ETSI TC SMG#21 Tdoc SMG#21 25/ 97 Paris, France 10-14 February 1997 this paper relates to agenda item 6.1 SMG1/CAMEL Source: Mannesmann Mobilfunk Title: Scope of CAMEL Phase 2 Proposed agenda item: 6.4 Presented for: Decision 1 Introduction Current vendor specific implementations of the ETSI Core INAP (prets 00 74) offer a lot more functionality compared to what the CAP protocol will support in CAMEL phase 1. As a consequence, IN-services running based on the ETSI Core INAP can in general not be offered to roaming customers using CAMEL phase 1. This restriction with CAMEL phase 1 was tolerated for the sake of smooth completion of this first step towards a GSM/IN platform. The operator s motivation to introduce CAMEL phase 2 into their networks, however, depends very much on the fact whether the CAP protocol in phase 2 will offer as much functionality as will be needed to run the INservice already being in operation in a couple of networks. 2 Recommendation Current working assumption is that CAMEL phase 2 shall be completed about one year after completion of phase 1. Experience with CAMEL phase 1 tells that in such a time frame only a little can be accomplished, for what ever reasons. Consequently CAMEL phase 2 potentially would be by far below the operators expectation which would only give little incentive to care for implementation. Therefore we are in favour of longer release cycles of future CAMEL phases for the benefit of more functionality in order to minimise the risk of divergence between vendor specific IN solutions and the standard platform. For the reasons given we recommend to give SMG1 and SMG the necessary time to specify at least the scope of functionality that is currently on the consolidated list of features for CAMEL phase 2 (see enclosure). At recent SMG1 meeting the need for further clarification at GSM MoU side was identified as far as charging features are concerned. Meanwhile such activities have been started within a dedicated working group. AP: Since the work on CAMEL phase 2 has started, we believe that a feasible target date of CAMEL phase 2 with a feature rich scope is the 98 release of GSM specifications. SMG is invited to endorse this view. SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page 1 of 8
SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page 2 of 8
ETSI STC SMG1 TDoc SMG1 50/96 Bournemouth, UK revised TDoc SMG1 482/96 4-8 November 1996 Source: To: Subject: SMG1 SMG1 delegates, SMG10 and MoU SERG SMG for information CAMEL Phase 2 - functional requirements Note: This document is the result of the invitation for contributions to CAMEL Phase 2, the text on the background is repeated for your convenience. After successfully completion of CAMEL Phase 1 stage 1 SMG1 had some first consideration of the probable content of CAMEL Phase 2. Contributions to this meeting were summarised and one consolidated list for functional requirements was produced (see Annex A). The intention of this list is to give SMG some early indication on the expected scope of CAMEL Phase 2. It anticipated that CAMEL Phase 2 will not constitute the last phase of CAMEL. It was agreed that this list shall be used to form the stage 1 contents from the service requirement perspective. It was also confirmed that it is expected that CAMEL Phase 2 should be completed roughly one year after completion of Phase 1 which means early 1998 for the completion of the full set of specifications affected. SMG1 delegates were invited to apply a ranking of this new features, using a scheme from 1 to 4 (1 = very important, 4 = not important). First contributions related to the ranking of priorities were received at this SMG1 meeting. It has to be noted that ranking had to applied to service aspects, not to implementation aspects. For the purpose of harmonising the ranking the priority of functional requirements it is important to invite contributions from the following parties: additional views from delegates representing companies in SMG1 (manufactures and operators); views from operators not represented in ETSI SMG1, but being member of MoU/MoU SERG; views from security experts represented in SMG10 for ranking of functional requirements on security. This paper is the result of a first attempt to harmonise the ranking of functional requirements and is based on documented contributions of a number of operators and manufacturers. However, contributions from members of the GSM Association not being member of one of the respective SMG STC s may have to be reflected at a later date. SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page of 8
Annex 1: Consolidated list of proposals for CAMEL phase 2 The following is a consolidated list of proposals for a Feature List for CAMEL phase 2 based on the inputs to SMG1 meetings in Stuttgart and Bournemouth. The current timeframe is for the phase 2 CAMEL to be completed one year after the completion of phase 1; i.e. early 1998. Additional requirements should be fit into the appropriate place and ranked as well. CAMEL Feature Justification/Service Examples Priority (1=very important, 4=not important Assist Features Assist procedure to pass CAMEL processing to another supporting entity Support of external SRF for user dialogues or other applications The SRF is to be administered by the HPLMN User interaction (via the SRF function) Access to SRFs on another entity (e.g. in HPLMN) Access to facilities on another SSP HPLMN controlled in-band subscriber interaction using voice prompting and information collection HPLMN controlled announcements Summary: Desirable -> 1 Discussion Although CAMEL will provide a common platform some advanced functions may not be supported by all SSF s. of a multivendor environment. Therefore this function offers this flexibility. Summary: Desirable -> 1 This is one of the essential parts of CAMEL Phase 2. examples of above See Tdoc 447 In-call audio signal injection examples of above See Tdoc 447 Charging Features Before the ranking can be done in a sensible way the whole picture need to be more clear. Also InterOperatorTariffs may need to be separated from information to be put into call records for CAMEL users. The overall Philosophy needs to be studied. MoU BARG comment is invited. Tdoc 459 CSE controlled e-parameters Centralised control of AoC The variety of opinions needs some analysis.. Inclusion of larger fields in charging records More flexibility for HPLMN-specific billing information The variety of opinions needs some analysis. SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page 4 of 8
Application of charge limits by downloading of maximum call duration timers to MSC Alternative implementation of on line charging services and fraud control. May be more efficient and reliable then controlling duration at CSE. The variety of opinions needs some analysis. Actually the functional requirements should be stated rather than a specific method of implementation. New Call Related DPs Support for abandon, busy, no answer, Alignment with CS1 Call Hunting services Personal Number Summary: Desirable -> 1, DP "abandon" may need more analysis. More justification for the DP s are invited and criteria (as defined in CS-1) under what circumstances DP s are triggered should be elaborated (e.g. depending on bearer capabilities). "Abandon" is left in for commonality with CS1 for the time being. not reachable, route select failure Notification to CSE of handover Control of handover for non-radio reasons. CSE control of handover DP Control of handover for non-radio reasons. Mid-Call DP for user invocation of supplementary services On-line charging of supplementary service invocation. Control and monitoring of subscriber initiation of supplementary services. Summary: High interest -> 2. Further study is suggested. There were some arguments questioning whether the use of CAMEL with this DP is the right approach for fraud control measures. Further study is suggested. Non-call related DPs Notification to CSE on Attach/detach Personal Number "Intelligent" call routing Summary: High interest -> 2 CSE control of network processing of Attach/detach Notification to CSE on Location Update Monitoring of user location. Information services. Summary: High interest -> 2 CSE control of network processing of Location Update SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page 5 of 8
Notification to CSE on User initiated call independent supplementary service activities (registration, erasure, activation, deactivation and interrogation) CSE control of network processing of call independent supplementary service activities (registration, erasure, activation, deactivation and interrogation) Downloading thresholds on number of call independent supplementary service operations by a user. CSE processing of forwarded-to number on CF registration and/of interrogation. Notification to CSE on sending or receiving a Short Message Miscellaneous On-line charging of supplementary service operations. Control and monitoring of subscriber control of supplementary services. Management of interactions between GSM supplementary services and CAMEL services. Alternative implementation of fraud control. May be more efficient than notifying the CSE on each event. Support of short-number registration for GSM call forwarding. Summary: High interest -> 2 It was commented that this information is known at the HLR. Insofar the HLR could directly notify the CSE. On the other hand the CSE/HLR interface is not subject for standardisation yet. SMG1 is of the opinion that this interface should be standardised. Same as above. Siemens feels that there are some more suitable methods to offer the functionality requested in contrast to Vodafone, who recommends to use this feature for fraud control. Actually this solves the problems encountered in conjunction with PNP s. On-line charging of Short Messages Summary: For further study It was argued that some other methods for charging SMS are in place. USSD to and from CSE Out-of-band Subscriber interaction. Summary: High interest -> 2 This feature may improve substantially the possibility to run dialogues between a CSE application and the user, in particular in conjunction with USSD enhancements under progress. CSE initiated calls Per-call CSE suppression of GSM supplementary services (especially call forwarding) Information services. Wake-up calls Provision of charging information to subscriber. Management of interactions between GSM supplementary services and CAMEL services. Executive or operator override of call forwarding and call barring. Summary: For further study, a better description of the functionality needs to be provided. Summary: For further study Tdoc 477 It has to be clarified fro what network entity, at the home or visited network, the call triggered by the CSE shall be set-up. Further ideas were presented within Tdoc 447, highlighting VoiceMail applications. SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page 6 of 8
Transmission of the IMEI to the CSE CS-2 call party handling Compilation of statistics on mobile station usage, probably useful also to run CSE/MS dialogues based on type of MS the subscriber is using. Allows the IN node to establish new call legs in a flexible manner, remove parties from a call, control the cross connects between various parties.. Active Location information retrieval Gives the gsmscf and HLR the option of requesting the VMSC to page the subscriber to retrieve his/her location (e.g. cell ID) at that time, thereby ensuring that the information is accurate. This would be useful when the subscribers roaming to countries which have a long periodic update time set. Multiple SCF s Support for different alert s Download multiple SCF addresses, with a set of criteria for each one - e.g. contact gsmscf1 first, then contact gsmscf2 if called number = xxxx. Ability for the CSE to specify which ring tone it wants when it initiates a call. Summary: For further study See Tdoc 447 Summary: For further study, although it seems to be useful. See Tdoc 447 More studies are required in order to elaborate in a better manner the actual functional requirements. See Tdoc 447 See Tdoc 447 SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page 7 of 8
Annex 1 A small assessment group (Ericsson, Mannesmann Mobilfunk, Nortel, SIEMENS and Telia) have spend some ideas on which of the CAMEL phase 2 issues could be specified within the next year. As far as we are aware of, it is anticipated that CAMEL phase 2 shall be available ONE year after CAMEL phase 1. In addition, document 420 - the GSM roadmap - informs us, that CAMEL phase 2, should be approved at SMG2. Due to the time constrains, it shall be noted, that the assessment group is of the opinion that it is very likely to get the priority 1 issues and some charging issues specified in CAMEL phase 2. Regarding the charging, the complete picture must be clearer to make up the mind. As a conclusion it could be stated, that a balance between the content and quality of CAMEL phase 2 and the time delivery within release 97 has to be considered very carefully. SMG#21 (97-025.DOC) page 8 of 8