Andy Rawnsley (Gamma Telecom)
Ann Francis (Colt),
Martin Whewell (Openreach) (Audio)
Paul Beaumont (Sky)
Peter Ryde (NGNuk)
Rod Smith (NGNuk)
Andy May (CW),
David Halliday (OTA
Mark Dalziel (OTA),
David Clarkson (Ofcom)
John Morden (BTW) (Audio)
Robyn Durie (Everything Everywhere), Gareth Davies (Ofcom), Andrew Wileman (Virgin Media), Neil McArthur (Talk Talk), Steve Best (BT Wholesale),
The minutes and actions of the November meeting were agreed.
Peter Ryde stated that Version 2 of the NICC Minimum Security Standard (ND1643) had been agreed by NICC but not yet published on the NICC web site. Version 3 will be released shortly for review. Version 3 updates the Standard with feedback from CPs and Auditors following the initial implementation and audits. It is hoped to complete Version 3 ready for 28 day approval by end February.
The revised version of the Standard will be applied retrospectively to those CPs who have been audited to date. These are BT, TT and Kcom. It will however not affect the existing conclusions of the auditors. Overall both the CPs audited and the Certification Bodies were able to confirm there were no significant issues identified with the Standard or auditing against the documented controls.
At the meeting between CPs and Audit Bodies the following key changes to the Standard were recommended to NICC:
At this CP/CB meeting it was felt that the existing scope of the Standard should meet the IP element of Article 13 (but not for Internet Peering). The interpretation of the scope that has been applied by the 3 CPs was consistent but a concern was discussed that this was a more limited scope than originally envisaged by TISAC/CPNI.
This concern was reviewed in more detail at the Executive meeting. Peter Ryde informed the Executive that he had raised the position with CPNI who confirmed that the original scope aimed to protect networks in shared areas; this was conveniently defined as 'interconnect' rather than the type of equipment (e.g. MSAN) or operation (e.g. LLU). Where there are sites which are shared by other parties but declared 'out of scope' then CPNI believe the original purpose will have been undermined and the risk not fully addressed. In terms of BT this is estimated as 1500 MUAs being out of scope.
It was agreed that this should be flagged to Ofcom for resolution between NICC/Ofcom and CPNI. Peter Ryde stated that dependent upon the outcome the inspection scheme guidance should be able to accommodate any change although it may increase costs via larger sample sizes
Action 1 – January 2011 – Peter Ryde to flag to Ofcom that the scope of ND1643 differs from that originally envisaged by CPNI.
Peter Ryde also stated that the joint meeting with CPs and CBs had reviewed the guidance provided for the audit. The CPs and Auditors had reported that inspecting 3rd party shared sites belonging to a certified CP significantly increases costs without delivering any additional benefit. It was agreed that the guidance will amended to significantly reduce the auditing of 3rd party shared sites belonging to certified CPs and thus lower sample sizes. Pass/Fail criteria against the controls were agreed as were reporting and certificate requirements. Both the CPs and Auditors had requested that NGNuk publish which organisations have been certified to allow interconnecting CPs to verify claims made by other operators.
Peter Ryde flagged to the NGNuk Executive that the consensus amongst the CPs and auditors involved with the review was that the inspection is unlikely to be completed in a single day. A two day initial audit is therefore likely to be required even for smaller CPs, with a day for subsequent surveillance audits. Peter Ryde pointed out that it had been hoped that a one day audit would suffice.
The CP/CB meeting had also agreed that there needs to be a single minimum standard applying equally to large and small CPs. This was in part on principle, a minimum being a minimum but also as it was believed any gradation within the Standard would make the guidance too complex and its application too subjective. It was however agreed that auditor guidance needed to reinforce auditor discretion as to admissible evidence for smaller CPs.
Peter Ryde informed the Exec that an assessment of ‘readiness’ and advice on implementation for two small CPs undertaken by Red Island, which had been funded by Ofcom, had been completed. The CPs involved were DRD and Telxl. As these had only just taken place, no formal feedback had yet been provided. The preliminary verbal feedback indicated that the biggest issue related to support for documenting processes and procedures etc.
In terms of the status of activities with UKAS, Peter Ryde informed that NICC had agreed to act as scheme owner should NGNuk cease to operate. He stated that the documentation that needs to be supplied to UKAS is prepared but requires the final version of the Standard and Guidance to progress.
He also informed the Exec that the BIS output on Consultation responses regarding legislation surrounding Article 13 is anticipated late March/Early April but little change of approach anticipated. An Ofcom statement on their approach will follow this. Ofcom are also working with the EU on the wider aspects of reporting and standards. In the interim certification to ND1643 provides a presumption of compliance, although Voice and IP Peering are currently out of scope of the existing Standard.
To support CPs wishing to gain certification in advance of UKAS accreditation, Peter Ryde stated that there are three Certification Bodies are available which are BABT, BSI and LRQA.
The Exec discussed smaller CP adoption. Peter Ryde expressed the view that this will be triggered by an Ofcom statement(s) and contract activity by larger CPs, so is not an immediate prospect however that this is likely to prove more costly than anticipated and is an area where support for smaller CPs, in terms of implementation may need to be considered. It was suggested that NGNuk be prepared to offer this but that advice should be chargeable for non members.
Peter Ryde informed the Exec that the NICC guidance for terminal compatibility with NGA/NGN had been circulated on 28 day approval. BSIA had previously been requested to provide detail of their expectations of the NICC guidance to ensure the output was consistent with their expectations. This is still awaited but is now unlikely to be received in time to influence the NICC document.
The action to define their requirements for test facilities remains with both BSIA and TSA.
There is an action on NGNuk to help facilitate the appropriate BT contact for NGA for both TSA and BSIA. Both Openreach and BT Retail have been approached but no contact yet identified.
Peter Ryde stated that ND1610 and associated Standards cover NGN interconnect. Since their release there have been changes in the market with some CPs deploying their NGNs as anticipated, others not. There was also a greater understanding of IP interconnects and the practical issues associated with their deployment. The delay to voice NGNs has shifted the focus of developing standards towards supporting NGA and the voice/telephony services that will be carried. It also appeared that the initial support for SIP-I has largely evaporated with CPs largely implementing SIP on a bilateral basis. These bilateral arrangements in support of SIP raise concerns as the subsequent multiple hand-offs between networks in a non standardised way could lead to unacceptable delay and reduced call quality.
The question had been posed to a number of CPs as to whether parts of the existing Standards needed to be revised or deprecated as well as SIP NNI standards developed. Early standardisation to support SIP interconnects would help increase the speed of deployment for NGN interconnect and also minimise future retrofit costs.
Feedback on their analysis from a number of CPs was that SIP-I deployment is cost prohibitive versus SIP as SIP is a commoditised global product.
NICC feedback is that they do not consider any parts of ND1610 need to be deprecated and that SIP-I and SIP can co-exist within its umbrella. This view was endorsed by the majority of those CPs who were involved in the NGNuk discussions.
The importance of developing a SIP NNI was recognised by the Executive and Peter Ryde requested to lobby members to support the NICC work in this area.
Action 2 – January 2011 – Peter Ryde to contact NGNuk members to encourage their support for SIP NNI Standards development via NICC ND1647
Rod Smith provided an update of expenditure against the 2010/11. He also proposed a budget for 2011/12. This was agreed by the Executive.
Consult 21: David Halliday explained to the Executive that the Consult 21 remit was under review between BT Wholesale and CPs. Peter Ryde/David Halliday had suggested to C21 that some alignment of meeting dates might be considered to provide for a more efficient use of peoples time where there was common membership but also that it might facilitate the transfer /handover of issues between the two groups.
Thales: Peter Ryde reported that he had met with Thales who are an actively bidding for PSN tenders. NGNuk originally attended some PSN meetings to clarify position of ND1643 with respect to PSN activity and raise concerns regarding the impact of PSN on smaller CPs. Thales made contact with NGNuk to clarify the status of ND1643 regarding PSN compliance. During discussions Thales identified themselves as an alternative to Red Island to support CPs considering compliance to ND1643
Peter Ryde
NGNuk Office
07771 555 048
020 7783 4688
peter.ryde@ngnuk.org.uk