PDF of this tutorialThe costs and effort involved for a carrier to deploy the entire infrastructure necessary to tie number portability elements together can prove prohibitive. As NP has progressed, the industry has seen the development of a variety of deployment options, ranging from a full self-deployment to outsourcing the entire process. Before deciding on an approach, each carrier should evaluate not only the costs associated with implementation and ongoing operation of the system as well as flexibility, time to market, technical expertise, and internal resources. Both wireline and wireless carriers must closely examine and compare their own needs, capabilities, and intentions to determine how best to deploy and manage LNP.
“N-1” Call Routing Responsibilities
The FCC adopted NANC’s recommendation that the carrier in the call routing process immediately preceding the terminating carrier, designated the “N-1” carrier, be responsible for ensuring the database queries are performed. If that designated “N-1” carrier in the call path has no NPDB system and has not made arrangements with another NPDB provider, the call will proceed to the original switch network without a lookup. The terminating network upon determining that a query has not previously been done will route automatically a query to its own NP database. The terminating network is then authorized to charge the “N-1” carrier for the database query. While passing the responsibility to another carrier is the least complicated option for a carrier, it tends to be expensive on a per-query basis and may not be the most cost-effective, particularly as more exchanges are marked as portable. This deployment strategy only addresses call completion to ported numbers.
Interconnection Contract
Some large carriers, usually BOCs, may offer full-service NP data access, switch, and transport. The originating carrier may contract for these services through the regional provider, enabling NP database queries into that BOC’s database. This has similar results to dropping unqueried messages into a network but with a formalized agreement and generally lower per-query costs. A national provider utilizing this method will require negotiating and maintaining numerous interconnection agreements. This deployment strategy typically only addresses call completion to ported numbers.
Full Self-Deployment
Full self-deployment of a comprehensive number portability system involves the ownership, administration, and management of all of the network elements, interfaces, and processes described in the LNP Architecture and Processes section. Full self-deployment allows the carrier to control all of its elements and processes but introduces such challenges as updating, maintaining, and upgrading the software and hardware, in addition to regression testing as necessary and when required by industry standards. NP creates an environment in which service providers must keep up with their own enhancements but also have to keep elements current with NPAC release upgrades and change orders. Carriers may want to determine which criteria are important in each business environment and evaluate the option against alternatives available.
Partial Service Bureau
An alternative to full self-deployment includes partial connection to a service bureau, which will relieve carriers of some responsibility and expense as they gear up toward a complete internal implementation. This recent development will allow a carrier to deploy one or more of its own network elements, most likely an STP and/or SCP, necessary for accessing routing data, and directly connect these elements to the service bureau’s LSMS system for some agreed upon cost. This arrangement provides a completely functional NP system for the carrier while at the same time enabling the carrier to retain control over more of its network elements and processes. Partial self-deployment requires less initial capital outlay and fewer ongoing resources from the carrier than full self-deployment. This option may prove cost-effective in high-volume environments.
Full Service Bureau
This is similar to interconnection contracting but is offered by an independent third-party provider. Outsourcing to a service bureau providing a SOA, LSMS, and/or NPDB platform allows carriers to share access to NP services and resources without incurring the initial capital outlay and ongoing effort of full or partial self-deployment. Spreading the infrastructure and human resources investment among multiple carrier customers enables the service bureau to offer attractive pricing. On a per-query basis, service bureau pricing tends to be less expensive than default routing and comparable to interconnection contracting. A full-service bureau with a nationwide footprint eliminates the need to negotiate arrangements with various regional providers. The service bureau typically assumes responsibilities for provisioning, maintenance, management, and administration as supported by the service and agreed upon between the two parties. Since the service bureau is a noncompeting carrier, the customer might be assured of receiving unbiased service and pricing.
