Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR022103-01 Detail

- BA will be a required field and will be auto-populated with "N."

- BLOCK field will have letters P, R, S, T, W, Y, & Z activated for PPU features.

- All references to USOCs will be removed from rules.

- A new rule will be added to BA, BLOCK, FEATURE, & FEATURE DETAIL fields: "Blocking USOCs & FIDs are not allowed in FEATURE or FEATURE DETAIL.” These entries will be derived by Qwest from the BA & BLOCK entries."

- FTS will derive the blocking USOCs & FIDs from the BA & BLOCK entries.

- Qwest will reject requests with blocking USOCs & FIDs.

- Qwest typists will be advised to reject manual requests with blocking USOCs & FIDs.

- For UNE-P POTS Migrations as Specified, the only valid values will be E, N, or Z.

- For BA values N or Z, no BLOCK entries will be required.

Status History

Project Meetings

Update includes documentation corrections to synch up with existing OSS Interface documentation. Refer to IMA System Release 14.0 notification SYST.11.14.03.F.01059.IMAGUI14.FinalRelNotes. Under the Implementation section, the Service Request Preparation sub-section was updated to correct information regarding how to request call blocking using the Blocking Activity (BA) and BLOCK fields.

Actual updates to the operational document are found on the Qwest Wholesale Web Site at this URL: http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/ordering.html.

Comment Cycle: No formal comment cycle applies. CLECs who feel the change(s) described in this Level 1 notification alter(s) CLEC operating procedures should immediately contact the Qwest CMP Manager, by e-mail, at cmpcr@qwest.com.

Sincerely, Qwest

-- January Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest asked if there were any objections to this CR closing. Kim Isaacs/Eschelon stated that there were no problems and Eschelon is okay to close. This CR moves to Completed status.

January 9, 2004 Ad-Hoc Meeting was held by Cindy Macy (Qwest). The blocking discussion was in regard to the possible creation of a new PIA value for Blocking. This would require a CMP CR to be submitted.

- December 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that there is a patch scheduled to go in on Friday, December 19th and noted that this CR would remain in CLEC Test until the patch goes in and the CLECs have tested. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that Jill Martain (Qwest) has some questions that she is bringing internally to Qwest. Jill Martain/Qwest stated that she does have the Action Items. This CR remains in CLEC Test.

-- November 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest has been testing the job aid and noted that it is testing fine. Connie asked the CLECs if they also wanted to test the job aid. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T responded yes. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest would ask for feedback in the December Systems CMP Meeting. This Action Item is Closed.

-- October 16, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the target date for the Blocking Job Aid is October 17th. Stephanie Prull/McLeodUSA asked if every scenario that is in the blocking job aid was tested. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that was the case the last time and would ensure that is the case this time as well. It was agreed that this action item could be closed off-line, after the job is available.

-- September 19, 2003 IMA 14.0 High-Level Walk-thru Meeting Minutes Excerpt:

Functionality Description: Implementation of this candidate will permit the CLECs to request multiple changes to the blocking activity on a single line without the need to mark the request for manual handling and without the need to populate the REMARKS field with additional information. This candidate will also eliminate the need for the CLECs to populate the FEATURE and FEATURE DETAIL fields with blocking USOCs and FIDs.

Since Qwest will implement blocking based on the entries in BA and BLOCK, the CLECs will need to request a BLOCK value or group of BLOCK values equal to a valid Qwest product. Documentation will be updated to reflect valid BLOCK values and combinations.

Additional block values will be added for blocking pay-per-use features and for screening values associated with CustomNet.

Products: All products associated with product specific forms that can have a block feature.

Forms Impacted: Port Service (PS), Loop Service Number Port (LSNP), Number Port (NP), Resale (RS), Centrex (CRS),

Field Impacts:

FEATURE - Blocking USOCs will be prohibited in the FEATURE field.

FEATURE DETAIL (FEATURE DET) - Blocking FIDs will be prohibited in the FEATURE DETAIL field. BLOCK ACTIVITY (BA) - Remove current value of A-Add. Implement new value of E-End State of the Account (Block values that are not specified, as part of this block activity and that are currently on the account will not be retained.)

BLOCK - LSNP, NP, PS, CRS, and RS form screen change and EDI valid value change to accommodate additional Block values.

ACTs: N/A Questions & Answers:

Q: Will the Blocking USOCs and FIDs appear on the PSON? A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes, the PSON is a snapshot of the service order, not of what was submitted on the request. No additional comments or clarification requested.

Q: Will this upgrade apply to change ACT C orders as well as conversions? A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes, all ACT’s where the BA field is utilized. No additional comments or clarification requested.

Q: Will the CSR recap function return Blocking USOCs and FIDs that will need to be removed from the feature fields by the CLEC? A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes, USOCs and FIDs would be returned and stated that yes; the CLECs will need to remove USOCs and FIDs. Liz Balvin - MCI asked if the CLEC has to populate what they are intending to remove. Mallory Paxton - Qwest stated that the CLEC would have to remove, from the recapping CSR. Kim Isaacs - Eschelon asked if they would use the delete function in IMA. Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked for clarification. Kim Isaacs - Eschelon stated that in IMA, you can recap the CSR and noted that it is a GUI function. Mallory Paxton - Qwest asked if there were any other questions.

No additional comments, questions, or clarifications were requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR that on UNEP POTS Conversion orders, migrate blocking as specified without having to specific changes to the Customer’s current blocking options. (ACT= V with BA= E) A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest stated that blocking features that are to be retained, will have to be specified as BA=E for end-state. Mallory stated that the CLEC will have to specify the value and that the block field is required.

No additional comments or questions were requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR that on UNEP POTS Change orders, adding blocking only (if QWEST doesn't support BA =A how is this accomplished?) A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded that the CLEC would use a block of E. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked if 1 blocking option exists and are adding an additional, would the CLEC use BA=E and specify both. Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR that on UNEP POTS Change orders, deleting blocking only (ACT= C with BA = D) A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR that on UNEP POTS Change orders, adding & deleting blocking only (ACT= C with BA = E specifying the end state) A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes, the CLEC would use ACT=C with BA=E and show what the CLEC wants to end up with in BLOCK, rather than Remarks.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR that on UNEP POTS Change orders - no change blocking only (ACT= C BA IS NOT REQUIRED) A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes and noted that the CLEC may not be doing anything on a C request, and noted that it is not required. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked if BA=N would be optional. Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded yes.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR that on UNEP POTS New install & Move Order or Change Order to Add Line - adding blocking only ( (ACT = N or T) or (ACT = C & LNA = N) with BA = E) A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded that BA=E would be used, even if adding new.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR that on UNEP POTS Disconnect Order or Change Order to Disconnect Line - removing all blocking ( (ACT = D) or (ACT= C & LNA= D) BA IS NOT REQUIRED) A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded that is a true statement, BA is not required.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, if the BLOCK field values would still be required to be in alphabetical order. A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded no.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, if a draft Blocking Job Aid would be issued with the draft Technical Specifications for IMA 14. A: Mallory Paxton - Qwest responded that a job aid would be available but does not yet have that date. Liz Balvin - MCI asked if the tech specs would draw to the same conclusions. Connie Winston - Qwest responded yes.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Liz Balvin - MCI asked if meeting minutes would be made available. Peggy Esquibel Reed - Qwest responded yes and noted that they would be emailed to meeting participants, would be noted within each of the CR’s discussed, and that a copy of the minutes would be included in the October Systems CMP Distribution Package. Connie Winston - Qwest stated that she would like the minutes incorporated into the walk-thru summaries document that has been provided to the CLECs. Peggy Esquibel Reed - Qwest stated that could be done.

Connie Winston - Qwest thanked Mallory Paxton (Qwest) for providing and sharing the information.

Action Item: - Provide date for when job aid will be available.

March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Mallory Paxton/Qwest presented this CR. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked for some clarification on the blocking, when to use ‘D’ and ‘A’. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if you can add to add a block without recapping. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated not as it is written it and stated that if the CLECs want that, she would need to look at all the BA’s and combine to get what is needed. Mallory stated that you cannot add without re-capping. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she wants to combine ‘E’ and ‘A’. Mallory Paxton/Qwest asked to clarify that AT&T is asking for a new BA value. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we would have to look at the LOE prior to the vote. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if we use this new value with the assigned meaning, and if we remove all blocking, can we put something in there in terms of migration orders. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that for UNE-P and UNE-P POTS on migrate as specified, you will give us USOCs and FIDs, as they are new. Mallory stated that with that CR, if you do not specify the FIDs and USOCs, you do not get the feature. Mallory stated that due to the unique nature of UNE-P, we are not going to combine. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that that is correct. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked to clarify that when they do a migration order, can’t use assigned on UNE-P POTS. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that you would need to give it if it exists and can use assign. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if she always has to give the assign value. Phyllis asked if can put UNE –P POTS and UNE-P CTX 21 on the migrate as specified order and always use a BA value of ‘A’. Mallory Paxton/Qwest asked AT&T, what if you want no blocking? Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated would use ‘Z’ and for UNE-P POTS will use A, N, or Z. Phyllis stated that that would satisfy AT&Ts need. Connie Winston/Qwest asked if we had closure. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she was having difficulty understanding the change for UNE-P POTS. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that for resale migrate as specified, can use any available value. Mallory stated that for UNE-P POTS, the difference is the Add. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated ok, as long as I know that’s the case. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that until this CR gets worked, you are still going to need to use your manual workaround for blocking features. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated add the value for supporting ‘N’, and add BA of ‘N’ and ‘Z’, block field not required. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that the LOE will need to be revisited. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that Qwest will turn around for the vote.

February 24, 2003 - Clarification Meeting

Attendees: Mallory Paxton/Qwest, John Gallegos/Qwest, Connie Winston/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest

CR Description Reviewed: - BA field will keep same values but meaning and rules will change. BA values will be: A-Assign (CLEC must indicated all desired blocking, even if it already exists. Blocking not indicated will be removed.); D-Delete; N-No Change (N will be default); Z-remove all blocking.

- BA will be a required field and will be auto-populated with "N."

- BLOCK field will have letters P, R, S, T, W, Y, & Z activated for PPU features as shown in attachment.

- All references to USOCs will be removed from rules.

- A new rule will be added to BA, BLOCK, FEATURE, & FEATURE DETAIL fields: "Blocking USOCs & FIDs are not allowed in FEATURE or FEATURE DETAIL". These entries will be derived by Qwest from the BA & BLOCK entries."

- FTS will derive the blocking USOCs & FIDs from the BA & BLOCK entries.

- Qwest will reject requests with blocking USOCs & FIDs.

- Qwest typists will be advised to reject manual requests with blocking USOCs & FIDs.

There were no other questions or comments.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022103-01IMA Revise BA & BLOCK Fields on RS & CRS Forms

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022103-01. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held February 24, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 2100 to 3525 hours for this IMA Change Request and no SATE impacts.

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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest