Rod Smith NGNuk
Peter Ryde NGNuk
Andy May (CW)
Angus Flett (BT)
Steve Best (BT)
Neil McArthur (CPW)
Marcus Webb (Vodafone)
Stuart Shutt (Orange)
Marina Gibbs (Ofcom)
Gareth Davies (Ofcom)
Robyn Durie ( T Mobile)
Ann Francis (Colt)
Apologies; Phil Male (Thus), Andy King (Virgin Media), Detlef Spang (Colt), Mark Dalziel (NGNuk)
The minutes and actions of the March meeting were approved
At the June 2007 meeting the Exec discussed whether NGNuk should support the principle of inter working testing by suppliers where this would ease subsequent integration by Operators. It was agreed that where a 3rd party wished to establish inter-supplier testing for NGN equipment using standardised tests, that NGNuk recognises such action as being beneficial and recommended to NICC that this be supported technically.
MSF attended the April 2008 Executive to provide an update on their work on 3rd party certification testing.
The MSF Presentation is appended:
|
694 K |
The presentation stimulated a lively debate amongst the Executive. There was general acceptance that interworking testing between operators within an NGN environment would be considerably more complex and difficult than for TDM and is an area that operators should consider and pursue more proactively to avoid future cost and resource issues associated with interconnection testing and faults.
A number of options were discussed as to how this might be achieved. 3rd party certification of networks was seen as a valid option although some members of the Exec did question whether given the scale and complexity of some networks whether it was practical to test these via a lab facility as replicating the many components of any network would be cost prohibitive. Overall the Exec continued to support the approach of third party testing as having the potential to ease interworking issues although the decision to do so must be made on a bilateral basis.
At the March Exec Ofcom had led a discussion on how best to seek industry input towards the proposed NGN consultation. At the Exec it was agreed that Ofcom attend the Exec meetings, as appropriate, to provide an update to the Exec on the consultation’s progress and where appropriate to provide specific questions where it seeks the views and feedback of the NGNuk Exec
The Secretariat had been asked to provide a base set of questions to the Executive covering suggested areas where the Exec may wish to provide more detailed feedback regarding the objectives and remit of the consultation.
The responses where consolidated by the secretariat and broadly covered the following issues:
The consolidated issues were presented to the Exec. Ofcom were asked to comment on the degree to which each issue was covered within the proposed consultation to inform the Exec debate.
In this area two concerns were discussed. The first related to Operator plans to migrate to NGNs and the implications this has on “legacy services”.
The second was how to migrate to an NGN world without re-entrenching the market power of dominant operators. This prompted a lengthy debate regarding how the extraction of services from the underlying transport might help ensure competitive markets in the future, what this means in practice and how it might be achieved. The Executive felt that whilst the debate had been constructive it required more detailed consideration to articulate the commercial and technical consequences of service extraction. To facilitate this it was suggested that a number of scenarios be developed such that they can be used to develop a better understanding of these issues, linkages and alternatives at the next Exec.
Action 1 – 24/04/2008 – Secretariat to develop a “terms of reference” briefing for the work to develop scenarios covering various products and services operating across varied networks and distribute to the Exec for comment.
Action 2 – 24/04/2008 – Secretariat to schedule a “one –off” work shop for members nominated delegates to develop the scenarios as detailed in the brief.
Stuart Shutt stated that he was concerned that the definition of the 4 standard bearer classes had not been agreed by NGNuk/NICC and the mapping with 3GPP as this was a pre-requisite for services operating across multiple networks.
Action 3 – 24/04/2008 – Peter Ryde to discuss with NICC TSG how the definition of the 4 standard bearer classes this might be progressed
The concerns presented from the consolidated feedback were (i) a desire to avoid reopening much of the debate on voice charging that had taken place within NGNuk, except the issues on timing and transition were accepted as real and significant and (ii) developing thoughts about the long term charging mechanism and how this might share value across the value chain.
The view of the Executive was that further progress on the framework for voice emulation would require Ofcom involvement although most probably outside of the consultation. On the latter point it was acknowledged that this had not been pursued previously by NGNuk however, the Exec felt that market conditions now were now such that industry would need to consider this in the relatively near future.
Two concerns relating to Security were discussed. The first related to whether large CPs might unfairly use network security (including user authentication) to delay or refuse interconnection with other providers. The second related to the ability of operators to differentiate using NGNs via improved security and integrity of identify information. In this context two aspects were considered:
Ofcom advised that they considered that these issues would be fully addressed within the consultation; however this will be undertaken from the perspective of the consumer.
Some members expressed concern that UK regulatory policy has encouraged infrastructure competition, initially at core network level and latterly at ‘deeper’ MSAN level. The economics of NGNs are expected to increase the economies of scale and reduce the costs associated with core network infrastructure – which in turn could affect the sustainability of infrastructure players based primarily on core network (i.e. without significant access network). Members expressed a concern that Ofcom needs to consider the implications of current technology and market trends on infrastructure competition, the role of regulation and what is in the best interests of UK plc.
Ofcom stated that they felt that this issue would be covered comprehensively within the proposed consultation.
Insufficient time was available to discuss the following topics which will all be discussed at the next Executive meeting:
Due to the length of time discussing the MSF item and the initial issues relating to the consultation insufficient time was available to discuss the 2008 priorities and focus. This subject will therefore be discussed at the next Executive meeting.
The next scheduled meeting was 10.00 to 14.00 on 26th June at Riverside House. It was agreed however that as the Exec have not been able to complete the agenda items, and in view of their importance, that an additional Executive meeting during May should be scheduled.
Action 4 – 24/04/2008 – Secretariat to schedule an additional Executive meeting during May
Peter Ryde
NGNuk Office
07771 555 048
020 7783 4688
Action 6 – 27/09/2007 – The secretariat to request feedback from the Exec members on their thoughts regarding the key aims and attributes of the service principles. These to be collated by the secretariat and represented for discussion at the October Executive meeting. One response (Thus) to date. Held pending Exec discussion on 2008 priorities and focus. Scheduled for discussion on 24th June but not discussed. | Secretariat Ongoing |
Action 8 – 27/09/2007 – The secretariat to request feedback from the Exec members on their thoughts regarding the key aims and attributes of the principles that need to be considered for Numbering and Addressing. These to be collated by the secretariat and represented for discussion at the October Executive meeting. Request sent to Exec, 2 responses. Held pending Exec discussion on 2008 priorities and focus. Scheduled for discussion on 24th June but not discussed. | Secretariat Ongoing |
Action 2 – 29/11/2007 – Prepare documentation covering the background and approach to the charging work, the summarised responses of the members and recommendation for publication on the NGNuk web site. Exec sign off will be required prior to release. Initial draft circulated to Commercial work group for comment. | Peter Ryde Ongoing |
Action 1 – 13/12/2007 - Secretariat to provide their views (for discussion) at the January Exec on how the aims for 2008 outlined by the Exec will be achieved. Awaiting Exec output regarding 2008 priorities | Secretariat Ongoing |
Action 2 – 13/12/2007 - Exec members should table those initial policy areas they wish NGNuk to consider during 2008 at the January Exec .2 responses to date ( CPW and Orange). Scheduled for discussion on 24th June but not discussed | Exec By 24th Jan |
Action 1 – 13/03/2008: Peter Ryde to liaise with Ofcom to schedule attendance, as appropriate, to provide feedback on the progress of the NGN consultation to the Exec. Gareth Davies attended the April NGNuk Executive | Peter Ryde |
Action 2 – 13/03/2008: Secretariat to circulate to the Exec a draft “issues list” by end March | Secretariat Completed |
Action 3 – 13/03/2008 – Peter Ryde to document the output of the Charging Framework discussions and circulate this to the Executive for sign off prior to submission to Ofcom. Document circulated to Commercial work group for comment. 3 responses to date confirming their agreement to the content. | Peter Ryde Ongoing |
Action 4 – 13/03/2008 – NGNuk Secretariat to invite the appropriate Ofcom representative to attend the Exec to discuss the opportunity for the NGNuk Exec to provide pre-consultation input to the NBMR. Marina Gibbs had advised that as yet there was no owner for the wholesale element of the NBMR and that this was unlikely to commence until October. | Secretariat Ongoing |
Action 5 – 13/03/2008 – Secretariat to meet with Participating members to outline the changes in approach and budget for 2008/9 and to provide reassurance , on behalf of the Exec , of their value to the NGNuk Exec. One meeting had been undertaken with Tiscali, 2 further meetings with O2 and H3G are planned for the 30th April. Unfortunately Viatel have taken the decision to resign from NGNuk. | Secretariat Ongoing |
Action 6 – 13/03/2008 – Secretariat to request that Ofcom immediately issues the 2008/9 invoices at the agreed rates | Secretariat Completed |
Action 7 – 13/03/2008 – Secretariat to issue the Exec with details of the revised meeting dates and locations | Secretariat Completed |
Action 8 – 13/03/2008 – Secretariat to provide a budget update at each Exec meeting. Rod Smith provided an update on the 2008 budget vs. actual which are on forecast, although income for the year will be ahead of projections given that all Exec members had confirmed they would remain members and Colt had rejoined the Exec. In addition Rod stated that the excess funds, from previous years, were higher than anticipated within the budget. Ofcom are to confirm the exact amount. Rod stated that this additional excess would be repaid to members (inc ex members). | Secretariat Completed |
Action 1 – 24/04/2008 – Secretariat to develop a “terms of reference” briefing for the work to develop scenarios covering various products and services operating across varied networks and distribute to the Exec for comment | Peter Ryde |
Action 2 – 24/04/2008 – Secretariat to schedule a “one –off” work shop for members nominated delegates to develop the scenarios as detailed in the brief. | Peter Ryde |
Action 3 – 24/04/2008 – Peter Ryde to discuss with NICC TSG how the definition of the 4 standard bearer classes this might be progressed | Peter Ryde |
Action 4 – 24/04/2008 – Secretariat to schedule an additional Executive meeting during May, if feasible. | Rod Smith |