Minutes of the Fourth Meeting of the Network Reliability and Interoperability Council V
June 26, 2001
Along with the presenters, members in attendance at the June 26, 2001 meeting of the Network Reliability and Interoperability Council ("NRIC") included Ruth Michalecki of the University of Nebraska, representing the International Communication Association; Arthur K. Reilly of Cisco; Rikke Davis of Sprint; Dan Gonzales of XO Communications; Rick Harrison of Telcordia Technologies; David Jeppsen of Lucent Technologies; Ray Strassburger of Nortel Networks; Katherine Condello of CTIA; Harold Salters of PCIA; John Graves of NCS; Robert Creighton of USTA; Gene Edmond of SBC; Mary Retka of Qwest; John T. McHugh of OPASTCO; Mark Wegleitner of Verizon; Andy Scott of NCTA; Phil Kyees of Paradyne; Douglas Sicker of
Kent Nilsson, the Designated Federal Officer of the Network Reliability and Interoperability Council (NRIC), opened the meeting by introducing himself, Bruce Franca, Acting Chief of the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET), and FCC Chairman Michael Powell.
Chairman Powell thanked the members of the NRIC for their efforts and stated that the Commission relied on the NRIC for advice on the increasingly complex questions it faced, questions that were difficult for the Commission to answer without outside help. He said that the NRIC was a collection of gifted individuals from companies who put their interests aside and combined their expertise to work for the common good in a way that allowed the Commission to make sound policies. Chairman Powell said that, as telecommunications becomes more important, the ability of networks to interoperate seamlessly was becoming critical. He observed that the communications industry had, in effect, issued an invitation to the entire national and global economy to rely on the means of communication it provided. Individuals were increasingly invited to entrust such things as banking functions, private records and the intimate details of their private lives to the telecommunications network. Security and efficiency have become more important as a result. Security and reliability are topics of enormous importance in interagency circles. Chairman Powell stated that he had been to meetings attended by the President where network security and efficiency and their importance to the economy were discussed. He thanked those members who were cooperating in the voluntary outage reporting efforts of NRIC IV and V.
Kent Nilsson thanked Chairman Powell and then introduced NRIC V Chairman Crowe. Chairman Crowe began by announcing that Douglas Sicker of
Chairman Crowe then said that, since the last meeting, Focus Group 2.A.2 had proposed to conduct a survey on the actual use by industry of best practices for preventing telecommunications outages. He urged the members to be sure their companies cooperated with the survey, upon completion of which Focus Group 2.A.2 would write a report in time for the next NRIC meeting. He thanked the Chairman of the Focus Group, Karl Rauscher, who couldn't be present because his wife was having a baby, and he thanked Rick Harrison of Focus Group 2.A.1 for helping Group 2.A.2 with its presentation. He said there had been progress on the voluntary outage reporting project and looked forward to the report on that subject from Focus Group 2.B.1. He thanked P.J. Aduskevicz for her efforts to persuade the industry to cooperate with the voluntary reporting project. He said that in Focus Group 2.B.2, under the leadership of Paul Hartman, there had been further development of the criteria for outage reporting by owners of packet switches. Chairman Crowe stated that three companies, WorldCom, Covad, and Rhythms, had resigned from Focus Group 3 since the last NRIC meeting. Since this group dealt with the deployment of xDSL and competition among ILECs and CLECs, he was interested in hearing the group's chairman, Ed Eckert, describe the recommendations the group could make in the future. Chairman Crowe said that, with regard to interoperability of packet switch providers, Focus Group 4 would make a recommendation that internet service providers publish their criteria for peering. He said that during the meeting the members would be able to decide whether they wanted to vote on the recommendation or postpone their decision to a later date. The Chairman then introduced Philip Patrick, who would report on Packet Switching Best Practices and Focus Group 2.A.2's progress.
Mr. Patrick said that the present is the most exciting time to be involved with telecommunications. He said that enhancing the reliability of the telecommunications networks enhances the nation's productivity. He pointed out that he was standing in for Karl Rauscher who deserved much of the credit for the group's work.
He then summarized 2.A.2's charter:
Mr. Patrick pointed out that the membership of 2.A.2 was broad and well-balanced and international in scope. He said his group owed much to those who had worked on best practices in previous NRIC Councils, including Rick Harrison, Rick Canaday, Norb Lucash and Art Reilly. He said the current draft of best practices is approximately 240 pages with much work left to be completed this year. On behalf of Karl Rauscher, he urged the Council members to continue to support the participation of their representitives in the group. He then summarized the deliverables of the group. Focus Group 2.A.2 will produce network reliability best practice recommendations for packet switched telecommunications network services by the refinement and modification of existing circuit switching best practices, by the development of new best practices, and by the enhancement of the current list of best practices in view of the information obtained from outages reported under the voluntary trial and the information gained from the review of best practices by Focus Group 4, Network Interoperability. A statement of the unique characteristics of packet switching networks and the draft formed at the IEEE Technical Committee on Communications Quality & Reliability (CQR) International Workshop (May 2001) will be used as a checklist to determine the coverage of the best practices. In addition, Mr. Patrick said the group would produce special reports from monitoring industry developments or specific network outages (e.g., the commercial power outages that precipitated telecommunications outages).
Mr. Patrick discussed a further set of deliverables involving the use of best practices by the industry. To this end, the group was commencing an industry survey to evaluate and report on the extent to which service providers and equipment suppliers are using best practices, and to identify ways to increase the use of best practices. The survey is designed to be balanced in its coverage of industry including, yet distinguishing, best practices for circuit switching and packet switching networks. The survey would evaluate the industry use of best practices, the effectiveness of best practices, the cost of implementing best practices, and the risk of not implementing best practices. A final Report to the Nation on packet switching best practices was expected in October, 2001. A final report on enhancements to improve best practice access and ease of use was expected in December, 2001. The survey would cost $35,000 which would be raised by the Council. Individual responses to the survey would be masked so that no single company would be able to be identified as having given a particular response.
Mr. Patrick said that his Focus Group encourages Council member organizations, and other participating organizations, to support the best practice industry survey by ensuring timely and accurate responses. The Focus Group strongly recommends that power best practices be deployed to address Commercial Power Outage concerns. A current draft of those best practices is available at: www.nric.org.
In conclusion, Mr. Patrick thanked Kent Nilsson of the FCC and Tricia Paoletta and Doug Sicker of
Chairman Crowe pointed out that he had recently solicited a $5,000 contribution from each of the NRIC members to fund the study Mr. Patrick had just described and also to fund FCC travel in support of the Council's efforts and finally to fund a study with respect to telecommunications-related power issues. He asked Douglas Sicker to summarize the intent of the power study.
Dr. Sicker said that the study would focus on three issues: 1) anticipated power shortages; 2) the increasing power demands of telecommunications providers; and 3) the impact of the shortages on the telecommunications industry. The study will attempt to evaluate state of the art in power provision. The immediate concern would be getting the necessary funding.
Chairman Crowe then introduced Rick Harrison to report on Focus Group 2.A.1. Mr. Harrison said any report he gave would be very redundant, given the content of Mr. Patrick's report, because the two Focus Groups work closely together.
Chairman Crowe then asked P.J. Aduskevicz for her report.
Ms. Aduskevicz chairs Focus Group 2. B.1, Network Reliability - Data Reporting &Analysis. She began her report by showing the structure of Focus Group 2 with its subgroups. She showed the membership of Focus Group 2 and pointed out that it was broadly representative of various industry segments, especially those that had a strong interest in the issues involved. She stated the basic elements of Focus Group 2.B.1's charter. These include: 1) implementing a voluntary one year outage reporting trial with participation by Internet Service Providers, CMRS, satellite, cable, and data networking service providers; 2) evaluating outage-reporting requirements and guidelines currently used by wireline carriers to improve the quality of outage reporting; and 3) evaluating and reporting on the reliability and availability of the PSTN utilizing NRSC quarterly reports.
Ms. Aduskevicz next summarized the status of the voluntary outage reporting trial. There was a recommendation from NRIC IV to proceed with the trial. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed by the NCS/NCC ensuring that proprietary information provided under the agreement will be protected against unauthorized use or disclosure including disclosure through the Freedom of Information Act. NRIC V Chairman Crowe sent a letter to industry association representatives reinforcing the commitment to a voluntary trial and explaining the MOU. Additionally, criteria for data scrubbing by the NCS have been completed. A flow chart of the reporting process has been documented by Focus Group 2. B. 1 and distributed to industry association representatives. Overarching trial goals and data analysis options have been documented by the Focus Group and distributed to industry association representatives. One formal outage report has been submitted along with some monthly statements declaring that there have been no outages.
Ms. Aduskecicz said participation in the voluntary trial has begun but is not yet at a level that would allow for analysis. Ms. Aduskevicz asked the members of the Council to urge their companies to cooperate with the voluntary reporting project. She showed a list of the types of information that should appear on the standardized outage reporting form indicating which items would be "scrubbed out" and which not. She then showed a chart of analysis options.
She then discussed the purposes of the trial which included: determining the reported outages' impact on the public, addressing the effectiveness of the trial, identifying outage reporting similarities or differences across industry segments, showing that industry has the initiative to gather "outage" information without government involvement, identifying what data should or should not be reported, providing an opinion on the "State of Reliability" of the examined networks, addressing future steps (e.g., to continue or stop the trial), identifying outages' root causes (i.e., the chains of events that led to outages) for best practices review, allowing best practices to be identified for the entire industry's benefit, allowing unregulated voluntary outage reporting to assist national communications security and awareness, and enabling carrier and vendor service improvement for all consumers.
Next Ms. Aduskevicz discussed the Focus Group's progress toward its second objective, evaluating outage-reporting requirements and guidelines currently used by wireline carriers to improve the quality of outage reporting. The Group had revised its Charter to reflect the Council's Charter's intent to "improve" reliability verses the previous charter objective which was to "monitor" reliability. The Group had changed the baseline for FCC Reportable Service Outages from the first year outage record to the cumulative record. The group has begun to conduct special analyses on detected trends (for example, single failure affecting large geographic areas). The Group has begun to perform an analysis on emergency services outages. And, finally, the FCC had begun working to implement the 47 CFR Section 63.100 electronic filing system and put the template into "user friendly" format.
Ms. Aduskevicz next discussed the third objective of her Focus Group which is to evaluate and report on the reliability and availability of the Public Switched Telephone Network utilizing NRSC quarterly reports. The NRSC analyzes data from outage reports filed pursuant to Section 63.100 of the FCC's rules. The NRSC publishes quarterly and annual reports of overall outages and their subcategories. These are available on the web site: http://www.atis.org/atis/nrsc/nrschome.htm. The NRSC intends to incorporate analytics from the Voluntary Outage Reporting Trial for cable, satellite, wireless, and ISPs to extend Network Reliability Reporting based on the Voluntary Trial Data Analysis. Ms. Aduskevicz said that the NRSC had formed a study group to review Common Channel Signaling ("CCS") outages and identify possible causes of their recent increase and that the NRSC had initiated an awareness program. The Focus Group found that the CCS outages, which had been on the rise, could have been prevented if current best practices had been followed. Ms. Adusvevicz. also noted that the NRSC 2000 Annual Report was in the process of being written. She stated that the last quarter had one of the lowest frequencies of outage reports.that the NRSC has had. The outage index for that quarter was also very low.
Like the CCS outages, an increase in power outages would also have been mitigated if current best practices had been followed. She then gave a preview of the annual outage report for 2000, to be released later this year. There have been 184 outages, somewhat more than in most other years, but the outage index had been close to the baseline. Based upon analysis of all outages reported from the first quarter of 1993 through the first quarter of 2001, there is an increasing trend in the number of tandem switch, CO power, CCS, and DCS outages, but there is a decreasing trend in the number of facility outages, which is normally among the most problematic of the outage categories. Procedural errors as a cause of outages are on the rise. Ms. Aduskevicz concluded her report by thanking the members of her team for their work and asking for questions. There were none.
Chairman Crowe next introduced Paul Hartman to report on Focus Group 2.B.2, Network Reliability - Data Reporting & Analysis for Packet Switching.
Mr. Hartman said his Focus Group was chartered to evaluate, and report on, the reliability of packet switched networks; to monitor the voluntary outage reporting process; analyze the data obtained from the voluntary trial; and report on the efficacy of that process and on the on-going reliability of telecommunications services. He said the criteria for the voluntary reporting trial handed down by NRIC IV was two years old, which was a great deal of time in the Internet world. His Group would consider changes, including greater specificity, in those criteria. He had asked members of his Focus Group for examples of outage reporting criteria that would describe types of outages that clearly should be reported in the voluntary trial. Some examples the Focus Group considered were access failures (dial-up, DSL, cable) affecting 30,000 or more customers for 30 minutes or more; separation failure of two non-redundant OC-48s for 3 hours; routing failures in an advertised default route; DNS failures involving an NSI partial update of DNS routers with corrupted data; and denial of service attacks.
Mr. Hartman said he did not want to duplicate the work of other industry bodies. He said that other groups outside the NRIC were looking at some of these same questions. Committee T1A1.2, for example had come up with specific recommendations, and the Internet Engineering Task Force has also become involved with these issues.
He said the Focus Group's next steps should be to determine reportable event criteria and catalogue the efforts of others including, perhaps, standards bodies such as T1A.1 or the IETF, and other groups such as CompTIA. The Focus Group should also look into service level agreements to discover the criteria triggering penalties. Next, the Focus Group would measure and report on reliability based on publicly available "external" information as well as on outage reports. Possible sources of external information include: Keynote, Boardwatch and Internet Weather. The Focus Group will also investigate ATM and Frame Relay. Mr. Hartman concluded by asking for questions. There were none.
Chairman Crowe next introduced Ed Eckert to report on Focus Group 3, Wireline Network Spectral Integrity.
Mr. Eckert said that, during the last six months, his Focus Group had six days of face-to-face meetings; established liaisons to key standards development organizations; reviewed and considered 12 individual contributions towards the Focus Group goals; worked towards a white paper on intermediate transceiver units to be entitled "Remote Deployed DSL: Advantages, Challenges, and Solutions;" and worked towards a recommendation on SM information exchanges among equipment manufacturers, loop owners and service providers.
Mr. Eckert next read the mission statement of his Focus Group. He said the mission of the Wireline Network Spectral Integrity (WNSI) Focus Group is to provide recommendations to the FCC and to the telecommunications industry that, when implemented, will ensure the integrity of coexisting services in wireline public telecommunications networks; facilitate widespread and unencumbered deployment of xDSL and associated wireline high speed access technologies; and encourage network architecture and technology evolution that safeguards the integrity of wireline public telecommunications networks while maximizing capacity, availability and throughput in an unbundled or competitive environment. Mr. Eckert showed a list of the subject matter experts and organizations contributing expertise to his Focus Group.
Mr. Eckert then reported on the development, status and implementation of technical standards relevant to wireline network spectral integrity. Committee T1's Technical Subcommittee T1E1 has now completed the first "American National Standard [for] Spectrum Management for Loop Transmission Systems." It was approved by ANSI as T1.417 on January 1, 2001 and is available at www.atis.org.. Standards for in-line filters (for splitterless DSL) and network end splitters will be balloted by Committee T1 in June. VDSL standards have been targeted for default letter ballot in August. An effort on Dynamic Spectrum Management (DSM) has begun.. There will be joint work between T1E1.4 and TR41.9 on "Administrative Council on Terminal Attachments" (ACTA) Part 68 issues. T1E1.94 will be responsible for developing a recommendation on the installation of ADSL splitters in homes having alarms or security systems (a call for contributions has been made). There will be joint work to identify appropriate sections of T1.417 "Spectrum Management" for inclusion in a future issue of TIA-968. T1E1.4 continues work on Issue 2 of T1.417, with discussions and contributions being focused on the spectral compatibility of central office based DSL with remote terminal based DSLs and repeaters. T1E1.4 hopes to have a draft "Issue 2" out for letter ballot in the fourth quarter of 2001. The format (i.e. delta document, addendum, or a completely new version) for Issue 2 is not yet clear; however, any changes will be normative.
Mr. Eckert next discussed the plans of his Focus Group. He said that at least one new recommendation and at least one white paper are targeted for presentation at the October NRIC meeting. The recommendation will cover spectrum management information exchanges among equipment manufacturers, loop owners and service providers. In August, 2000, the Focus Group had put forward four recommendations. Events since the last meeting have been relevant to the development of two of these recommendations. Recommendation 1, covering "New Technology - Frequency Planning," has been revised to the original recommendation approved in February, 2001. In connection with this, Mr. Eckert noted that the means of "FCC Endorsement" of Band Plan 998 is still unclear. With regard to recommendation 2, "Ingress/Egress Issues - In-Premises Wireline Transmitters," Mr. Eckert said the ITU-T is developing technical requirements for an isolation device. It is presumed that such technical requirements would be adopted by a US standards development organization. He said he would report further on this at the next NRIC meeting. With regard to recommendation 3, "Equipment Registration - Application of Part 68 to xDSL TU-R," formation of ACTA is moving forward under ATIS and the TIA. The first meeting was May 2, 2001. Work towards moving "Part 68 Technical Requirements" to "ANSI 68" has started in TIA TR41. Committee T1E1 will provide advice on this and further updates to the proposed "ANSI TIA-968." Recommendation 4, "Intermediate TU Issues," has been shown to have priority in T1E1 by the fact that nearly all of the contributions towards T1.417 Issue 2 are intended to help bring resolution to this issue.
Mr. Eckert said that no further progress had been made on recommendation 5, "Line Sharing Test Access." With respect to recommendation 6, "Intermediate TU Issues - Remote DSL," a new recommendation had been developed by the Focus Group and it was partially approved by the Council in February. One part of the originally proposed recommendation was remanded to the Focus Group for further consideration, since no consensus on the language for this aspect of the recommendation could be attained. It was agreed that a white paper would be produced instead. This paper is in development and will describe, in a factual way, the many complexities of Remote DSL deployment. It is not intended to provide conclusions or recommendations.
Mr. Eckert next discussed some problems with participation in Focus Group 3. He said that, on May 8, 2001, service providers Covad, Rhythms and WorldCom sent a letter to NRIC Chairman James Crowe and NRIC Designated Federal Officer Kent Nilsson, stating that Covad, Rhythms and WorldCom will not continue to participate in Focus Group 3. Mr. Eckert said that, nevertheless, Focus Group 3 is committed to its mission and will continue to provide the industry and the FCC with information on wireline network spectral integrity that will promote deployment of advanced services in a competitive environment. Focus Group 3, with the support of the FCC Common Carrier Bureau, which attends its deliberations, respectfully requests that Covad, Rhythms and WorldCom reconsider their action to withdraw their participation. The Focus Group stands ready, as always, to institute changes to promulgate the renewed participation by these service providers and looks forward to Covad, Rhythms and WorldCom contributions to the development of the White Paper on Remote DSL as well as further recommendations.
Finally, Mr. Eckert thanked FCC staff Young Carleson, Paul Marrongoni and Kent Nilsson for their contributions to the work of Focus Group 3. He also thanked the Focus Group's meeting hosts, Catena Networks and Paradyne. He asked if there were any questions. There were none.
Chairman Crowe thanked him for his work which, he said, was especially difficult since it involved an intersection of technology and competition that brought very different perspectives to their work. But the essence of the Council is to provide a forum for varying points of view. He said he would try to get WorldCom, Covad and Rhythms to renew their participation. He next introduced Ross Callon to present the efforts of Focus Group 4.
Mr. Callon said the purpose of Focus Group 4 is to provide recommendations to the Council that, when implemented, will facilitate and assure interoperability of public data networks. The duties of the Focus Group 4 are to prepare studies, reports, and recommendations for assuring data network interoperability within the parameters set forth in the NRIC V Charter. Focus Group 4 will determine what levels of interoperability are needed. Focus Group 4 will also monitor future developments to ensure that interoperability is not at risk. Focus Group 4 will make recommendations with respect to interoperability issues that may arise from convergence and digital packet networks. Focus Group 4 may also make recommendations with respect to such additional interoperability issues as the Commission may specify.
Mr. Callon said the group has broad membership but is heavy on Internet service providers and people familiar with the Internet Engineering Task Force. The focus group had three meetings to date. These were on December 7, 2000 (hosted by Genuity, in Burlington, Massachusetts), on March 7, 2001 (hosted by the FCC), and on May 23, 2001 (hosted by
Mr. Callon said the statement urging publication of peering criteria was issued with a cover letter from Chairman Crowe. The statement reads:
Mr. Callon asked if the proposed statement could be addressed by the Council now or at the end of the meeting. Chairman Crowe said he would prefer to wait to the end of the presentation.
Mr. Callon then began discussing the Focus Group's work on its white paper. He said the paper would provide background for discussions of interconnection issues. A draft outline had been sent to the focus group prior to their last meeting. The outline was discussed and edited in detail at the last Focus Group 4 meeting. Some draft text had been written. Multiple participants have volunteered to produce additional text. The next step will be to assemble the draft text prior to the next meeting and to discuss and edit the text in detail. The outline itself includes an introduction and background section, sections on the quality of interconnection and related issues, and concludes with references and an appendix with an example of peering guidelines.
Mr. Callon next dicussed Focus Group 4's efforts to coordinate its work with that of Focus Group 2.A.2. Focus Group 2.A.2 has produced best practices for reliability in data networks. Karl Rauscher, Chair of Focus Group 2.A.2, had given a general overview to Focus Group 4 in March. Focus Group 4 went through the best practices one-by-one at its meeting in May. Results have been drafted and distributed to Focus Group 4, and updated based on the comments received. The next step will be to transmit that document to the Focus Group.
Focus Group 4 has had two discussions on testing. The first was a presentation by D. Currie, R. Parker, and R. Neumann, at the March meeting. Thereafter, the Focus Group had a general discussion at its May meeting, There is strong agreement among the Focus Group members on the importance of testing. The Focus Group believes there are many valid forms of testing among the many organizations involved in testing (including vendors and service providers). The Focus Group is reluctant to endorse any particular test group. Focus Group 4 will produce a short statement summarizing its conclusions to date. This will be discussed at the next Focus Group 4 meeting.
Mr. Callon said the dates of the next meetings of the Focus Group would be July 24 in San Jose, California (hosted by Cisco); a date in September, not yet determined, in Boston; and a date in November or early December in Washington, DC. The group's next steps would be to continue to encourage participation, to publish a short statement on peering criteria, to continue progress on the interconnection white paper to be completed in October, to coordinate with other Focus Groups as appropriate, to issue a short statement on testing, and to consider the need for longer term efforts in this area. Mr. Callon then concluded his presentation.
Chairman Crowe asked if there were any questions. There were none. The Chairman thanked Mr. Callon. He summarized the proposal introduced by Mr. Callon. He pointed out the importance of interconnection as an issue for both the industry and the FCC. He emphasized the importance of taking the step of adopting the proposal. He asked the members if any of them was uncomfortable with proceeding now. P. J. Aduskevicz expressed concern on behalf of AT&T. The Chairman then proposed that if anyone wanted to vote against adopting the proposal that they should let him know within three weeks, after which he would announce the results. The Chairman's motion to complete the balloting in that way was passed unanimously.
Chairman Crowe reminded the members that the next NRIC meetings have been scheduled for October 30, 2001 and January 4, 2002. He reminded the members to meet their economic contribution obligations so that the proposed studies can be carried out. He then asked if there were any other matters for discussion. Rick Harrison said that it was the tenth anniversary of the rolling SS7 outages that brought about the creation of the Council. Chairman Crowe then reviewed the deliverables of the groups that had just made their presentations. He said Focus Groups 2A would give a report on the use of best practices at the October 30 meeting. Focus Group 2.B.1 would report on the status of the voluntary outage reporting trial at the same meeting. Focus Group 2.B.2 would report on the criteria for reporting disruptions of packet networks. Focus Group 3 would report on the cataloguing process discussed and on their participation problems. Focus Group 4 would give an update on the white paper discussed at the meeting. On January 4, Focus Group 2.B.1 would provide recommendations for voluntary reporting for non-wireline carriers and, contingent on the funding, there would be a report on the power study.
A member asked for a breakdown on the funding issue. Chairman Crowe said he would send an accounting out to each of the Council members in the next few days. The member asked if the same level of funding would be asked of all members regardless of their ability to pay. Chairman Crowe said that was the initial request. A member asked if the meeting dates of the Council overlapped the charter. Kent Nilsson said they did not, since the termination date of the Council's charter is January 6, 2002.
Chairman Crowe said the Council had gotten a lot of work done and had touched on matters that go to the heart of what the Council is all about. He said the voluntary discussion and publication of matters having to do with interconnection was extremely important. He said progress was slowed by the mixture of technology and competition, which made participation essential. He thanked the members for their participation. Kent Nilsson thanked the members and the focus groups for their diligence and adjourned the meeting.