Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR081803-01 Detail

Qwest has also suggested an additional value of HA = BLANK in which the Hunting form would not need to be sent. The "BLANK" would indicate that the customer is being migrated and no hunting is being requested.

Expected Deliverable:

To not have to recap existing hunting USOCs and to utilize HA=N to be inclusive of the end state of the customers account.

Status History

Project Meetings

August 18, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was implemented in 15.0 and would remain in CLEC Test.

- July 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this was implemented in 15.0 and would remain in CLEC Test.

-- June 17, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated this CR will remain in CLEC Test for another month per the request of Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T.

May 20, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the majority of the CRs in Attachment G were deployed in 15.0. Connie said that we usually like to wait for the 1st EDI customer to certify a new release. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that when the submitting CLEC of a CR has not moved to the release and another CLEC performs the test, they may not understand the submitting CLECs intent or their system may be different. Bonnie said that she initiated a CR to establish a new status and Qwest voted no. 6/1/04 - Revision to Minutes from Eschelon. Bonnie said that we need to define in the CMP Document, a new status that fits the situation when a CR has not been tested in a release. Randy Owen/Qwest said that we might look at something between CLEC Test and Completed. Cheryl Peterson/AT&T said that we might use CLEC Test One and Two. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that we could use ‘Pending Test’ or ‘CLEC Hold’. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we would create an action item to research the possibility of establishing a new Status Code.

This CR will remain in CLEC Test.

April 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was just deployed in the IMA 15.0 Release and will remain open for another month. There were no questions or comments. This CR remains in CLEC Test.

-- March 18, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR is deploying on April 19, 2004, in the IMA 15.0 Release. There were no questions or comments.

- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that she wanted to provide an update to the funding approval process that was discussed in the January CMP Systems Meeting. Judy referred everyone to Attachment J in the Distribution Package. She stated that all CRs are being re-evaluated and must be approved. Judy said that CRs could not be scheduled without approval. Judy stated that the CRs with an impact to the IMA interface would follow the existing prioritization process. Judy noted that the funding for IMA 15.0 and IMA 16.0 has been approved, as well as funding to begin work on IMA 17.0.

- MEETING MINUTES February 17, 2004 Hi-Level Walk Through of IMA 15.0 Committed CR's

Attendees: Anne Robberson-Process Analyst (Qwest), Curt Anderson- IT Systems Analyst (Qwest), Diane Burt-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Donna Osborne-Miller - Carrier Relations Manager (AT&T), Dusti Bastian-Process Analyst (Qwest), Ellen McArthur-Process Analyst (Qwest), Hank Martinez- IT Systems Analyst (Qwest), James McCluskey-ILEC Manager (Accenture), John Daugherty-Product Management (AT&T), John Gallegos- IT Manager (Qwest), Kathy Miller-Process Manager (Qwest), Kim Isaacs-ILEC Relations Process Analyst (Eschelon), Kyle Kirves- IT Analyst (Qwest), Linda Miles- Process Manager (Qwest), Lori Langston-Process Manager (Qwest), Marie Acceno-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Nancy Denny- IT Analyst (Qwest), Nicole James- IT Analyst (Qwest), Pat Bratetic- Process Manager (Qwest), Phyllis Burt-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Randy Owen- IT Manager (Qwest), Shon Higer-Process Analyst (Qwest), Shonna Pasionek- IT Analyst (Qwest), Stephanie Prull- EDI Business Analyst (Eschelon), Susie Wells-Product/Process Analyst (Qwest)

Meeting Facilitator: Nancy Denny (Qwest)

Purpose: High-level walk-through of the CRs that are committed in the IMA 15.0 Release.

Supporting Documents: Qwest Notification: SYST.02.13.04.F.01366.IMAEDI15.0Cand&DocWkth Documentation containing 15.0 Candidate Summaries: February 17, 2004, attached to notification CRs can be found in the Qwest Wholesale Change Request Interactive Report located at: http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/changerequest.html

Functional Overview: This enhancement will allow the CLEC to provide end state hunting information for Conversions/ Migrations as Specified. If hunting is desired on the converted account, the CLEC will populate the HTQTY field on the LSR with a quantity greater than zero and provide hunting information on the HGI form. On the HGI form, the only HA allowed will be N = New. If an HGI form is not provided, Qwest will remove any existing hunting from the account. If an HGI form is provided, Qwest will provision hunting on the converted account as specified on the HGI form. If no HGI form is provided, hunting USOCs and FIDs will be prohibited in FEATURE and FEATURE DETAIL on the Product Specific Form. This enhancement will not affect hunting functionality in previous versions of IMA. In addition, current hunting functionality for ACT = C, N or T will remain unchanged.

Form Impacts: Hunt Group Information (HGI) Resale (RS) Centrex Resale (CRS) Port Service (PS) - FEATURE/FEATURE DETAIL fields. LSR - HTQTY field

Products:

Functionality will be available for ACT= V or Z for: Resale POTS Resale BRI ISDN Centrex 21 PBX Analog Line Side Port Digital Line Side Port Designed Trunk Resale Qwest DSL UNE POTS (P or STAR) UNE-P ISDN BRI UNE Centrex (P or STAR) UNE-P PBX Designed Trunk

Functionality will be available for ACT = V only for: Centrex Plus/Centron UNE Centrex 21 (P or STAR)

Activities: Activity Type = V and Z

Meeting Discussion: Susie Wells/Qwest: provided the overview based on the document circulated with the meeting agenda.

Stephanie Prull/Eschelon: For ACT = W, hunting will remain even though the HGI not sent? Susie Wells/Qwest: That is correct. (John Gallegos/Qwest confirmed).

- October 16, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Kit Thomte/Qwest noted that the CR Title has been revised for the 10th ranked CR on the list. There were no questions or comments.

September 18, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T reviewed the CR. Regina Mosley/AT&T stated that this CR was issued to be in synch with OBF standards. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this was all shared on the Clarification Call. There were no additional comments or questions. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR has been requested to be a Late Adder into the IMA 15.0 Prioritization. Peggy stated that it might be appropriate to do the vote at this time instead of waiting until the end of the CMP Meeting. There was no dissent for taking the vote. Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest reviewed the following: A vote of ‘Yes’ will indicate that SCR081803-01 is to be included in the IMA 15.0 Prioritization, utilizing the Late Adder Process. A vote of ‘No’ will indicate that SCR081803-01 will NOT be included in the IMA 15.0 Prioritization as a Late Adder request. There were no questions associated with the Yes and No vote. Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest stated that Quorum was achieved with 7 Carriers. Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest stated that emailed ‘Yes’ votes have been received from AT&T and from Qwest. Bonnie Johnson stated that Eschelon votes ‘Yes’. Monica Avila stated that VarTec votes ‘Yes’. Liz Balvin stated that MCI votes ‘Yes’. Ian Coleman stated that Allegiance ‘Abstains’ from the vote. Stephanie Prull stated that McLeodUSA votes ‘Yes’. Jennifer Arnold stated that USLink votes ‘Yes’. John Berard stated that Covad votes ‘Yes’. Alan Flanigan stated that Time Warner ‘Abstains’ from the vote. Nancy Sanders stated that Comcast votes ‘Yes’. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that based on the results of the vote, SCR081803-01 was granted by a vote of 9 ‘Yes’ votes, 0 ‘No’ votes, and 2 ‘Abstain’ votes. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if this effort could include Resale. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest would review for a possible revision to the LOE. Connie stated that if the LOE can be determined in time for the ranking, it would be included in the Notification. Connie stated that if Qwest could not have the revised LOE in time for the Notification that the effort would be for UNE-P only.

-- September 8, 2003 Email Received From Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: May I please change my mind about the vote. I would like to ask that a vote to allow this cr as an exception be voted on the this month's systems forum. I had stated in my exception request that we did not want it to take place, but we do. If I need to send this "change of heart" would you like me to send another exception to cmpcr......? Thank you, Donna

September 4, 2003 Email Received From Donna Osborne-Miile/AT&T: AT&T would like to request an exception as a late adder to IMA 15.0 SCR 081803-01 Recapping of hunting USOCs After much consternation and discussion on the hunting process and the eventual agreed- upon matrix creation and distribution, we seek changes and additions to the hunting process as it relates to end state and recapping of USOCs. We seek consideration as a late adder exception to the latest IMA prioritization. In addition AT&T wishes to have the vote NOT taken at the next systems CMP meeting. We believe the community may need time to resonate on the change and to re-examine the results of IMA 15.0 prioritization. If there are any question or concerns on this request please contact: Donna Osborne-Miller at 303.465.4134 Thank you, Donna

-- September 2, 2003 Email Received From Regina Mosley/AT&T: Donna/Peggy, Hope it's not too late to make the revisions to the CR......see below...Regina Please correct wording to read: Description of Change: AT&T does not want to recap any existing hunting USOCs the customer has on their account. Whatever the customer wants as their "end state" hunting arrangement (whether the USOC is existing or not), we would populate using HA=N. This includes the hunting USOCs and the lines hunting is to be applied to. Also, if Hunting exists on the Qwest retail CSR, but is NOT specified on the LSR, it should be deleted when the customer is migrated over. Qwest has also suggested an additional value of HA = BLANK in which the Hunting form would not need to be sent. The "BLANK" would indicate that the customer is being migrated and no hunting is being requested. Expected Deliverable: To not have to recap existing hunting USOCs and to utilize HA=N to be inclusive of the end state of the customers account.

August 29, 2003 Email sent to Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Subject: SCR081803-01 Late Adder ?? Hi Donna -- In regard to your submitted CMP CR, SCR081803-01. I have attached the revised CR for your review. Please advise if corrections need to be made. I revised the CR description, Interface, and Impacted Products. A question for you - Have you submitted your exception requests? One asking to invoke the late adder process and a separate request asking that the vote be held outside of the monthly CMP meeting? If you have, can you please resend them to CMPCR@qwest.com with a copy to me? I apologize but I am not finding them. I will start the late adder process as soon as we have the exception CRs. Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems Peggy.Esquibel-Reed@qwest.com

- August 26, 2003 Email Received From Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Hello Peggy, As agreed on the clarification call, I owe you a correction in wording in the description of change to SCR081803-01: Please correct wording to read: Description of Change: AT&T does not want to recap any existing hunting USOCs the customer has on their account. Whatever the customer wants as their hunting arrangement, we would populate. This includes the hunting USOCs and the lines hunting is to be applied to. IMA release 13.0 introduces new hunt values that are more specific that what is in IMA 12.0. AT&T would like to utilize HA= N to include "end state" as well. Expected Deliverable: To not have to recap existing hunting USOCs and to utilize HA=N to be inclusive of the end state of the customers account.

- Clarification Meeting - August 22, 2003: ATTENDEES: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Regina Mosley/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest, Curt Anderson/Qwest, Mallory Paxton/Qwest, Shon Higer/Qwest REVIEW REQUESTED DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: AT&T does not want to recap any existing hunting USOCs the customer has on their account. Whatever the customer wants as their hunting arrangement, we would populate HA= (value determined by team)and provide the hunting USOCs and the lines hunting is to be applied to. IMA 13.0 will introduce new hunt values that are more specifice than what was in IMA 12.0 . AT&T woiuld like to add another hunting value: perhaps that of A, for example. To illistrate, associated rules for A would look something like this: A= to show end state of the account (this would be used for E (to convert hunting with no change) and C (to change hunt sequence) The E and the C values would not br replaced with the end state as the CLECs would be given a choice to use A versus E or C. Expected Deliverable: As stated and requested in the description of change, adoption of HA=A to the hunting rules. CONFIRM INTERFACES: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the interface noted is IMA EDI. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that it should be IMA Common, in the interest of the CLEC Community. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest agreed to revise the interface to reflect IMA Common. CONFIRM PRODUCTS: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the noted product is UNE-P. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that in the interest of the CLECs, it is for all products. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest agreed to revise the impacted products to All UNE-P. DISCUSSION: Regina Mosley/AT&T requested to change the CR Description to ask for a new value and to use an existing value of 'N' to be end-state, as well as for new. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that she thought that would be better. Curt Anderson/Qwest stated that he agreed with Mallory and that it is OBF compliant to use 'N' for end-state. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that then there would be 2 options for migration or conversion, An 'N' would be for end-state. A blank would result in the removal of all hunting. Mallory noted that an 'N' would be used to keep, add, or change hunting; that it would be treated like a request for new service. Mallory stated that if the Hunting Form is not filled out, the CLEC would not get hunting. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that in other words, a blank or no hunting form would result in no hunting. N would be the only valid value for HA. Regina Mosley/AT&T asked if hunting exists on the Qwest CSR and is not specified on the LSR, how would the other USOCs get deleted, does not want to recap anything. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that with conversion as specified, if the USOCs are left off, they don't get the feature. Shon Higer/Qwest stated that if hunting is not specified, it would be removed and would not get converted. Regina Mosley/AT&T stated that she does want hunting to work the same way, if it is not specified, they are not to get hunting. Shon Higer/Qwest stated that he understands the request. Donna Osborne-Miller/Qwest stated that she would like this to be a late adder. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest advised AT&T that they will need to submit an exception request asking to invoke the late adder process and needs to submit an exception request asking that the vote be held outside of the CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments.

- August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion (Attachment F - Walk-on Requests): Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T reviewed the CR description. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked Regina Mosley (AT&T) if this request should also include blocking. Regina Mosley/AT&T stated that she was still checking with Peter Cole (AT&T) and noted that 14.0 does include blocking for end state. Regina stated that this CR is for the 15.0 vote. Kim Isaacs/Eschelon stated that end state for Listings is via recapping in LML. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that was also in 14.0. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if this candidate made the cut-off date for 15.0. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it did not make the cut-off date to be included in the 15.0 vote. There were no additional questions.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR081803-01 Seeking Ability To Migrate UNE-P Customer As End-State

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request (SCR081803-01). Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held August 22, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1900 to 2400 hours for this IMA Change Request, and an impact to SATE of 40 to 60 hours.

At the next Monthly 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 currently an eligible candidate for the IMA 16.0 prioritization. At the request of AT&T, there will be a vote conducted at the September Systems CMP Meeting seeking to allow this candidate as a Late Adder into the IMA 15.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest