Building A Better Interconnect Gateway: The Clearinghouse Approach

By Lisa Phifer
Core Competence, Inc.

Competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs) require access to incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) operations support systems (OSSs) to support pre-order inquiry, service ordering, provisioning, trouble administration, and billing transactions.  Manual, fax-based requests are time-consuming and error prone. Automated "interconnect gateways" improve operational efficiency and thus competitiveness and profitability.

But, as I wrote in my February column, there's still a catch: Like the tower of Babel, where every worker spoke a different tongue, each ILEC provides a unique set of OSS interfaces.  Any CLEC rolling out service on a national level must become multi-lingual, with  systems that connect to all the ILECs’ interfaces -- and fast.  CLECs must build point-to-point gateways that connect their own OSSs with as many as seven ILECs and dozens of ILEC systems.

There must be a better solution.  Instantaneous, national conversion to single universal "OSS interconnect" language isn't likely.  But how about the next best thing: a universal translator?  This is precisely the approach taken by Exchange Link, an interconnect clearinghouse service operated jointly by Telcordia and GE Information Systems.

Successful Interconnection

Let's look at an example transaction to understand the capabilities that Exchange Link or any other clearinghouse must provide for successful interconnection.  Here, we illustrate service order processing, but the transaction could just as easily involve pre-order inquiry, a trouble report, or billing request.  In fact, information obtained during pre-order is required to complete any service order.

A CLEC OSS creates a service order and represents it in electronic format -- for example, a format that complies with Local Service Order Guidelines (LSOG).  The order is conveyed to the clearinghouse gateway over some type of protocol -- for example, using electronic data interchange (EDI) or Flexible Computer Interface Format (FCIF) over TCP.

Upon receipt, the incoming request is acknowledged, timestamped, and captured in a database.  A workflow manager shepherds the request, routing it to the appropriate processes and maintaining an audit log that tracks progress.  The request must be syntax-checked and the data it contains must be validated against format guidelines.  The request must also be syntactically and semantically evaluated against the destination ILEC's business rules -- the rules that define what requests can be received, when, and what they must contain.

Order data is translated to the format required by the ILEC -- for example, convert LSOG 3 to LSOG 1+ -- and the request is forwarded over the appropriate protocol to the ILEC OSS.  ILEC responses take the reverse route; there may be several messages associated with the same CLEC request.  While the request is in progress, the workflow manager must monitor status and notify both the CLEC and ILEC if a transaction timeout occurs, indicating that rules regarding response time have not been met.  The clearinghouse must also support transaction status and reporting queries from either party, and must maintain a fail-safe, non-repudiable log of all transactions, including performance measurements.

It goes without saying that the clearinghouse must be robust, protect against transaction fallout, and able to withstand surges in activity.  It must also adapt quickly to new protocols and data formats.  And perhaps the most difficult challenge: it must accept and enforce new business rules and changes to thousands of existing rules.

Why Use A Clearinghouse?

A point-to-point interconnect gateway must provide many of the same capabilities, but on a more limited scale.  In a sense, point-to-point gateways are easier -- the formats, protocols, and business rules required to interface with a single ILEC can be "hard coded" by the CLEC's gateway.  But this approach is not as flexible, and may not be easily adapted to changing business rules and technologies.  Building a point-to-point gateway also requires investment in software development and maintenance, multiplied as the CLEC expands into new incumbent serving areas.

A clearinghouse approach in effect outsources the interconnect gateway problem.  Instead of building point-to-point gateways to interface with each ILEC, the CLEC builds a single gateway to the clearinghouse.  CLEC time-to-market should improve, and development, operations, and maintenance costs should decrease.

The flip side is that, for a clearinghouse to be truly successful, every ILEC must use it.  A CLEC must be able to reach all ILEC OSSs through the clearinghouse.  And the clearinghouse must be able to support the very high demands placed on it as CLEC usage grows.

The First Clearinghouse: Exchange Link

Telcordia (formerly Bellcore) and GE announced their intent to deploy a national interconnect clearinghouse service for telecommunications providers one year ago, in March 1999.  At the time, Telcordia's Mike Kret said, "The Telcordia/GE service provides a solution that builds on existing technologies, allows for differences in trading agreements and is transparent to customers, retailers and wholesalers." 

Initially, Exchange Link has focused on pre-order and local service request transactions, automating the two processes that are the most essential to rapid service deployment -- and perhaps the most error-prone.  By allowing CLECs to retrieve customer service records, validate addresses, and reserve telephone numbers during pre-order, Telcordia and GE hope to significantly reduce service order fallout and the need for human intervention.  Initial trials by Sprint and four trading partners were conducted during 1999.

Last month, one year after Exchange Link was first announced, NorthPoint Communications became the first CLEC to announce successful deployment with Exchange Link.  According to Mike Parks, chief information officer of NorthPoint Communications, "NorthPoint is using Telcordia's Exchange Link to connect our back-office to the ILECs for automated, flow-through exchange of order information.  We chose Telcordia because their solution gives us more interconnections to the ILECs and because of their superior track record of working with ILECs. We've already completed successful tests of the system with Pac Bell and GTE.  By May, we'll be live with four ILECs and before the end of the summer we should be up with seven."  According to Telcordia's Kret, "By supporting high-volume ordering, Telcordia Exchange Link accelerates NorthPoint's aggressive expansion into the consumer broadband market."

Exchange Link is just one piece of NorthPoint's new service delivery and support system, OSS2000.  Integrated by PriceWaterhouseCooper, OSS2000 will include supporting technologies from Vitria, MetaSolv, Siebel, Syndesis, Portal, and Telcordia/GE. 

"By implementing Telcordia -- and with the implementation of our new industry-leading OSS system -- NorthPoint will streamline the ordering and provisioning process and support high order volumes," said Parks.  "Because we're the first and only CLEC to deploy Telcordia this will give us a short-term advantage over the competition.  But everybody can, and should, be doing this.  The demand for broadband services is growing so rapidly, that flow-through ordering will become a de-facto standard."

Parting Thoughts

The clearinghouse approach holds both great promise and challenge.  Exchange Link is just getting started, and has a difficult row to hoe.  But, if Exchange Link proves successful, other software solutions providers may seek to leverage the clearinghouse approach.  Regional CLECs should keep a watchful eye on Exchange Link.  CLECs doing business in more than one region are the most likely to benefit from becoming an early adopter.

Lisa (lisa@corecom.com) is vice president of Core Competence, a network consulting firm located in Chester Springs, PA.  She has been involved in OSS design and development for local and inter-exchange carriers for nearly a decade.