• Attendees
• Agenda
• Minutes and Actions of Previous Meeting (25/01/2007)
• Summary of Output on Charging Models
• Charging Framework Programme Plan
• Interconnect locations and numbers
• Update on Requirements Work Group
• NICC/TSG Report
• AOB
• Next Meeting
• Outstanding Action List
• New Action List

Peter Black (NGNuk) - Chair

Clive Fedida (NGNuk)

Peter Ryde (NGNuk)

Andy May (Cable & Wireless)

Steve Unger (Ofcom)

Phil Male (Thus)

Alireza Mahmoodshahi (Colt)

Huw Saunders (Kingston)

Angus Flett (BT Wholesale)

Stuart Shutt (Orange)

Robyn Durie (T-Mobile)

Andy King (Virgin Media)

Phil Kirby (Vodafone)

Neil McArthur (Opal)

 

Apologies:       Justin Fielder (Easynet)

• Minutes and Actions from last meeting (25th January 2007)
• Summary of Output on Charging Models
• Charging Framework Programme Plan
• Recommendations on Interconnect numbers and locations
• NICC/TSG Report
• Update on Requirements Working Group
• AOB

To top

Minutes - No changes to the draft minutes had been received. The minutes of the last meeting were therefore accepted.

Actions - See outstanding actions update at the end of this document

To top

The feedback from members to the questions relating to on the principles for potential charging models had indicated strong support towards CPP though this might be better interpreted as support for the status quo given use of RPP for 0800 etc. Work on the charging framework is proceeding on this basis however the Exec wished to review the feedback to confirm such an approach.

These were discussed by the Exec. Whilst there was agreement amongst the Exec regarding the work group recommendations It was felt that as a consultant (Richard Cadman - SPC Networks) had been engaged to review the member feedback on Charging Models and help identify / resolve any outstanding inconsistencies this should be reviewed before any final endorsement is given. Following review with the Exec he would then write a paper explaining the NGNuk member views on Charging Models ( as they apply to the priority work stream). This work should be completed during April.

To top

The programme plan to develop the charging framework for the priority services was presented. This programme comprised of 5 phases:

• Preparation
• Initial Data Gathering
• Review
• Detailed Investigation
• Final Review and Endorsement

The objective for the charging framework was discussed. The Exec made a number of amendments. The objective is now:

To evaluate the potential charging frameworks for specified voice products (Termination, NTS, PRS ,Origination , Indirect and Transit plus messaging products e.g. SMS )  and the benefits and potential pitfalls of each. To use this information to provide a recommended framework that can be endorsed and utilised by industry. This should include a good understanding of how the recommended framework could be adapted to meet the needs of non voice products.

The Exec stressed that it must be recognised that the programme is in response to the priority work related to "voice" products and that the activity must not foreclose any future approach for other products and services.

The Exec also requested that a clearer definition of the products for which the framework would apply is agreed.

Action 1 - 22/02/2007 - provide a more detailed listing of the products which the Charging Framework programme will address. Charging Work Group/ Commercial Priorities.

The programme plan presented was discussed and broadly agreed. The following comments and amendments were discussed:

1. Input on the development of charging framework external to the UK was agreed as being valuable. Both Members and Ofcom agreed that such input would be provided.
2. Independent 3^rd party review was seen as inappropriate. It was felt that the Secretariat should be sufficiently independent to undertake such a role despite acting as author. The Exec felt that should members feel their views had been misrepresented then it was their responsibility to raise the matter.
3. It was agreed that there will be no combined economic review of the potential frameworks since this might be construed as collusion. For the same reason no activity on the vulnerability of the frameworks to arbitrage would be undertaken. It will be up to members to undertake their own analysis of the impact to inform their feedback during the data gathering stage.
4. The Secretariat was asked what concerns they had in terms of the programme implementation. The Secretariat felt that delays may occur in the 4^th due to the more detailed demands on members for support and input. In addition there was concern that if lack of consensus would delay final agreement. It was hoped that the approach in the initial phases would identify at an early stage whether this was likely to be a problem.

Action 2- 22/02/2007 - up date Programme Plan in line with Exec comments and distribute. Peter Ryde

 

To top

The work group had been asked to address the question of "What number of interconnects are anticipated (between BT, Mobile and CPs), where would these be sited and what types of interconnect will be at these locations?"

A paper produced by the  work group had been circulated to the Exec which addresses the first two elements of the question          . There had been very limited MO feedback so most input relates to Altnet interconnection with BTW.. The Exec were requested to confirm that the paper represented member requirements of NGN Interconnect with BTW and the response requested of BTW

Background

The initial spread from Member feedback was that between 4 and 40 interconnects were anticipated and that fewer, larger interconnects were the preferred by industry. BTW feedback was that 20 locations for IP (session based) interconnect would provide lowest cost. BT also stated that Layer2/Ethernet could be interconnected at any of the 1200 Fibre MSANs. Subsequent review by work group had agreed that deployment of approximately 30 interconnects would be suggested as basis of an initial deployment

The Altnet concerns with the 20wBC locations included:

• The 20 locations were based on internal BT criteria
• The 20 does not include key locations where altnets have significant existing assets e.g. Edinburgh
• That there are significant areas of the country where no interconnect will exist and that these may exacerbate "Same and Adjacent DLE (SAD) type issues"

Some metro nodes promoted for PSTN emulation are not within the 20

Work Group recommendations

The work Group recommended 10 additional nodes and  substitute nodes to the 20 wBC sites:

The work group expected that all locations would contain border gateway functionality

Outstanding Issues

 

CP's had a number of key concerns affecting the number and interconnect locations. These were:

• A lack of formally published information on connectivity of the non core metro nodes to the core plus MSAN to i-Node parenting.
• No specific information on the distance gradient between core and metro nodes
• That the potential exists for SAD type issues to affect equivalence

In view of this the Exec did not believe that the work group recommendation could be considered as an agreement. It was a suitable position upon which to build provided BT could confirm that design decisions will not be taken today which foreclose the possibility of varying the number of interconnect points at a future date and that the work group recommendation was updated to strengthen the CP view over the outstanding issues affecting the optimum number of interconnects and that as a consequence the recommendation could not be considered any form of agreement.

Action 3 - 22/02/2007 - To update the work group recommendations on interconnect numbers and locations to reflect the views of the Exec. The updated document to be circulated to the Exec for agreement. Peter Ryde.

To top

End to End Requirements

A Draft had been prepared by Cognos Associates Ltd (external consultants) and issued for review on 9/2/2007. This had tried to incorporate the various inputs that members had authored or identified.

Formal written feedback is sought from all Executive members no later than Friday 23rd February. The content is essentially focussed on strategic product requirements, so the Secretariat recommends that it should be reviewed first and foremost by product strategy teams as well as your technical teams. The aim is to ensure that no requirements are left out of the scope of work of NGNuk. When fully agreed, the document will become the formal scope statement of the NGNuk programme

Members of the Exec stated that they would be providing feedback. Most felt that there were no significant omissions and that feedback would relate to some of the detail of the requirements.

Interconnect requirements

The End to End Requirements are part of an overall programme. The End to End document will be followed by the Interconnect Requirements which will help frame the overall scope of NGNuk activity.

 

Unfortunately this had been delayed due to further work being asked of our consultants who are undertaking the draughting .They will not be available to commence this work until the beginning of March. Rather than issue something in an interim state, we would prefer to get it substantially right before asking for any review. The revised estimated date to issue draft for review is mid-March

There was some discussion at the Exec regarding the scope required of the Interconnect Requirements document. It was agreed that any gaps should be highlighted when the initial draft is circulated. Vodafone requested that the scope of the interconnect requirements be extended to cover the inter-working of NGN networks with legacy networks for voice services to ensure that customers do not receive a degraded QoS during the period of transition. Whilst this work is covered within the Consult 21 programme there were potential problems on a multilateral basis. This widening of the scope was agreed by the Exec.

Action 4 - 22/02/2007 - Brief Cognos to widen the scope of draft interconnect requirements to include NGN to Legacy interconnection for voice services. Peter Ryde.

To top

Green Release

Paul Rosbotham had sent through the resource plans relating to development of the Green Release.  This identified the level of support from each organisation and also where additional support was required. Whilst not representing NICC formal position Paul had expressed the concern that the status of the Green Release should now be considered "Red". The Exec expressed the view that the document was useful feedback. 

There was a discussion regarding how best to support NICC to secure adequate resources for the timely completion of the Green Release and also the root cause of the lack of support. There was some concern regarding a lack of suitable personnel within some Member organisations which limited the support that might be provided however it was agreed that NGNuk members should seek to encourage greater support from their suppliers for NICC. Steve Unger expressed the view that the restructuring off NICC underway at present was , in part, seeking to establish wider engagement across industry and thereby address the availability of suitable resources however it this would not be completed in time to support the Green Release.

Action 5 - 22/02/2007 - Ofcom to discuss with Professor Sir John O'Rilley NICC actions required to support the Green Release being delivered to plan. Steve Unger.

Action 6 - 22/02/2007 - Exec members to respond (to Peter Ryde) regarding the resource requirements and / or lack of support identified within resource plan provided by NICC (Paul Rosbotham). A view of where how their vendors might better support NICC should be provided as part of this. Exec by 2^nd March.

Action 7 - 22/02/2007 - Secretariat to draft letter to be sent by NGNuk to vendors to solicit greater support for NICC in the development of the Green Release and distribute to Exec for comment. Secretariat.

NICC/NGNuk interaction

A draft Terms of Reference covering the interaction between NGNuk and NICC. This was discussed and agreed by the Exec.

Action 8 - 22/02/2007 - Confirm the status of the Terms of Reference covering interaction of NGNuk with NICC within NICC. Peter Ryde

To top

Nominet had sent in an application to join NGNuk as a participating member. The Exec was supportive of them being accepted provided that they met the criteria detailed under the constitution.

Action 9 - 22/02/2007 - Secretariat to confirm status of Nominet versus the membership criteria detailed within the constitution. Secretariat.

Clive Fedida will be leaving NGNuk at the end of February for a long planned sabbatical. The Exec thanked him for his support and wished him well.

To top

The next meeting will be 10.00 to 14.00 on 29^th March 2007 at Riverside House.

Future scheduled meetings:

 

DATE	MEETING	TIME
26th April 2007	NGNuk Executive Meeting	10.00 - 14.00
31st May 2007	NGNuk Executive Meeting	10.00 - 14.00

Peter Ryde

NGNuk Office

07771 555 048

020 7783 4688

peter.ryde@ngnuk.org.uk

To top

Action 3 - 26/6 - Peter Black undertook with the help of Ofcom to take the necessary steps to apply for registration of the 'NGNuk' logo.27/7 - Application for registration of the NGNuk logo is in preparation by Ofcom. Steps have already been taken to secure URLs 'ngnuk.org.uk' and 'ngnuk.co.uk'. Unfortunately, 'ngnuk.com' is already reserved. 28/9 - The application was registered at the beginning of September and the trademark attorneys are now waiting for the trademark office to process it. This normally takes about 6 weeks, so we should hear something in about 2-3 weeks. 26/10 - the trademark lawyer is still waiting for the application to be processed by the trademark authority. It has taken longer than normal. 14/12 Still awaiting a response from the Trademark Authority . Update - the NGNuk trademark was published by the UK Trademark Office on 1st December 2006. This means that the Trademark Office has accepted it. There is now a period of 3 months ( i.e. until 1st March 2007) during which objections can be lodged. Ongoing.	NGNuk Secretariat 27/7/2006
Action 1 - 14/12/2006 -  Paul Rosbotham to identify any named individuals required to act as Document authors to further the Green Release requirements. Paul reported that this work is not yet complete but would be shortly. It will identify the activity down to an individual and company level . This was received 13th February.	Paul Rosbotham Completed
Action 6 - 14/12/2007 - NGNuk Executive members will review attendees proposed for the workshop to review the Requirements Definition on 8th January with a view towards ensuring the attendance of Product personnel. This had been partially successful but greater product input was still required in support of completing the Requirements definition. This is being handled through formal document review process under Action 5 - 25/01/2007.	NGNuk Executive Closed
Action 7 - 14/12/2006 -  Peter Black to discuss opportunity for NICC to take delivery responsibility of all technical activity with the Chair of NICC The idea has been supported in principle by NICC. TOR  proposal for NGNuk / NICC inter working to be produced by 5/2/2007. This was circulated with the agenda for review.	Secretariat Completed
Action 1 - 25/01/2007 -  Circulate draft paper on Interconnect ( Numbers and Locations) prior to the February Exec.	Peter Ryde Completed
Action 2 - 25/01/2007 -  Peter Ryde to circulate summary of Charging Model feedback prior to the February Exec.	Peter Ryde Completed
Action 3 - 25/01/2007 - Peter Ryde to update consultant's brief regarding the activity on the Charging Models and distribute to the Exec. Comments will be requested by return to.	Peter Ryde Completed
Action 4- 25/01/2007 - Peter Ryde to present scope and programme plan for the Charging Framework for agreement at the Feb Exec.	Peter Ryde Completed
Action 5- 25/01/2007 - Clive Fedida to progress NGNuk Requirements Scope document to Final Draft stage in readiness for formal review and agreement by the full membership by the end of February. Draft for review issued 09/02/2007. Formal written feedback due 23/02/2007.	Clive Fedida 28/2/2007 Ongoing
Action 6 - 25/01/2007 - Secretariat to provide an updated Programme Plan at the end of Feb	Secretariat Ongoing
Action 7 - 25/01/2007 In discussion with NICC to identify where NICC require NGNuk commercial input to facilitate progress on the technical solutions for ENUM for discussion at the Feb Exec. No support required immediately. Activity will be addressed within overall NGNuk scope.	Secretariat Ongoing