Open Product/Process CR PC091001-1 Detail |
| Title: Mandatory tagging of both ILEC and CLEC circuit Ids at installation | ||||||
| CR Number |
Current Status Date |
Area Impacted | Products Impacted | |||
|
|
||||||
| PC091001-1 |
Completed 1/17/2002 |
Installation | WFA-C and T1s | |||
| Originator: Kratzer, Walter |
| Originator Company Name: SBC |
| Owner: Meehan, Terrance |
| Director: |
| CR PM: |
Description Of Change |
|
Have Qwest installers tag both ILEC and CLEC circuit Ids when new circuit installed.
|
| Date | Action | Description |
| 9/7/2001 | CR Received from Walter Kratzer of SBC Telecom | |
| 9/10/2001 | CR status changed to New - to be Reviewed | |
| 9/10/2001 | Updated CR sent to Walter Kratzer of SBC | |
| 9/19/2001 | Qwest requested and obtained clarification from SBC. | |
| 9/27/2001 | Held Clarification Meeting with SBC. | |
| 10/9/2001 | Draft Response posted to database. | |
| 10/17/2001 | Draft response presented. Qwest issued formal response to CLEC community. Status changed to CLEC Test. | |
| 11/14/2001 | SBC respresentative was not available at the November CMP meeting to respond to Qwest on this CR. | |
| 12/12/2001 | CMP Meeting - CLEC participants agreed to have Qwest confirm with SBC whether the CR can be closed. | |
| 12/17/2001 | Telephone conversation with Walter Kratzer, SBC. SBC hasn't had the opportunity to process an order under the process. They would like to have the CR left open and in CLEC Test. | |
| 1/16/2002 | CMP Meeting - SBC's Walter Kratzer wasn't present at the meeting and it was requested that Qwest confirm with Mr. Kratzer whether the CR can be closed. | |
| 1/17/2002 | Voice mail received from Walter Kratzer advising that the CR can be closed. Qwest left return voice mail requesting e-mail confirmation. | |
| 1/17/2002 | Received e-mail confirmation from Walter Kratzer, SBC, that the CR can be closed. |
Project Meetings |
| Subject: Circuit Tagging Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:19:57 -0600 From: "KRATZER SR, WALTER J (SBCTI)" Rick: Please close CR PC091001-1 in which we asked Qwest to tag our circuits with both Qwest and SBC Telecom IDs. Thanks, Wally Walter J. Kratzer Sr. Network Service Center SBC Telecom, Inc. Office: 214-689-7443 Pager: 888-472-1990
- Thursday, September 27, 2001, 10:00 p.m. (MDT) Alignment/Clarification Meeting Introduction of Attendees Walter Kratzer, wk4736@txmail.sbc.com, SBC Telecom Terry Wicks, terry.wicks@algx.com, Allegiance Terry Meehan, tmeehan@qwest.com, Qwest Cindy Buckmaster, cbuckma@qwest.com, Qwest Kate Spry, kspry@qwest.com, Qwest Wally, Terry W., Terry M., Cindy, and Kate Review Requested (Description of) Change At demark, SBC Telecom would like both of the Qwest’s and CLEC circuit IDs on smart jacks to be tagged at installation. Confirm Areas & Products Impacted Areas: Installation Products: WFA-C Confirm Right Personnel Involved Terry Meehan is the ‘owner’ of this CR and will be the point of contact for future problems of this nature until the root cause is established and draft response issued. Cindy will forward necessary System Contact information to Kate. Terry Wicks would like to stay informed as to response. Kate will coordinate all necessary clarification meetings, complete meeting minutes, and review, forward, and send information to Michael Belt and Matt Rossi to store to database. Identify/Confirm CLEC’s Expectation Per SBC Telecom, they want both SBCT and Qwest circuit Ids tagged at the demarc. For example, both Ids should be placed on a smart jack on a T1 installation or the Subscriber Network Interface on a UNE loop. Allegiance mentioned they would like phone numbers on their circuit Ids as well. Per Terry M., we do not tag circuit Ids currently because we are not provided with the information from the CLECs to do so, or it is not consistent. Per Cindy, when information is populated into the system by the CLECs, the information field that would provide the ID #s is not active for the CLECs. Qwest needs to find out if this is something that we can change. Cindy will look into who could answer that system question for us. She believes it is Jim Benedict with WFA-C. Terry M. stated that Qwest has no problems tagging with circuit Ids if we have the information at the time, however we will not search for the Id numbers if they aren’t provided and we also won’t go back and retag if all circuit Ids are provided. Also, the CLECs are welcome to tag Ids if they are at the sites. Identify any Dependent Systems Change Requests No related system CR’s were identified Establish Action Plan (Resolution Time Frame) Terry M. will clarify this process via a written formal response draft. After clarification is received regarding possible system changes. He will forward this documentation to Kate by 10/19/01. Cindy will look into who could answer that system question for us and forward the information to Kate by 10/5/01. Kate will arrange to hold a systems meeting with Terry M and the identified, Qwest systems personnel to discuss response options. Kate will review and forward the response draft to Michael Belt and Matt Rossi to store in the CR database by 10/19/01 for CLEC review. The web location will be noted in Matt Rossi’s email regarding the response document by 10/22/01. This information can then be reviewed and discussed by the CLEC Community at the following CMP Meeting. Wally can view this information on the CR database and this CR can then be reviewed and discussed by the CLEC Community at the following CMP Meeting. Corrections/updates can then be made at that time.
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 10:38:53 -0500 From: KRATZER SR, WALTER J (SBCTI)
Kate: We want both SBCT and Qwest circuit IDs tagged at the demarc. For example, both IDs should be placed on a smart jack on a T1 installation or the Subscriber Network Interface on a UNE loop. The locations you mention appear to be internal Qwest locations which you need not tag with our IDs. When I was a technician with SWBT's InterExchange Carrier Center in St. Louis tagging with the SWBT ID and the IEC ID was a requirement for SWBT installers. This was done as tagging both IDs at the demarc facilitates both companies trouble shooting. Thanks, Wally
From: Kate Spry [mailto:kspry@qwest.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 10:02 AM To: KRATZER SR, WALTER J (SBCTI) Subject: PCCR091001-1 Tagging ILEC & CLEC circuit IDs Walter,
I received your change request #PCCR091001-1 for the mandatory tagging of both ILEC and CLEC circuit ID's at installation. I have been trying to find an owner for this CR however there are a number of questions coming up before we can assign this to someone:
Is this at the circuit level? Where go you want these tagged (i.e. splitters for dsl, CFA block, 4-10 blocks, unbundled, tagged in db)?
We really need more information on this CR before we can process it. Please let me know. Thanks.
Kate Spry (303) 896-0547
|
CenturyLink Response |
|
10/09/01 Final Response Kratzer, Walter SBC CC: Fred Aesquivel This letter is in response to your CLEC Change Request Form, number PC091001-1 dated 09/07/01 Mandatory tagging of both ILEC and CLEC circuit ids at installation. Qwest will not require "mandatory" tagging of both ILEC and CLEC circuit ids at installation, because the ID numbering information is passed by the CLEC to Qwest via the LSR CKR field. This is currently only an optional data field on the LSR and the information is not consistently received by all CLECs. A recent sample indicated that this information was only available approximately half of the time. On field dispatched provisioning orders, Qwest has no problems with tagging both circuit IDs when the CLEC completes the CKR field with the ID numbering information via the WORD document, although we will not delay the provisioning process seeking this information. Qwest also has no problems with the CLEC tagging the IDs if they happen to be on site. Another option would be to make the CKR field on the LSR a "required" field, however this would impact all CLECs and all CLECs would have to agree to this process of providing this data on every order. If all CLECs agree to make the CKR field a required data field, then this CR would roll into a systems change request for coding updates. Sincerely, Terrance Meehan Lead Process Analyst
|
Information Current as of 1/11/2021