• Agenda
• Minutes of Meeting

Agenda

1. Introduction

2. Minutes of previous meeting

3. 2001 Annual Audit Report

4. Review of Corporate Numbering and use of the 05 Number range

5.. PRS Numbering

6. Tariff structure for 08 Special Service numbers

7. Beyond the Numbering Conventions - the regulation of numbering from July 2003

8. Bedford - 01234 567890

9. Any Other Business

Oftel Panel Members
Peter Walker (PW) - Director of Technology- Chairman of the meeting
Ray Thornton (RT) - Numbering Unit Manager
Nicholas Good (NG) - Numbering Allocations Manager
Elizabeth Greenberg (EG) - Policy Adviser
Gavin Daykin (GD) - Policy Adviser
Christine Thompson (CT) - Numbering Adviser
Maura Crawford - Secretary

Agenda Item 1 - Introduction

1.1 PW welcomed the attendees - representing operators, telecom users, consumer groups and consumers. The Numbering Forum is open to anyone who has an interest in numbering issues.

Agenda Item 2 - Minutes of Previous Meeting

2.1 The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed.

Agenda Item 3 - 2001 Annual Audit

3.1 CT gave a presentation on the 2001 Annual Numbering Audit. She explained that the Annual audit was a requirement of the Numbering Conventions. CT emphasised that operators who were sent an audit were obliged to complete and return it to Oftel Numbering Unit by 31 January 2002. She highlighted that responses to the 2001 Audit had been very slow, many being received well after this deadline date. Those operators, who had not returned their audit at all, would be mentioned in the next Numbering Bulletin - published shortly after the Numbering Forum.

3.2 CT then compared information requested in the 2001 Audit to that in previous years Audits. She emphasised that by concentrating specifically on areas of concern, the Audit had become less burdensome for operators to complete.

3.3 CT indicated that following the 2001 Audit, Oftel had managed to recover valuable numbering capacity in Geographic Conservation areas and Premium Rate Service ranges, both of which had increased the pool of available capacity in those areas. CT concluded that Oftel would be looking into a way of providing Numbering Audits electronically in the future to make them easier for operators to complete and return on time.

Agenda Item 4 - Review of Corporate Numbering and use of the 05 number range

4.1 EG gave a presentation on corporate numbering and the use of the 05 number range, which covered the background and current position of 05, Voice over IP (VoIP) as well as the forthcoming consultation document.

4.2 An attendee asked if 05 had already been classified as non-geographic numbering, and added that if it had, why was Oftel suggesting that 05 numbers could have geographic significance. PW confirmed that the 05 range was non-geographic, but that businesses could impose a geographic structure within the arrangements of their number block(s).

4.3 In response to EG's discussion on VoIP, an attendee argued that VoIP should not be seen as a driver for the corporate numbering range, particularly as VoIP services could be offered on other number ranges. It was also stated that VoIP and ENUM services did not require a specific number range. PW responded that operators, who had been allocated 05 ranges already, particularly wanted the numbers for VoIP/multimedia services for corporate customers. However, the issue of VoIP and 05 numbering would be addressed in the consultation document and it was hoped that many interested parties would respond.

4.4 An attendee stated that consumers were familiar with 0500 numbers being used for Freephone and may be confused by different tariffs in the 05 range. PW stated that there were no plans to migrate existing 0500 Freephone numbers and that the consultation would pose questions regarding the retail price of calls to corporate numbers.

4.5 The presentation explained that it was proposed initially,that blocks of 05 numbers would be allocated to operators for sub-allocation to businesses. Following the implementation of the Authorisation Directive, it might be possible to allocate numbers direct to businesses, who would then need to nominate a service providing operator for each 10,000 number block. An attendee asked why corporate numbers could not be allocated direct to businesses and when they could, why businesses needed to be tied to particular operators. PW explained that under the current licensing regime, number blocks could only be allocated to those who have a public network. Once the Communications Bill was in place, numbers could be allocated to businesses, however, in order to route on the public network, specific operators would need to be nominated in order for the calls to be routed.

4.6 An attendee asked how Oftel had quantified the market demand for corporate numbering. In response, PW stated that many 05 ranges had already been allocated or reserved to operators and Oftel had received expressions of interest from potential users and support from the Large Business User Panel (LBUP). In addition, the Consumer Marketing Association had supported the idea of corporate numbers for many years.

4.7 Oftel was asked how it planned to open the 05 number range. EG stated that, in line with other number ranges, sub-ranges would be opened up according to demand.

4.8 An operator, that had been allocated 05 number blocks for a planned multimedia service, emphasised that it had not requested a 05 range for its service. Oftel was asked what plans had been made for migration of the 05 numbers if, following the conclusion of the consultation, the 05 range was not designated for corporate numbering. PW stated that Oftel had not made plans for migration and such discussion would be pre-empting the statement, which would be published after the conclusion of the consultation.

4.9 In response to a question on the minimum block size for allocation, it was confirmed that due to the constraints imposed by block routing, numbers would be allocated in multiples of 10,000 numbers. However, block size allocation would be addressed in the consultation document.

4.10 An attendee asked how, in situations involving mobility, calls to emergency services would be directed to the appropriate emergency authority. PW stated that businesses may choose to display the 05 number as a presentation number, with the network number being set as the network ingress point. With this procedure in place, any mobile IP originated call would at least be identified by the geographic ingress to the PSTN, and assuming that this identified the office location, a geographic location for the call would be identified to the emergency services.

Agenda Item 5 - PRS Numbering

5.1 GD gave a presentation about a review of Premium Rate Services ("PRS") numbering arrangements that Oftel was currently undertaking. GD indicated that Oftel intended to consult with key stakeholders in the Autumn.

5.2 GD reported that Oftel had already commissioned consumer research which explored PRS calling behaviour with the aim of providing greater understanding about the degree to which consumers derived significant benefit from the current numbering structure and associated sub-structure. The preliminary results showed that, overall, number prefixes were not currently used to aid decision-making, and that consumer understanding of the current structure was very limited - although preferred to other potential options. In particular, the sub-structure within '090' number ranges was seen as complicated, and consumers believed that it would be helpful to have separate codes for different price points. Moreover, the '090' content and '091' non-content split was poorly understood, and appeared to serve little benefit. In terms of future development, the biggest issue concerned the breadth of potential call costs within the '09' number range.

5.3 The issue of PRS migrating to '087' numbers was raised, and it was felt that this development diminished the ability of consumers to derive cost and service information through the prefix structure, as well as compromising the effectiveness of call barring facilities. GD explained that the only mechanism for defining '08' services was through price, and so long as services that appeared on this range were in accordance with the tariff structure detailed in the Numbering Conventions, this development did not contravene existing numbering policy.

5.4 One attendee queried the current utilisation of premium rate number ranges. RT commented that prefixes were currently being heavily used, but that actual number usage remained low. Also, PW stated that operators were asked to tariff at the 10k level but this was not supported by the Operators.

Agenda Item 6- Tariff structure for 08 Special Service numbers

6.1 EG gave a presentation on the designation of 08 special service numbers with emphasis on improving the information inherent in the sub-structure for the benefit of the consumer.

6.2 The presentation showed that possibly only BT aligned its geographic and non-geographic local and national rates and that the use of the terms could be misleading consumers over the actual cost of a call. It was pointed out by one attendee that this was only true if comparing BT's headline tariffs without the application of discounts and that for most consumers the cost of BT's calls were also not alighted.

6.3 It was suggested that the difference between geographic and non-geographic local and national rate tariffs was caused by anomalies in interconnect rates and Oftel could possibly address this apparent imbalance.

6.4 An attendee asked if was Oftel's intention to re-designate the local and national rate non-geographic ranges to give an indication of maximum tariff, rather than link the designation to the geographic market. Oftel confirmed that this would be suggested in the forthcoming consultation.

6.5 An attendee asked whether a fixed tariff structure would apply to all operators, including mobiles, and was informed that observance of tariff structure was one of the points that would probably be addressed in the consultation. It was pointed out that mobile operators charged for Freephone calls, although they did inform their customers of the charge and provide a means of cancelling the call without cost.

6.6 An attendee suggested that Oftel should make fixed line operators inform customers if they proposed to charge above the recognised tariff for a call.

6.7 It was pointed out that the proposed consultations on the structure of the 08 and 09 number ranges shared similarities and it would be sensible to co-ordinate their publication. Oftel agreed to consider co-ordinating the documents' publication.

Agenda Item 7 - Beyond the Numbering Conventions - the regulation of numbering from July 2003

7.1 NG gave a presentation on what the future held for the regulation of numbering once the Communications Bill is introduced in summer 2003.

7.2 Following the presentation PW reiterated that there would be no changes to policy during the transition to the new regime - any changes would be made beforehand. He explained that the Bill is drafted in general terms and does not mention specific codes and number ranges

7.3 An attendee stated that the definition of numbering would need reviewing as it currently mainly included numbering not administered by Oftel such as IP numbering and addressing, DNS domains. PW replied that the new Bill would include all current numbering and codes administered by Oftel (ie, it is wider than the numbering currently covered by the Numbering Conventions).

7.4 An attendee asked if Charging for numbers was in the Bill. PW stated that this was provided for but the detail would be a matter for the OFCOM Board.

Agenda Item 8 - Bedford - 01234 567890

8.1 RT gave an overview of the 'golden' Bedford number. He stated that it had been protected for some time because the Numbering Advisory Group (NAG) had advised Oftel to Protect the block as any company allocated it would be at a competitive advantage. He added that an organisation in Bedford has approached Oftel for the number.

8.2 RT indicated that Oftel was proposing to unprotect the block 1234 56 to make it available to operators to apply for on behalf on customers.

8.3 There was a mixture of views as to whether the block should be made available or continue to be protected. Oftel's decision would be published in the next Numbering Bulletin.


Agenda Item 9 - Any Other Business

9.1 Access Codes for the Deaf
9.1.1 An attendee raised the issue that the Telecommunication Action Group for the Deaf (TAGD) required an additional access code for a service for the deaf with a one stage call set-up. PW stated that Type A access codes 18001 to 18009 (inclusive) were designated for 'Voice Text Services for the Deaf'. He added that only codes 18000, 18001 and 18002 were currently in use. If further codes were required for specific services the TAGD should approach Oftel via one of the groups that dealt with disability issues.

9.2 Layout of London Area Code
9.2.1 An attendee raised the issue of potential problems of customer misdialling with incorrect number layout such as 020 (7) and 020 (8) for London. PW responded that a lot of work was done by the National Code Number Change (NCNC) project teams on number layout. Also, the Numbering Conventions showed suggested formats for number layout. However, he added that, as Oftel did not regulate number layout, it was up to the industry to encourage accurate number presentation amongst users.

9.3 Individual Number Allocation (INA)
9.3.1 Geoff Morgan informed the Forum that due to his retirement, Alan Pridmore would continue with the INA project.

[Click here to return to 'Numbering Forum' page]