Billing World Standards Watch Local Number Portability Rises to the Top of the Billing Committees Agenda

In the world of LNP, carriers will no longer be able to rely on NPA-NXX to identify the service provider, say LNP billing experts. So, how will carriers verify bills for locally ported calls if the end user's telephone number will no longer identify the service provider? The Ordering and Billing Forum's (OBF) billing committee discussed this and other issues surrounding this new reality at length during their last meeting, in New Orleans in February 1996. These LNP billing issues are so complex and time-sensitive that the committee put them at the top of its list to solve during its next meeting, which will be at the end of April in Chicago. (The deadline for long-term LNP solutions to be up and running in Manhattan, Houston, Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and Minneapolis is Oct. 1, 1997, according to the regional LNP working groups.) Meanwhile, carriers hope to reach a consensus in developing a guideline for the "creation of verifiable bills in an LNP environment," according to billing committee minutes. But many obstacles exist.

The biggest LNP billing problem: Carriers cannot rely on traditional use of NPA-NXX to identify carriers for billing and bill verification. This is especially troublesome for carriers whose switches do not perform an LNP "dip" or query an LNP database automatically, which is the case with most non-SS7 switches. For example, CLEC A's switch may identify usage for a call ported to CLEC B as coming from the ILEC that owns and operates the tandem switch the call is passed through-that is, if the traffic was "dumped" for the LNP dip at the tandem switch instead of by CLEC B. In this scenario, the usage would appear on the wrong carrier's bill.

This is not just a problem for local carriers. On a long distance call, there can be a difference between the local switch recordings and the IXC recording for terminating traffic if the IXC's switch is not set up to make an LNP dip. Here, as in the other case, the call to be ported would be sent back to the tandem switch (operated by the ILEC) for the LNP query dip into the LNP database. Again, the billing records would not match, this time because the IXC's switch does not have the intelligence to record or identify the ported number-only the original number. To make matters more complex, in many cases even the ILEC's tandem switch being dumped on will not be able to identify which CLEC or IXC has done the dumping, explains Jill Blakely, LNP expert, Time Warner Communications.

In this new world of local competition, billing managers can no longer rely on the NPA-NXX for billing information or verification. So a ported call requires a cross- reference between the service provider of the ported call and the terminating company for billing and bill validation. "They need to be linked up, tied together somehow," Blakely says.

The local routing number (LRN) is under development to help solve this problem. The LRN, a six-digit number that identifies a specific rate district within a switch, will be assigned to a switch so a carrier can identify the owner of a call. The LRN allows the carrier to identify which switch the call originates from or terminates at-for billing purposes-so that access and rating (e.g., toll call rating) can be done. The committee also is discussing putting that LRN information in the local exchange routing guide (LERG) and the national exchange carrier association (NECA) tariff to tie the LRN to an NPA-NXX. Currently, NECA has company codes, end office codes and NPA-NXXs.

The problem, however, is to find some database or storage facility for the LRNs that can hold the entire 10 digits of the phone number, says one member. Consequently, NECA may not work, because it stores NPA-NXX, but does not currently store the line number-the last 4 digits of a phone number, says an LNP expert. Databases set up on a regional basis, such as the NPAC being set up in Illinois, could be used to cross-reference the original number with the ported number, thus making bill verification possible by region. Not all LNP billing and rating issues being grappled with are in an industry-wide forum or committee. Many other LPN issues are being dealt with on a region-by-region, state-by-state or company-by-company basis. At least seven different regional LNP teams currently are working on billing and rating issues. CLEC reps, however, apparently wish that all LNP issues could be addressed under one roof. Blakely and reps from AT&T local, MCI metro and other CLECs have asked the OBF leadership to help organize an industry-wide, nationwide meeting place so that the OBF could facilitate LNP work in one place.

Currently, Blakely and others representing new local competitors must travel to each of the seven RBOC regions to sit in on that region's LNP workshop. Most regions have a steering committee and a rating and billing committee. What they would like to see, Blakely says, is these state committees pooled together on an industry-wide basis so CLECs could address the same issue just once instead of several different times. Most states and regions are using the Illinois LNP specifications-which grew out of such a regional LNP working group-as a baseline. However, differences develop within each region because of differences in networks and company relationships within each region.

The Illinois specifications, for example, do not address or require generating a record at the terminating end office. In California, the LPN working group therefore decided to add this requirement to its "delta document" so CLECs could have this record to identify the originating company network for mutual compensation, says Blakely. The California LNP team developed the delta document as a type of addendum to list the differences between the California specs and the Illinois specs.

All the requirements worked up within the regional LNP work groups are sent to all switch vendors, so carriers can get the requirements in at the baseline level, says Blakely. "We are trying to get the switch to give us as much information as possible, so the information will flow through to our back office billing systems. We do not want to have to get this information at the back office billing system stage. Switches must be upgraded, a generic must be developed to facilitate long term LNP," says Blakely. (For more information on LNP, see Ed Bond's article in this Billing World.)

Other issues now on the billing committee's agenda include selecting a unique identifier for each industry segment, billing for frame relay, billing for unbundled switching elements and billing for unbundled network elements. Billing for local went to final closure at the OBF February meeting, as did the issue billing for IntraLATA intermediary traffic. "February brought out a lot of issues for discussion. I see April as more productive as far as nailing down solutions, especially for LNP," says Rose Cherry, billing committee representative from Sprint LDD. The next OBF meeting will be held the week of April 21 in Chicago.