Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR090302-01EX Detail

Expected Deliverables:

Extend sunset of IMA 10.0 from May 18th, 2003 to July 18th, 2003.

Status History

Project Meetings

Michael Buck/Qwest introduced the exception request SCR090302-01EX (Eschelon is requesting that the sunset date of IMA 10.0 be extended). Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that Eschelon was seeking to treat this change request as an exception due to an internal system upgrade required to move to 11.0 they are asking that the sunset date of 10.0 be extended for as long as the hardware allows but no sooner that July 18th. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon also said that the date is available leaves no time for testing and implementation of the upgrade. Michael Buck/Qwest said that the change request is clear and need to vote as an exception. He also stated that Exception language was changed in redesign but agreed this would be voted on under the previous guidelines. Michael Buck/Qwest also said that no e-mail votes were received. Alan Flanigan/Time Warner asked if this change would impact any other dates (i.e., 11.0, 12.0) Wendy Green/Qwest said no. Bob Carias/NightFire asked if this change would impact recertification. Wendy Green/Qwest said that the dates would be adjusted to reflect the retirement dates. Michael Buck/Qwest reviewed the Quorum calculation. The quorum required for vote was determined to be carriers. Ten (10) carriers were present, resulting in a quorum. Michael Buck/Qwest reviewed that a yes vote means that you are voting to request that the sunset date of 10.0 be extended. A ‘no’ vote means that you are voting not to extend the 10.0 sunset date and an ‘abstain’ vote means you are choosing not to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Following are the results of the vote: Allegiance – Yes AT&T – Yes Covad – Yes Eschelon – Yes McLeod – Yes Qwest – Yes Time Warner – Yes U S Link – Yes WorldCom – Yes Z-Tel – Yes

The vote was unanimous to extend the sunset date of 10.0. Michael Buck/Qwest said that the disposition notice, vote tally and the meeting minutes will be sent to the CLEC Community within the notification guidelines. In addition, the OSS calendar will be updated to reflect the revised date. There were no other questions or comments.

Eschelon CR Clarification meeting Held on Thursday, September 12, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. Mountain Conference bridge 1-877-560-8688 ID 5282369 For CR # SCR090302-01

Attendees: Terry Wicks - Allegience Telecom Mark Routh- Qwest Cim Chambers- Qwest Michael Buck- Qwest Deb Osborne- Qwest Bonnie Johnson - Eschelon Beth Foster - Qwest Jana Harmon - Qwest Randy Owen- Qwest

Mark Routh-Opened the meeting and described that the purpose of the call was to review/clarify a CR from Eschelon. Mark read the title/description of the CR.

Bonnie Johnson -Stated that she had learned a lot about this on yesterday’s call (the WorldCom Exception call on 9/11/02). She added that she and Mark Routh had talked earlier and Mark told her that he thought they would not be able to go out as far as August 18th as had been requested.

Michael Buck -Stated that we can not look at this CR in a vacuum, the WorldCom CR has some obvious implications on Eschelon’s request as explained yesterday. However, he did think that we could make some headway by considering the various possible things that might happen. For example, if we assume the WorldCom CR is not successful and the current schedule did not change, it’s his understanding that Qwest would be able move out the IMA 10.0 sunset date to July 18, with some pretty firm definition at this point. Qwest anticipates obstacles to pushing the date beyond July 18.

Terry Wicks -Stated that July 18 is good for Allegiance, but it’s more critical for Eschelon. As far as Allegiance is concerned, they are not going to IMA 11.0 because there’s nothing in it for them, they are going to go straight to IMA 12.0, so an extension to July 18th would work for Allegiance.

Bonnie Johnson - Replied that as far as Eschelon is concerned, the reality is that they will take whatever they can get and make it work. She added that if Eschelon can get out further, that would be great. She asked at what point Qwest would have a firm date on the sunset of IMA 10.0.

Michael Buck - Replied that Qwest is trying to firm up the date. Clearly, the final outcome of the WorldCom bears in the decision.

Randy Owen - Stated that he believed Qwest can get to July 18 with minimal obstacles.

Bonnie Johnson-Replied, ok, so we are assuming July 18 and attempt to get further out if at all possible.

Randy-Explained that it’s the same constraints that Qwest spoke of in yesterday’s WorldCom call. There are many things that drive the date: hardware platforms, training, schedules etc. These were discussed on the WorldCom call. He stated that until the schedule variables are firmed up Qwest can’t make further decisions.

Michael Buck-Stated that if the WorldCom CR is successful, Qwest will not be able to extend the sunset date but in fact it will be retracted to the March time frame as Jeff Thompson had discussed during the WorldCom call.

Mark Routh -Asked if there were any other questions.

Bonnie Johnson -replied that she didn’t think so, and asked if there were any other impacts to Eschelon or any other CLECs.

Randy Owen-Stated that usually there are no negative impacts by taking a date further. He added that extending the sunset date will not place any CLECs at an advantage or disadvantage.

Michael Buck-Explained that if there were no other questions about technical or functionality issues, that the group needed to address this CR from a procedural standpoint. He reviewed the area in the CMP Process document where it mentions the sunset date. He clarified that in order to deviate from that language it requires an Exception process. He mentioned that while it seems to be more of a formality, Qwest is interested in following the process.

Bonnie Johnson -Replied that she had no problem with that.

Randy Owen-Stated that out of CMP Process language comes the OSS release calendar, and that once Qwest publish that calendar any change to those dates would be an Exception

Terry Wicks - Stated the he agreed with that, and added that in this case, the CLECs and Qwest are only altering a timeline so it only requires a 2/3 vote.

Michael Buck-Clarified that the group addressed that during the WorldCom call on Wednesday and from a Qwest view, the timelines are the timeline graphs that are in the document. So whether this is a time line change is a gray area. He added that from his perspective though, this is more of a formality for this CR. He thought that the process should be a collaborative one but he thought that the group should keep it in line with the unanimous voting process that was used for similar situation with the Covad CR. He pointed out that in Section 8.0 of the CMP Process it states that Qwest will support the previous major Interconnect Mediated Access (IMA) EDI release for six (6) months after the subsequent major IMA EDI release has been implemented.

Bonnie Johnson-Reiterated that there is impact with the WorldCom CR on this and asked if there would be a vote on WorldCom before this would be decided.

Michael Buck-Explained that his dilemma as CMP Manager was the timing. If the group agrees that this is an Exception, then he proposed that the group work together on figuring out the right solution. One workable option is that Eschelon could resubmit it as an Exception. Then, upon receipt of the revised, exception request, Qwest could follow the process for an exception CR. He described the steps for following the process. Again, the concern is timing. If the exception request were submitted today, Qwest is obligated to send out the notice prior to resolution of the WorldCom CR. As we’ve discussed, until we have clarity on the WorldCom CR, it’s not clear how the wording of the exception CR and required notice would need to be structured. He stated that Qwest is very appreciative that Eschelon submitted this so early in order to allow Qwest to look at all options. Given that there is an adequate amount of time to address the request, he suggested that Eschelon still bring this forward as a regular walk-on CR in the September CMP meeting. He added that if the WorldCom CR is not successful then Eschelon can revise this CR and submit it as an Exception. Then Qwest can move forward with the required notices, etc. He said in this case he would anticipate a vote in the October meeting unless WorldCom had a burning desire to have an emergency exception call between the September and October monthly meetings. If the WorldCom CR is successful then the group can talk about it in the room as to what do we do with the Eschelon request to push out the IMA 10.0 sunset date.

Terry Wicks-Stated that he agreed with this. He referred to section 16.4.1 of the CMP Process document. He stated that if a CLEC or Qwest submits an exception request without a date, then it would require a 2/3 vote to pass. He added that if there is a specific date on the request, then the process would be for a unanimous vote in order to approve it. He noted that if a CLEC were to submit a CR to say, push it out as far as possible then you don’t need a unanimous vote to pass it.

Bonnie Johnson -Stated that she would agree with that because she didn’t want to be where the group was during the WorldCom call the previous day.

Michael Buck—Stated that Qwest was in 100% agreement with that. He added that if the participants remember the Covad CR, they had asked for a date beyond what Qwest could do. Qwest worked with Covad and they revised the CR. He noted that he would use the exact language that Terry suggested, push it out as far a possible.

Bonnie Johnson-Stated that she would like to use the language of ‘as far as possible’ so that she didn’t have to keep revising the CR.

Michael Buck-Mentioned that next Thursday (during the September monthly CMP meeting) if Bonnie had the revised CR ready to go, or if she wanted to send it to him the following Friday, Qwest could then either talk about it at October’s meeting, or if Bonnie wanted to meet before then Qwest can call an emergency meeting . He added that we are far enough in advance of the required date that we have time to work with this request.

Terry Wicks-Noted that since we’ve got the time he suggested doing it at the October CMP meeting.

Bonnie Johnson- Agreed

Terry Wicks-Added that that way we’ll get a good quorum.

Mark Routh-Asked Bonnie to clarify when she was going to re-submit this CR.

Bonnie Johnson-Stated that she would do it when she gets back from Denver (after the September CMP meeting) and then she would send it as an Exception.

Terry Wicks-Pointed out the fact that there is a whole section in the CMP process document for submitting an Exception CR.

Michael Buck-Confirmed that Terry was right. He recommended that Bonnie review that section and submit the exception request according to those guidelines. He asked her to please give him a call if she had any questions.

The call was ended at 9:25 a.m. Mountain Time.

Discussion at the September CMP meeting

Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon reviewed the CR. She said that she will resubmit as an Exception CR and won’t make it date specific and would like the IMA 10.0 sunset date pushed out as far as possible. Terry Wicks/Allegiance said that Allegiance supports this CR as well. We are not planning to migrate to 11.0 so we need to maintain on 10.0 for a little longer. Liz Balvin/WorldCom said that WorldCom's exception CR essentially asks for 2 of the CRs that have been prioritized for IMA 12.0 to be implemented by the end of 2002. Qwest indicated that to accomplish what WorldCom wanted would require a major release. In that case Qwest would need to support 10.0, 11.0, 12.0 and the new major release. As a result there would be 4 EDI platforms out there. Qwest indicated that was not an option and that they would have to get 10.0 off of the hardware platform to make room for another release. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that’s basically correct. IMA 10.0 & 11.0 would retire much earlier than the current plan. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked if it would be sooner than the May timeframe that Qwest has in place right now. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that is correct. Terry Wicks/Allegiance — said that since this request changes the documented process this is required to be an exception CR. In the clarification call Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon indicated that she will re-submit it requesting a change without specifying a date. Mike Buck/Qwest thanked Eschelon for initiating the request far enough in advance so that the exception process can be fully used. Micki Jones/WorldCom—it’s my understanding that with 11.0, there are certain CR that are supporting the OBF LSOG 6 business rules, however there is the other layer of EDI version, so as you do LSOG version there is an equivalent EDI version that gets upgraded. In some other areas we’ve brought in some of the business rules of the upcoming LSOG releases without changing the EDI version. Is there any consideration for 11.0 bringing in the business rules without changing the EDI version underneath it? Connie Winston/Qwest — All the re-numbering and re-mapping for EDI is being done in IMA 11.0 based upon the outcome of the CLEC vote. When the CLEC vote indicated that an LSOG 6 change was wanted, that’s how the renumbering was done. Micki Jones/WorldCom —confirmed that IMA 10.0 is on EDI version 40/20 and IMA 11.0 is going to be on 40/30. So you are basically moving the EDI version to LSOG 6 and Qwest is a groundbreaker because they are the only one in the industry who is doing that. She asked whether or not it was a requirement, in order to do the LSOG 6 change requests, a CLEC must do the EDI, they can’t bring that in on the LSOG 5, the 4020 version of EDI, you must go to 4030 is what Qwest is saying? Connie Winston/Qwest said that it was voted by CMP to do it that way. Micki Jones/WorldCom — asked if everyone who voted on it that way understood that it was changing the EDI version as well as the business rules? Connie Winston/Qwest said yes.

CenturyLink Response