North American Portability Management, LLC LNPA Transition Contingency Rollback Industry Working Session January 16 th, 2018
Agenda Resubmission Aid Issue 2 Refinements and updated plan Decision Process Problem severity, rollback triggers, and communication Transaction Reports and Timeline Sample report availability and overall timeline Conclusion and Next Steps Q & A 2
About this meeting Welcome to today s presentation! Objectives Our goal today is to review the resubmission aid refinements and discuss the rollback decision process This is the fifth in a series of meetings to prepare for potential rollback following transition Facilitators Greg Chiasson Principal Chicago, IL William Reilly Director Florham Park, NJ Jonathan Turner Manager Washington, DC 3
Subject Matter Experts A number of subject matter experts are present today and will support the discussion Suzanne Addington NAPM Transition Team Sprint Inc. Teresa Patton NAPM Co-Chair & Transition Team AT&T Inc. Deborah Tucker NAPM Transition Team Verizon Inc. Paul Mazouat LNPA Transition Team iconectiv LLC John Malyar LNPA Transition Team iconectiv LLC Dave Gorton LNPA Transition Team iconectiv LLC Pat White LNPA Transition Team iconectiv LLC 4
Resubmission Aid Issue 2 5
Overview The resubmission aid has been just been updated to Issue 2 in response to industry feedback and further review Contingency Rollback Resubmission Aid 1. Introduction 1.1 Service Provider Readiness 1.2 Definitions 2. Resubmission Guidelines 2.1 Executive Summary 2.2 Gather Data 2.3 Identify Completed Ports 2.4 Prioritize Work 2.4.1 Network Data Requests 2.4.2 Port-Out Requests 2.4.3 Customer Service-Affecting Work 2.4.4 Soon To Be Customer Service Affecting Work 2.4.5 Other Port-in Requests 2.4.6 Self-Dependent Work 2.5 Schedule and Execute Resubmission of Work 3. Exception Situations 3.1 Ignore Certain Transactions 3.2 Combine Transactions 3.3 Other Transaction Resubmittal Exceptions 3.4 SOA Resubmittal Exceptions 3.5 NPAC Broadcast Exceptions 3.6 Bulk Data Download Files 4. Contingency Rollback Preparation 4.1 Rollback Testing Considerations 4.2 Pre-Transition Considerations A number of small updates and expanded descriptions have been added as clarifications in response to industry feedback All registered service providers should review Issue 2 and refine their transition and rollback planning accordingly 6
Resubmission Aid guidance Section 4.1 Testing Considerations contains the most changes. It describes a range of areas which Service Providers must evaluate when preparing for possible rollback: 1) Connectivity 2) iconectiv Transaction Reports 3) SP Internal Processes 4) Testing Facilities This section has been updated to further explain a) The connectivity testing required for mechanized providers b) Recommended service provider process validation c) Resources available for Service Provider testing Service Providers should validate their readiness for a potential rollback in the same manner that they prepare for the transition itself 7
Other considerations Number Pool Block Requests In the event of rollback, pooling work would be submitted to the Neustar helpdesk, not the PA Pooling requests may be expected to take longer to complete using the manual process BDD File Availability During a rollback, BDD files would reflect the state of the Neustar NPAC, not SP systems Until rollback resubmissions were completed, BDD files might be inaccurate or not available All providers should minimize discretionary pooling work around transition time to create a smooth transition and reduce rollback risks Users that rely on BDD files for daily operations should be aware that these may not be available until resubmission is complete 8
Decision Process 9
How would a rollback decision be made? Report iconectiv will report issue scope and impact The TOM will supplement iconectiv reports with additional industry feedback Assess iconectiv will analyze any failure, estimate the repair timeframe, and describe the planned mitigation actions A Transition Governance Team, or TGT, composed of NAPM experts, iconectiv executives, and the TOM, will evaluate the impact of continuing operations, the resolution timeframe, and the risks of conducting a rollback versus fixing in place Decide If a failure is critical* and it is in the industry s best interest to roll back, then all participants and relevant stakeholders will be notified In the event of significant issues, the TGT will also determine whether future Go-Live events will proceed as planned or be delayed *in accordance with the iconectiv MSA A failure would be considered critical only if it caused a loss of key functionality for all users in one or more regions and were not repairable in a reasonable period 10
What might trigger a rollback? Rollback would only be triggered by a catastrophic service outage which could not be fixed in a reasonable period Software failure Hardware or Connectivity failure Security-based failure Risk reduction Build to Federal NIST guidelines Third-party security audit 24x7 security monitoring and threat response Risk reduction High availability software architecture Exhaustive pre-transition testing Risk reduction Individual validation with each vendor Redundant data centers with failover / mechanized system (geographically remote) Development team on standby High availability architecture Disaster recovery and continuity testing The scale and complexity of NPAC services makes any type of rollback difficult preventing and mitigating catastrophic failure risk is core to the transition program design 11
Who is involved in making a rollback decision? Industry participants All participants in the regional transition will be informed, via regular reports on status, and should monitor their own systems for incidents and performance. Impacted participants will be consulted if an incident is reported Transition Governance Team (TGT) A Transition Governance Team will monitor the transition. This group will be responsible for making a determination that a failure is catastrophic and for the decision to rollback TGT composition NAPM LLC Project Executives NAPM LLC Transition Team Transition Oversight Manager iconectiv NPAC Executives 12
What challenges are expected? A rollback event would require extra effort from the industry Resubmission of transactions Resynchronization of systems Reconciliation of issues The greatest impact would fall upon high-volume, mechanized users Largest number of resubmissions SOA/LSMS resynchronization These challenges are recognized and have been evaluated by the NAPM, which has many members that would be among the most impacted by a rollback Industry-led rollback is the selected contingency rollback approach 13
Transaction Reports and Timeline 14
Transaction Reports Sample transaction reports will be provided on January 29 th to assist Service Providers with validating their rollback processes NPAC Extract Reports These reports will include a wide variety of transactions in support of resubmission use case testing and as a supplement to SP internal records Once available, iconectiv will send a notification email to the primary contact for each registered user, with step-by-step instructions for accessing the sample reports iconectiv servers Retrieve reports Prepare and post Service Providers Email Notice s If you do not receive the notification on January 29, please contact iconectiv using the npac@iconectiv.numberportability.com email address 15
Timeline 2017 2018 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN Industry Preparation Develop report specification Develop resubmission aid Industry review internal processes 18 Aug Report spec distributed 27 Nov Resubmission aid distributed 21 Aug 30 Jan Develop reports and distribution process 4 Oct 30 Jan Industry testing with sample reports 29 Jan 13 Mar Data Connectivity Testing 11 Feb 18 Mar Perform recommended rollback testing 29 Jan 13 Mar Today Ready mid-march 2018 Overall TOM/TT iconectiv Industry 16
Conclusion and Next Steps 17
Conclusions Today, we discussed the refinements to rollback resubmission reviewed the rollback decision process, and covered the upcoming release of the transaction specification logs We welcome your continued feedback and questions regarding any aspect of the industry-led contingency rollback option Next steps include Completing the schedule and preparations for user activation and connectivity testing Providing example transaction reports and testing the distribution process Users should review and the test internal processes which would be called upon in a rollback event 18
Discussion 19
Thank you for your participation