to the NANC or can the FoN
      simply report it has reviewed the information at the NANC’s request and by
      proposing that the LNPA WG should proceed according to normal processes?
   2. Is there a need for the NANC or the FoN to take any action other than create a
      response to affirm that the LNPA WG has completed its obligation to do due
      diligence in evaluating the change order request in accordance with its charter
      and direction from the NANC?
   3. From a policy standpoint, is there any need for NANC to change the charter of
      the LNPA WG who was tasked with evaluating the change orders, or is there any
      need for the FoN to insert additional processes that may prevent or delay NPAC
      release 3.3 or prevent the LNPA WG from proceeding with their normal business
      processes and practices?
   4. Was there any information provided in the presentations that warrant the FoN to
      advise the NANC to intervene in proceeding with the normal processes for
      accepting or rejecting change orders.
   5. Is there any impropriety with the requested change orders 399 and 400 as
      submitted and approved by the LNPA WG.
   6. What problems would the industry encounter if it deploys NPAC release 3.3,
      including NANC change orders 399 and 400 but without activation, until such
      time as there is a decision by the industry to activate that functionality.

Draft answers:
   1. There is no need for the FoN to report to the NANC anything other than it has
      reviewed the information provided by the vendors and industry members. The
      FoN recommends that NANC allow the normal LNPA WG processes to move
      forward. Furthermore, the FoN recognizes that there are many options and ideas
      that must continue to be evaluated as new technologies are deployed.
   2. Neither the NANC nor the FoN need to do more than they have and they have
      ensured the LNPA WG performed its due diligence on behalf of the NANC and
      sees no reason to delay any further the review of the change orders nor is there
      any reason to modify the proposed change orders. Furthermore there is no
      reason to change the processes or responsibilities of the LNPA WG as they have
      been executed successfully with regard to these two issues. Now that the LNPA
      WG has completed its review and recommended the vendor proceed to complete
      the change orders as requested, further delays are unnecessary, especially in
      light of the fact that the functionality of the change orders will not be activated at
      this time.
   3. No. There are no policy issues being established by proceeding forward with
      allowing change orders 399 and 400 to be included in release 3.3. All this is
      doing is permitting data to be made available that may be used in the future.
4. There was no information provided that should stop the change orders. There
   obviously are reasons the FoN and LNPA WG to continue to monitor the industry
   as it evolves to ensure that end user customers are afforded the opportunity to
   obtain the services which use telephone numbers and that the NANC continue to
   provide recommendations to the FCC on how to manage those public resources.
5. No and the LNPA WG should continue its role to receive, evaluate and make
   recommendations as it has done.
6. What is being offered with these change orders are the opportunities to assure
   that the playing field remains level for anyone using telephone numbers today,
   regardless of their “provider” of choice. In fact these proposed changes allow
   additional information to facilitate service provider portability; services affected by
   LNP and it provides additional methods for coordinating customer’s services
   when changing service providers.