20060713 VSWG Conference Call Minutes

From CDGWiki

Contents 1 Attendees 2 Purpose 3 Agenda 4 Discussion 5 Next Meeting

[edit] Attendees

• Gepsie Cox, Cibernet and subgroup lead
• KDDI
• QUALCOMM
• Syniverse
• VeriSign
• Verizon

[edit] Purpose

Get additional input regarding what information should go into the X0 to X2 CIBER record type migration paper.

[edit] Agenda

Gather input from the team as to what other items should be included in X0 to X2 CIBER record type migration paper.

• X0 to X2 CIBER record type migration

[edit] Discussion

Suggestions for additions are:

• What is the value of moving to X2 record types?
  • Reduces calls to CC by providing additional information
  • Additional benefits to the subscriber
    • More information can be captured
    • More detailed information captured that can be added to the subscriber’s bill
  • Less generation of additional records, i.e., instead of a Type 10 and 20, a Type 22 captures all the necessary detail
  • Ability to capture data information
  • Ability to capture MEID
  • Will no longer have to pay to have the conversion handled through the DCH’s
  • Prepared for the flash-cut date of January 16, 2007
  • Philosophy of wanting to ensure data integrity – Gepsie to touch base with Nancy on this.
  • Some carriers bill directly off the CIBER record so require this be correct or they can’t bill.

• Gepsie will add examples of what can happen if operators do not migrate to the X2 Records.
  • Billing wrong subscriber
  • Billing wrong customer
  • Roaming revenue is impacted and reduced
  • Risks in conversion process
  • Loss of data

• Note which countries require proper population of these two fields both the MDN and MSID in order to serve their subs (due to WLNP) roaming onto a serving carrier. This means if you have roamers from these areas in your network, this is a concern for you.
  • GSM
  • US
  • Canada
  • NZ
  • Who else requires this due to WLNP?

• General comments to add.
  • Some carriers can work around the fact that a partner doesn’t generate X2 record types but in order for this to work a partner MUST communicate to the home network that this is the case.
  • MSID identifies the carrier
  • MDN identifies the sub
  • If you must, populate the MDN with all zeros but do not put MSID in the MDN field.
  • Call Gepsie directly if they have questions. Will do in field training and consultation for those that request it.
  • Several of the slides from the training deck would be great in the paper such as which fields are new to X2 that were not in X0 records.

• Cibernet will send out a proposal to their customer base requesting the following information:
  • Currently, the MDN field can be populated with zeros, when the MDN is not available or applicable. Should an edit be put in place requiring that a valid number be populated in the MDN field?
  • Asking operators to share with us what the MSID and MDN information looks like when it comes off the network switch.
  • Syniverse and VeriSign will survey their customers as well and provide responses to Gepsie.

• There is concern that testing carrier to carrier and cutting out the clearing house might not produce a solid test. It was decided that testing of the migration needs to include testing from the migrating carrier to the clearinghouse process as well as the migrating carrier to roaming partner (through the clearinghouse) process. KDDI has forwarded their presentation on X0 – X2 Test Plan. These steps will be incorporated in the document.

• Cibernet will send out a draft of the migration paper to the group on July 26, 2006

[edit] Next Meeting

Our next conference call on this topic is scheduled for August 15, 2006.

Main | About | Work Items | Whiteboard | Meetings | Documents