u.s. enum implementation
DESCRIPTION
U.S. ENUM Implementation. Tier 1 Contracting Entity and Architectural Alternatives ENUM Forum. Scope. Tier 1 Contracting Entity Options Tier 1 Structure Alternatives. Introduction. Feb 2003 – Baseline Specification released Meetings through 2003 Dec 2003 – Release of 6001_1. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
U.S. ENUM U.S. ENUM ImplementationImplementation
Tier 1 Contracting Entity and Tier 1 Contracting Entity and Architectural AlternativesArchitectural Alternatives
ENUM Forum ENUM Forum
ScopeScope
Tier 1 Contracting Entity OptionsTier 1 Contracting Entity Options Tier 1 Structure AlternativesTier 1 Structure Alternatives
IntroductionIntroduction
Feb 2003 – Baseline Specification Feb 2003 – Baseline Specification releasedreleased
Meetings through 2003Meetings through 2003 Dec 2003 – Release of 6001_1Dec 2003 – Release of 6001_1
Tier 1 Contracting EntityTier 1 Contracting Entity
Desired Attributes:Desired Attributes: Short implementation timeframeShort implementation timeframe Light Government OversightLight Government Oversight Encourage CompetitionEncourage Competition Open StandardsOpen Standards Intellectual Property is owned by the Intellectual Property is owned by the
contracting entitycontracting entity Minimize procurement and operation costMinimize procurement and operation cost
Tier 1 Contracting EntityTier 1 Contracting Entity
Concerns:Concerns: Preserve National SovereigntyPreserve National Sovereignty Support CompetitionSupport Competition Promote InnovationPromote Innovation Protect User’s Security and PrivacyProtect User’s Security and Privacy Minimize RegulationMinimize Regulation Preserve Opportunity for Alternative DeploymentsPreserve Opportunity for Alternative Deployments Allow InteroperabilityAllow Interoperability Preserve Stability and SecurityPreserve Stability and Security
Tier 1 Contracting EntityTier 1 Contracting Entity
Contracting Considerations:Contracting Considerations: US Government interaction with Tier 0US Government interaction with Tier 0 Actual procurement processActual procurement process Ownership of the intellectual propertyOwnership of the intellectual property Compliance oversightCompliance oversight Operational integrityOperational integrity Policy development for procurement and Policy development for procurement and
ongoing operationsongoing operations
Tier 1 Contracting Entity – Tier 1 Contracting Entity – Alternatives ConsideredAlternatives Considered
Government ProcurementGovernment Procurement Industry Limited Liability CompanyIndustry Limited Liability Company
Option 1 Option 1 – Government Procurement– Government Procurement
Government Procurement through Simplified FARGovernment Procurement through Simplified FAR Accepted and understoodAccepted and understood Precedent - .usPrecedent - .us Does it provide the desired attributes?Does it provide the desired attributes?
Short timeframeShort timeframe - Unclear- Unclear Light government oversightLight government oversight - Unclear- Unclear Low costLow cost - Unclear, but at least similar to .us- Unclear, but at least similar to .us Competition encouragedCompetition encouraged - Unclear- Unclear Intellectual propertyIntellectual property - Easily retained by USG- Easily retained by USG Open standards & best practicesOpen standards & best practices - Possible- Possible
Option 1 Option 1 – Government Procurement - – Government Procurement - AdvantagesAdvantages
Little or no industry cost Anti-trust protection Contract liability protection Well defined and understood process
Option 1 Option 1 – Government Procurement – – Government Procurement – DisadvantagesDisadvantages
Unclear Statutory Authority Agency Lead Unclear Not Currently Funded High Complexity and / or cost Difficult to Coordinate with Industry USG Prefers light touch with new / emerging technologies Multinational coordination with other NANP countries is
required if single or skinny Tier 1 selected
Option 2 Option 2 – Industry LLC– Industry LLC
Industry LLCIndustry LLC Separate and distinct legal entity Separate and distinct legal entity Responsible forResponsible for
RFP creation, issuance, and evaluationRFP creation, issuance, and evaluation Contract negotiation & executionContract negotiation & execution Vendor oversight and change managementVendor oversight and change management Systems and data changesSystems and data changes Emerging issues managementEmerging issues management
Option 2 Option 2 – Industry LLC– Industry LLC
Industry LLCIndustry LLC AttributesAttributes
Liability protection for membersLiability protection for members Designated and recognized contracting entityDesignated and recognized contracting entity Level forum for joint venture for competitorsLevel forum for joint venture for competitors Unregulated yet authorized to conform to regulatory Unregulated yet authorized to conform to regulatory
directivesdirectives Easy Access for new entrantsEasy Access for new entrants Not For ProfitNot For Profit Government may choose oversight roleGovernment may choose oversight role
ActiveActive TacitTacit
Allows involvement of other NANP countriesAllows involvement of other NANP countries
Option 2 Option 2 – Industry LLC– Industry LLC
AdvantagesAdvantages Expect good reception from USGExpect good reception from USG Quick implementation possibleQuick implementation possible Limits industry liabilityLimits industry liability Good precedent (LNP)Good precedent (LNP) Ability to insure fairness and unbiased oversightAbility to insure fairness and unbiased oversight Contractual authority with all qualified vendorsContractual authority with all qualified vendors Can issue RFP, award a contractCan issue RFP, award a contract Can designate equal terms for participants who use services from Can designate equal terms for participants who use services from
selected vendorselected vendor Operates in an open environmentOperates in an open environment Non Aligned with any market segmentNon Aligned with any market segment May represent any of the NANP countriesMay represent any of the NANP countries Government coordination may be through the LLC or industry consortiumGovernment coordination may be through the LLC or industry consortium
Option 2 Option 2 – Industry LLC– Industry LLC
DisadvantagesDisadvantages Members responsible for initial funding and operational costsMembers responsible for initial funding and operational costs Fewer members, larger individual burdenFewer members, larger individual burden Requires independent legal assistanceRequires independent legal assistance
Initial membership operating agreementsInitial membership operating agreements Ongoing adviceOngoing advice
May have issues establishing industry payment / cost recovery May have issues establishing industry payment / cost recovery mechanismsmechanisms
Option 2 Option 2 – Industry LLC– Industry LLC
Can an industry LLC provide the desired attributes?Can an industry LLC provide the desired attributes? Short TimeframeShort Timeframe - - YesYes Light Government OversightLight Government Oversight - - YesYes Low CostLow Cost - - YesYes Competition EncouragedCompetition Encouraged - - YesYes Intellectual PropertyIntellectual Property - - YesYes Open Standards & Best PracticesOpen Standards & Best Practices - - YesYes
Tier 1 ArchitectureTier 1 Architecture
Two issuesTwo issues
Scope of Tier 1Scope of Tier 1
Tier 0 Delegation AlternativesTier 0 Delegation Alternatives
Tier 1 ArchitectureTier 1 Architecture
Scope of Tier 1Scope of Tier 1 US Numbers registered in single Tier 1 for all of NANPUS Numbers registered in single Tier 1 for all of NANP US numbers registered in single tier 1 for USUS numbers registered in single tier 1 for US US numbers registered in multiple tier 1s for sets of US numbers registered in multiple tier 1s for sets of
NPAsNPAs
Tier 0 Delegation AlternativesTier 0 Delegation Alternatives Delegation of 1+NPADelegation of 1+NPA Delegation of all of country code 1Delegation of all of country code 1
Tier 1 ArchitectureTier 1 Architecture
Five Possible Solutions:Five Possible Solutions: Single Tier 1 for all NANP countriesSingle Tier 1 for all NANP countries Single Tier 1 in USSingle Tier 1 in US
With delegation from Tier 0 by 1+NPAWith delegation from Tier 0 by 1+NPA With delegation from Skinny Tier 1With delegation from Skinny Tier 1
Multiple Tier 1 operators in USMultiple Tier 1 operators in US With delegation from Tier 0 by 1+NPAWith delegation from Tier 0 by 1+NPA With delegation from Skinny Tier 1With delegation from Skinny Tier 1
Single Tier 1 for NANP CountriesSingle Tier 1 for NANP Countries
Assumes:Assumes: All of country code 1 is delegated to a single Tier 1All of country code 1 is delegated to a single Tier 1 All participating NANP countries can/will form a single All participating NANP countries can/will form a single
contracting entitycontracting entity
Tier 0
Tier 1
Tier 2
Single Tier 1 for NANP CountriesSingle Tier 1 for NANP Countries
AdvantagesAdvantages Only country code 1 need be Only country code 1 need be
added to Tier 0added to Tier 0 Only one representative for Only one representative for
NANP countries needs to deal NANP countries needs to deal with tier 0with tier 0
Registrars that do business in Registrars that do business in more than one NANP country more than one NANP country only need to be certified onceonly need to be certified once
Registrar interfaces with single Registrar interfaces with single Tier 1 for many NANP countriesTier 1 for many NANP countries
May simplify non geographic May simplify non geographic number inclusionnumber inclusion
DisadvantagesDisadvantages All 19 NANP countries need to All 19 NANP countries need to
agree/acquiesce on Tier 1 entity agree/acquiesce on Tier 1 entity operationoperation
All NANP countries must All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce to selection of agree/acquiesce to selection of Tier 1 entityTier 1 entity
Restricts business opportunity to Restricts business opportunity to single entity at tier 1 levelsingle entity at tier 1 level
Creates risk of relying on single Creates risk of relying on single business entitybusiness entityTier 0
Tier 1
Tier 2
Single Tier 1 for USSingle Tier 1 for US
Requires either delegation from Tier 0 by Requires either delegation from Tier 0 by NPA or Skinny Tier 1NPA or Skinny Tier 1
Tier 0
US Tier 1
Tier 2
Delegation by NPA
Tier 0
US Tier 1
Tier 2
Delegation of country code 1
Skinny Tier 1
Delegation by NPA
Single Tier 1 for US – Single Tier 1 for US – Delegation of US NPAs from Tier 0Delegation of US NPAs from Tier 0
Tier 0
US Tier 1
Tier 2
Delegation by NPA
AdvantagesAdvantages No distribution of US NPAs No distribution of US NPAs
required between multiple US required between multiple US Tier 1 entitiesTier 1 entities
US can participate in global US can participate in global ENUM without agreement or ENUM without agreement or coordination of other NANP coordination of other NANP countriescountries
No negotiation required on No negotiation required on loading US NPAs into Tier 0loading US NPAs into Tier 0
DisadvantagesDisadvantages All NPAs from the US must be All NPAs from the US must be
entered into tier 0entered into tier 0 Restricts business opportunity to Restricts business opportunity to
single entity at tier 1 levelsingle entity at tier 1 level Does not resolve non geographic Does not resolve non geographic
number inclusionnumber inclusion Creates risk of relying on single Creates risk of relying on single
business entitybusiness entity
Single Tier 1 for US – Single Tier 1 for US – Delegation from within a skinny tier 1Delegation from within a skinny tier 1
Tier 0
US Tier 1
Tier 2
Skinny Tier 1
Delegation by NPA
AdvantagesAdvantages No distribution of US NPAs required No distribution of US NPAs required
between multiple US Tier 1 entitiesbetween multiple US Tier 1 entities Only Country code 1 must be loaded Only Country code 1 must be loaded
into Tier 0into Tier 0 Only one representative for NANP Only one representative for NANP
countries needs to deal with tier 0countries needs to deal with tier 0 Individual NANP countries deal with a Individual NANP countries deal with a
single tier 1 providersingle tier 1 provider MAY simplify inclusion of non MAY simplify inclusion of non
geographic numbers by placing them geographic numbers by placing them directly in skinny tier 1directly in skinny tier 1
DisadvantagesDisadvantages Restricts business opportunity to single Restricts business opportunity to single
entity at skinny tier 1 level and at the US entity at skinny tier 1 level and at the US tier 1 leveltier 1 level
Creates risk of relying on single business Creates risk of relying on single business entity at skinny tier 1 and US Tier 1 levelsentity at skinny tier 1 and US Tier 1 levels
Does not resolve non geographic number Does not resolve non geographic number inclusion in ENUMinclusion in ENUM
All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce on using a skinny tier 1 operatoron using a skinny tier 1 operator
All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce on selection of skinny tier1 entityon selection of skinny tier1 entity
Multiple Tier 1 Operators in the USMultiple Tier 1 Operators in the US
Assumes:Assumes: US NPAs are delegated to multiple tier 1 entities from Tier 0US NPAs are delegated to multiple tier 1 entities from Tier 0 OROR All of country code 1 is delegated to a single skinny Tier 1 All of country code 1 is delegated to a single skinny Tier 1
Tier 0
US Tier 1s
Tier 2
Delegation by NPA
Tier 0
Delegation of country code 1
Skinny Tier 1
US Tier 1s
Tier 2
Delegation by NPA
Multiple Tier-1 Operators in the US Multiple Tier-1 Operators in the US Direct delegation from Tier 0Direct delegation from Tier 0
AdvantagesAdvantages Promotes multiple business Promotes multiple business
opportunities in the tier 1 registryopportunities in the tier 1 registry US can participate in global ENUM US can participate in global ENUM
without agreement from other NANP without agreement from other NANP countriescountries
No negotiation needed to load US No negotiation needed to load US NPAs into Tier 0.NPAs into Tier 0.
Only one representative for NANP Only one representative for NANP countries needs to deal with tier 0countries needs to deal with tier 0
Reduces risk of relying on single Reduces risk of relying on single business entity for Tier 1business entity for Tier 1
DisadvantagesDisadvantages NPAs need to be distributed NPAs need to be distributed
among Tier 1 providersamong Tier 1 providers NPAs for US would need to be NPAs for US would need to be
entered into Tier 0entered into Tier 0 Introduces additional operational Introduces additional operational
and administrative interfaces for and administrative interfaces for Registrars and Tier 2 operatorsRegistrars and Tier 2 operators
Does not resolve non geographic Does not resolve non geographic number inclusion in ENUMnumber inclusion in ENUM
Tier 0
US Tier 1s
Tier 2
Delegation by NPA
Multiple Tier-1 Operators in the US Multiple Tier-1 Operators in the US Direct delegation from skinny Tier 1Direct delegation from skinny Tier 1
AdvantagesAdvantages Only Country code 1 must be loaded Only Country code 1 must be loaded
into Tier 0into Tier 0 Only one representative from NANP Only one representative from NANP
countries needs to deal with Tier 0countries needs to deal with Tier 0 Individual NANP countries deal with a Individual NANP countries deal with a
single skinny Tier 1 providersingle skinny Tier 1 provider MAY simplify inclusion of non MAY simplify inclusion of non
geographic numbers by placing them geographic numbers by placing them directly in skinny tier 1directly in skinny tier 1
Promotes multiple business Promotes multiple business opportunities in Tier 1 Registryopportunities in Tier 1 Registry
DisadvantagesDisadvantages NPAs need to be distributed among Tier 1 NPAs need to be distributed among Tier 1
providersproviders Restricts business opportunity to single entity at Restricts business opportunity to single entity at
skinny tier 1 level skinny tier 1 level Creates risk of relying on single business entity at Creates risk of relying on single business entity at
skinny tier 1 skinny tier 1 Does not resolve issues regarding non geographic Does not resolve issues regarding non geographic
number inclusion in ENUMnumber inclusion in ENUM All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce on using All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce on using
a skinny tier 1 operatora skinny tier 1 operator All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce on All NANP countries must agree/acquiesce on
selection of skinny tier1 entityselection of skinny tier1 entity Introduces additional operational and administrative Introduces additional operational and administrative
interfaces for Registrars and Tier 2 operatorsinterfaces for Registrars and Tier 2 operators
SummarySummary
Endorsement of support for LLCEndorsement of support for LLC No consensus on architectural alternativesNo consensus on architectural alternatives
Any solution which involves the delegation of Any solution which involves the delegation of country code 1 from Tier 0 will require country code 1 from Tier 0 will require agreement from all 19 NANP countriesagreement from all 19 NANP countries
Delegation of US NPAs from Tier 0 may Delegation of US NPAs from Tier 0 may require negotiation with Tier 0require negotiation with Tier 0
How many registries should operate for those How many registries should operate for those NPAs in the US?NPAs in the US?
ContactsContacts
Gary RichenakerGary Richenaker