Wholesale: Products & Services

Open Product/Process CR PC022703-9X Detail

Description Of Change

AT&T is requesting a report for all known IMA EDI & IMA GUI problems.

This report will be a list of IMA EDI and GUI problems currently

identified either internally identified by QWEST or reported by a CLEC

thru the ISC Help Desk or Service/Account Manager. The report will

identify all open issues that are pending investigations. Once an issue

has been reported and determined to be a problem/clarification/defect

issue it should be noted on the report with the appropriate QWEST

Trouble Ticket # as it goes through the phases within QWEST well before

it makes it to the Event Notification process. Once an event

notification issued for the problem, the notification number would be

referenced on this report. This gives CLEC one central point of

reference for all IMA EDI & GUI problems. The CLECs can use this report

to:

(1) find out the current status of their IMA EDI or GUI problem

(2) determine if a new problem has already been identified and the

current status

(3) proactively address problems that have been identified by other

CLECs that have potential impacts to their business

Similar to the SBC's Defect Report, the QWEST report should include

the:(1)Trouble Ticket(TT) Number, (2) IMA Version(s) Impacted, (3)

Indicator whether problem impacts IMA GUI, EDI or both (4)Indicator

whether the defect is impacting production code or code only in the SATE

environment, (5) Date the TT was opened, (6) Short Description used to

identify the Problem - for example the actual message being returned

from QWEST, (7) REQTYP and ACT values impacted,(8) Event notification

Number (9) Status of the Fix(Pending Analysis, In Analysis, Pending

Development, IN Development, Pending Testing, In Testing, Pending Prod

Migration, Pending Prod Validation, CLOSED), (10) Status Comments,

(11)Target Implementation/Resolution Date

All Closed Issues should be moved to a separate document or EXCEL Tab

(similar to SBC's Defect Documentation) and retained for 3 months.

Any IMA problems that are currently in analysis and haven't been

reported via event notification should be placed on this report is

activated.

Description of Change - Submitted 02-27-03

QWEST currently support a Manual Indicator, which is used to indicate that the Remarks field contains information that needs manual attention and this field will also be used on occasion as part of a workaround. However a centralized list doesn’t seem to exist to indicate the known workarounds in place in which the Manual Indicator and Remarks are used.

AT&T is requesting that a Production Defect Issues List separate from the CR log be created and maintained. This reported would indicated:

- States impacted

- Products (REQTYP/ACT) impacted

- QWEST assigned Severity Level

- Current Workaround in Place

- Manual Indicator value for workaround

- Remarks required to identify this specific workaround

- Pending Long Term Solution with CR reference

- Target Implementation

Project Meetings

February 18, 2004 CMP Meeting Connie Winston – Qwest advised that this CR is the one ATT originally issued. This was discussed during the Global Action Item meetings. IT looked at specific data elements on the request and we are planning on providing these via PC111903-1. Donna Osborne Miller – ATT advised we understood when Carla submitted the other CR, Qwest would deny this CR. Donna said she thought that Qwest would identify the parts of this original CR that would not be met but the new CR PC111903-1. Qwest agreed that we would identify the data elements that are not being met by the new CR and send this information to ATT and populate it in the database. This CR will change to Denied Status.

January 21, 2004 This is the original CR that was written with more depth and was reviewed as part of the Global Action Item meeting. The CLECs requested that Qwest create PC111903-1 Web site Notifier to replace this CR. Connie advised we are still evaluating if any piece parts of this CR can be incorporated. Otherwise, we will deny this CR. We hope to finish this in February. This CR will remain in Evaluation Status.

- December 17, 2003 Connie Winston – Qwest reported that this CR is part of the Global Action Item discussion. We anticipate for those meetings to wrap up in January. We will determine if we have met the intent of this CR or should be closed, withdrawn or crossed over. We will then finalize the action needed. This CR will stay in Evaluation Status.

November 19, 2003 Kit Thomte – Qwest advised that this CR was talked about Tuesday during the Global Action Item meeting. This CR was updated with the new title and description. Carla Pardee – ATT advised they would like to keep the old CR open and use the new CR description and title to open a different/new CR. Cindy Macy – Qwest asked if ATT would like to have the new CR clarified or had this happened during the Global Action Item meeting. Carla advised she would like Qwest to hold a Clarification Call for the new CR.

October 15, 2003 Judy Schultz – Qwest advised this is being addressed as part of the Global Action item that was discussed Tuesday October 14. Qwest is currently developing a hybrid Event Notification report as a resolution. The report would be downloadable and available via a url. The status will be changed to Evaluation.

September 17, 2003 Connie Winston – Qwest reviewed the response to this CR. Donna Osborne-Miller ATT advised that Phyllis Burt-ATT redlined the response and that she would like to review this with the group. Donna explained that ATT Consumer disagrees with the statement that Qwest’s Event Notification process is triggered immediately. An example of this is portrayed by PC032803-1. Clear resolution, timelines and work arounds, specifically for Alphabetical Blocking did not occur. This was first reported on July 11, 2003 and the Event Notification was issued 1 month later. The existing process at Qwest determines what information goes into the Event Notification. Not all issues are captured, Qwest decides what to publish. The CLECs want to be able to share their system issue and work arounds with each other. Connie Winston explained some information on Event Notifications is proprietary. Connie agreed we would include a discussion around Event Notifications in the lock up meeting. Connie suggested we look at the CMP guidelines on timeframes as those guidelines are requiring notification to go out, sometimes before we have completed our investigation, thus making the notification not as conclusive as it would be at a later date. Approximately 1300 tickets are taken in one month. Not all of these fit the Event Notification guidelines. We do not want to send notifications out on all 1300 tickets as that would overwhelm the CLECs and Qwest. We would need to develop criteria around what Event Notification to include. Liz advised they have issued trouble reports that could impact other CLECs that have not been turned into an Event Notification. The CLECs advised there is not an Event Notification tracking mechanism. This report would provide a wide view of Event Notifications. Phyllis Burt-ATT advised she does not feel comfortable that Qwest is tracking and managing trouble tickets. It doesn’t seem as if Qwest has a view of total number of open, closed, severity levels and priorities. Qwest advised this CR will be discussed during the lock up session, held the Tuesday before the next CMP meeting. This date is Tuesday October 14, 2003.

CMP Meeting 08-20-03

White-Qwest stated that there was an ad hoc call on 8/11. Following that call AT&T issued a new description of change. Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest was evaluating the new description and the documents AT&T provided. The CR was moved to Evaluation.

===================================

Ad Hoc Meeting – 08-11-03

Attendees Matt White-Qwest Beth Foster-Qwest Kyle Kirves-Qwest Randy Owens-Qwest Liz Balvin–MCI Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T Carla Pardee-AT&T Phyllis Burt-AT&T

White-Qwest introduced the attendees and described the purpose of the meeting. He asked Foster-Qwest if she had any questions for AT&T.

Foster-Qwest asked if AT&T could update the description of change for the CR with the information that Burt-AT&T had provided in her 7/30 e-mail to Cindy Macy-Qwest. She also stated that Qwest’s practice is to distribute event notifications in accordance with the CMP document’s timelines and that this usually happened immediately. Burt-AT&T stated that her experience was that this was not always the case. She cited the alphabetical blocking issue as an example of when Qwest had received a trouble ticket from a CLEC and had taken quite a while to initiate an event notification. Foster-Qwest asked if AT&T wanted information on the report for all trouble tickets before they are captured in an event notification. Burt-AT&T stated that she wanted all the issues for IMA that came through the help desk captured on the report. Foster-Qwest and Burt-AT&T discussed the headings used in the SBC report and how they may be applicable to Qwest troubles.

White-Qwest asked if there were any additional questions. There were none. White-Qwest thanked the attendees and adjourned the call.

====================================================

Ad Hoc Meeting 07-24-03

Attendees Matt White – Qwest Mallory Paxton – Qwest Linda Sanchez-Steinke - Qwest Phyllis Bert – AT&T Sharon Van Meter – AT&T Regina Mosely – AT&T Connie Nelson- USLink Bonnie Johnson – Eschelon Kim Isaacs – Eschelon

White-Qwest described the purpose of the meeting. Bert-AT&T stated that the 5/14 Qwest response addressed part of the issue. She explained that AT&T really wanted a a central place to see production issues. She stated that she had forwarded SBC’s defect report that she would like Qwest to create a report similar to. Paxton-Qwest stated that the SBC report looked like a spreadsheet that identifies system defects. Bert-AT&T stated that it was and that Qwest would need to modify it to match Qwest’s event notification processes. Paxton-Qwest stated that it looked like the dates on the report were target dates, not release dates. She asked if the SBC reprot was on line. Bert-AT&T stated that it was. Paxton-Qwest clarified that what AT&T wants Qwest to do is take system problems and create an online tool to give CLECs a holistic view of the troubles. Bert-AT&T agreed. Paxton-Qwest stated that the report looked like a catalogue of event notification that indicates when manual activity is required.

Van Meter-AT&T asked if Qwest will include Bert’s information as additional information in the CR interactive report. White-Qwest stated that he would.

Bert-AT&T stated that she wanted the original acceptance solution as well. Paxton-Qwest suggested that she submit an additional CR requesting that change. Bert-AT&T stated that she would.

======================================= CMP Meeting 07-16-03

White-Qwest stated that AT&T had provided feedback to the Qwest 5/14 response and that he recommended that Qwest hold and Ad Hoc meeting to discuss the issues. Osborne-Miller-AT&T agreed.

============================================= CMP Meeting 06-18-03

Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that she would send any comments from AT&T about Qwest’s proposed implementation to White-Qwest. ========================================================== CMP Meeting 05-21-03

Paxton-Qwest reviewed the Qwest response. Osborne Miller-AT&T stated that the response sounded interesting and inviting. She stated that she would take it back to her folks and let Qwest know if they had any concerns. White-Qwest stated that he would set up an Ad Hoc meeting to discuss any issues that Osborne Miller-AT&T identified. The CR was moved to Development. ==========================================

04-16-03 - CMP Meeting

White-Qwest described the CR and stated that Qwest would have a response at the May CMP Meeting.

==========================================================

March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: SCR022703-09 Support Production Defect Report (Originated by AT&T) Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T presented the CR. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that this is for documentation and we are looking at this CR to be a crossover to Product/Process. John asked if AT&T agreed. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated to Phyllis Burt (AT&T) that there are no systems implications for this request so it will be crossed-over to the Product/Process forum. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked how the determination is made as to whether a request is systems or product/process. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that if it is determined that there is a manual solution, the business keeps track of the CR and is a Product/Process definition. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that these things are handled on the operation’s side of the house. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she is in full support of this and asked for the product’s to be expanded to All products. Kit Thomte/Qwest asked if the business was agreeable to the expansion of products. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if Qwest would revise to All products. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would revise the CR to change Impacted Product’s to All. Stephanie Prull/McLeod stated that she would also like this for All products. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that she agreed that this should be for All products. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if there was agreement and understanding that this CR gets crossed-over to Product/Process. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that she is in full agreement that this is Product/Process. Mallory stated that she is currently working on something similar to this and this is a documentation issue. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that this CR would be crossed-over to Product/Process.

-

Clarification Meeting - March 12, 2003 Attendees: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Phyllis Burt/AT&T, Regina Mosley/AT&T, Carla Pardee/AT&T, Diane Burt/AT&T, John Blaszczyk/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Monica Manning/Qwest, Terri Kilker/Qwest, John Gallegos/Qwest, Berkley Loggie/Qwest, Lynn Stecklein/Qwest, Wendy Green/Qwest, Jan Martin/Qwest, Denise Martinez/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Rob Mitchell/Qwest, Laurel Nolan/Qwest, Shonna Pasionek/Qwest, Mallory Paxton/Qwest, Joan Pfeffer/Qwest, Deb Roth/Qwest, Carl Sear/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Scott Carne/Qwest

Reviewed CR Description: QWEST currently support a Manual Indicator, which is used to indicate that the Remarks field contains information that needs manual attention and this field will also be used on occasion as part of a workaround. However a centralized list doesn’t seem to exist to indicate the known workarounds in place in which the Manual Indicator and Remarks are used. AT&T is requesting that a Production Defect Issues List separate from the CR log be created and maintained. This reported would indicated: - States impacted - Products (REQTYP/ACT) impacted - QWEST assigned Severity Level - Current Workaround in Place - Manual Indicator value for workaround - Remarks required to identify this specific workaround - Pending Long Term Solution with CR reference - Target Implementation

Expected Deliverables: To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: Process & Documentation

Confirmed Products: UNE-P POTS

Discussion: There were no questions or comments.

Action Plan: This CR will be presented by AT&T at the March 20th CMP Meeting and Qwest will be providing the CR response.

CenturyLink Response

For Review by CLEC Community and Discussion at the February 2004 CMP Meeting Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

SUBJECT: Qwest’s Change Request Revised Response - PC022703-9X-“Support Production Defect Report.”

This response is in regards to AT&T’s CR PC022703-9X. This CR was originally denied in September 2003 due to no reasonable demonstrable business benefit. Upon further discussion with AT&T and other CLECs, Qwest agreed to include this CR in the discussions that were held at the Global Action Item Meetings (held on September 12, 2003; October 14, 2003; November 4, 2003; November 18, 2003; December 16, 2003). AT&T agreed to update this CR in accordance with discussions held between Qwest and the CLEC community for updating the Event Notifications Production Support Website. Initially, AT&T updated the existing CR, PC022703-9X, only to retract their update and request that a new CR, PC111903-1 (Web Site Notifier), be issued. Qwest took the action item of reviewing the original, unchanged CR, PC022703-9X, to determine if any components of the original CR should be subject to ongoing review.

Qwest’s original denial of this request stated the following:

AT&T requests that Qwest provide a log of all IMA EDI and GUI issues identified either by Qwest or by a CLEC (via a Wholesale Systems or ISC Help Desk trouble ticket or Service/Account Manager). AT&T also requests that the report identify all open issues pending investigation.

Qwest reviewed this revised request and determined that items AT&T requested be included in a log are already identified within the Event Notifications. Qwest publishes Event Notifications, according to the CMP guidelines, for each issue identified as either a problem, or an item requiring clarification, when it is a CLEC impacting issue. Qwest's Event Notification process is triggered immediately upon identification of an item as CLEC impacting. Log updates would be produced no sooner than Qwest currently issues Notifications.

The existing process ensures a full review of the issue and prevents CLEC proprietary trouble tickets that do not result in an event notification from being shared with the entire community.

Finally, it would require additional Qwest resources to implement and maintain the AT&T request. Duplication of effort in initial publication and again as updates are made to those issues introduces additional cost and complexity into the negotiated CMP process.

Qwest's existing process of providing notifications with workarounds, business impacts, and channels for escalation works effectively and includes the information AT&T is requesting. Qwest respectfully denies this change request because the change does not result in a reasonably demonstrable business benefit.

Based on the agreements at the Global Action Item meetings, the CLECs have agreed to issue PC111903-1 to address the improvements in Qwest’s trouble ticket reporting, and ongoing discussions will be tracked against that CR. Therefore, this CR remains in a denied status, effective September 2003, for no demonstrable business benefit.

Sincerely, Connie Winston Director, Information Technology

September 9, 2003

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

CC: Lynn Notarianni Beth Foster Kit Thomte

SUBJECT: Qwest’s Change Request Response - PC022703-9X “Support Production Defect Report (crossed over from SCR022703-09)”

CR Description: AT&T’s revised change request states:

Qwest Response: AT&T requests that Qwest provide a log of all IMA EDI and GUI issues identified either by Qwest or by a CLEC (via a Wholesale Systems or ISC Help Desk trouble ticket or Service/Account Manager). AT&T also requests that the report identify all open issues pending investigation.

Qwest reviewed this revised request and determined that items AT&T requested be included in a log are already identified within the Event Notifications. Qwest publishes Event Notifications, according to the CMP guidelines, for each issue identified as either a problem, or an item requiring clarification, when it is a CLEC impacting issue. Qwest's Event Notification process is triggered immediately upon identification of an item as CLEC impacting. Log updates would be produced no sooner than Qwest currently issues Notifications.

The existing process ensures a full review of the issue and prevents CLEC proprietary trouble tickets that do not result in an event notification from being shared with the entire community.

Finally, it would require additional Qwest resources to implement and maintain the AT&T request. Duplication of effort in initial publication and again as updates are made to those issues introduces additional cost and complexity into the negotiated CMP process.

Qwest's existing process of providing notifications with workarounds, business impacts, and channels for escalation works effectively and includes the information AT&T is requesting. Qwest respectfully denies this change request because the change does not result in a reasonably demonstrable business benefit.

Sincerely,

Connie Winston, Director, Information Technology Qwest

* August 13, 2003

DRAFT RESPONSE For Review by CLEC Community and Discussion at the August 20, 2003, CMP Product/Process Meeting

Donna Osborne Miller AT&T

SUBJECT: Qwest’s Change Request Response - CR #PC022703-9X

This is an updated response regarding AT&T CR PC022703-9X (Support Production Defect Report – crossed over from SCR022703-9).

Qwest reviewed this request and provided the initial response at the May 21, 2003 Product/Process CMP Meeting. AT&T reviewed Qwest’s response and provided additional information during an Ad Hoc meeting held on July 24, 2003. The additional information that AT&T provided included an example of a report that identifies a listing of ‘Event Notifications.’ AT&T requested that Qwest hold an Ad Hoc meeting with the CLEC Community to review the report. Qwest scheduled and held this meeting on August 11, 2003. During the meeting, AT&T agreed to modify the description of change to clarify this request.

While it assess this CR, Qwest would like to move it into Evaluation Status. Qwest will provide a status update at the September CMP meeting and will outline their response at that time.

Sincerely,

Connie Winston Qwest

========================================================= May 14, 2003

REVISED RESPONSE For Review by CLEC Community and Discussion at the May 21, 2003, CMP Product/Process Meeting

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

SUBJECT: AT&T Change Request – CR PC022703-9X

This letter is in response to AT&T Change Request PC022703-9X. This CR is a request by AT&T for Qwest to create a centralized list of known workarounds.

Qwest accepts this CR and is currently working to create an appropriate update to the Resale and Interconnection Ordering Overview PCATs to satisfy AT&T’s request. This update will create a new section in the PCAT that will contain links to documented manual processes or workarounds in product-specific PCATs or other procedure PCATs.

For example, in the Migrations and Conversions PCAT, there is a documented manual process for Courtesy Disconnects. The new section in the Ordering Overview PCAT may read:

“Manual Requests Required” Manual handling (Manual Indicator ‘Y’) is required to process the following types of requests. - Courtesy Disconnects (This hotlink would take a reader to the Migrations PCAT.) - Other Documented Process - Etc.”

This text is a proposed example only and is subject to change. Qwest will provide an update on the documentation change at the June CMP meeting.

Sincerely,

Mallory Paxton Senior Process Analyst

============================================

DRAFT RESPONSE to SCR022703-09 March 13, 2003

RE: SCR022703-09 Support Production Defect Report

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-09. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1050 to 1750 hours for this Change Request.

At the March Systems CMP Meeting, CMP participants will be given the opportunity to comment on this Change Request and provide additional clarifications. Any clarifications and/or modifications identified at that time will be incorporated into Qwest’s further evaluation of this Change Request.

Sincerely, Qwest