November 2020

Committee Reports

Click on a committee name below to display this month's issues.

• OBF: Ordering and Billing Forum
  • Issue: 3654
  • Title: Access Serice Ordering Guidelines (ASOG): Prohibited Special Characters
  • Statement: There is a need to identify special characters that should be prohibited for use within the ASOG.
  • Resolution: Addition of allowable special characters added to 000a clause 2.4.
  • Status: Initial Closure

  For more information, visit the OBF home page or contact Drew Greco.

• STEP: Sustainability in Telecom: Energy and Protection Committee
  • Issue: 0196
  • Title: Revision of ATIS-0600028.2016, DC Power Wire and Cable for Telecommunications Power Systems – for XLPE (Cross-Linked Polyethylene) High Heat-resistant Water-resistant (XHHW) and Diesel Locomotive (DLO)/Halogenated RHH-RHW Cable Types
  • Statement: Revision of ATIS-0600028.2016, DC Power Wire and Cable for Telecommunications Power Systems for XHHW and DLO/Halogenated Rubber insulated High-heat resistant (RHH) - Rubber insulated Heat-resistant Water-resistant (RHW) Cable Types to provide updates for modern products and terminology.
  • Resolution:
  • Status: New Issue

  • Issue: 0197
  • Title: Revision of ATIS-0600030.2016, Line Powering of Telecommunications Equipment on Outside Plant (OSP) Twisted Copper Pair Loops
  • Statement: Revision of ATIS-0600030.2016, Line Powering of Telecommunications Equipment on Outside Plant (OSP) Twisted Copper Pair Loops is needed to update testing requirements in accordance with revised reference standards and clarify the Scope.
  • Resolution:
  • Status: New Issue

  For more information, visit the STEP home page or contact Mignot Asefa.

• WTSC: Wireless Technologies and Systems Committee
  • Issue: 0087
  • Title: Report on WEA Vulnerability Mitigation
  • Statement: At the June 2019 MobiSys conference in Seoul, Korea, researchers from the University of Colorado presented a paper titled This is Your President Speaking: Spoofing Alerts in 4G LTE Networks. This paper proposed the first practical spoofing attack on Presidential Alerts, using both commercially available hardware as well as modified open source software. The paper also suggested that Fixing this problem will require a large collaborative effort between carriers, government stakeholders, and cell phone manufacturers. To seed this effort, we also discuss several defenses to address this threat in both the short and long term. The FCC is aware of the potential vulnerability as identified in this research, and as a result of a recent workshop on this topic, is looking to the industry to provide information on steps to address this threat.
  • Resolution: This Issue was resolved with the publication of ATIS-0700046, ATIS Report on Mitigating Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) False Base Station Attacks.
  • Status: Final Closure

  • Issue: 0092
  • Title: Wireless Operator Best Practices for WEA 3.0 Geotargeting
  • Statement: It has been reported recently by Alert Originators (AOs) that some mobiles well outside the alert area are receiving WEA alerts. It has also been reported that some mobiles within the alert area are not receiving WEA alerts. These experiences are not new and have occurred since WEA 1.0 deployment. With the deployment of WEA 3.0, the expectations of AOs are higher than ever for being able to alert in a more exacting manner. The AOs have also indicated a desire for network-based geotargeting uniformity among wireless operators to the extent possible. Since cellular coverage is highly dependent on cell site topology and RF propagation, the cell/sector coverage boundaries will not match the alert area boundaries. This means that selection algorithms to determine the broadcast area will either leave broadcast gaps in the alert area or overshoot the alert area in some cases in order to eliminate broadcast gaps. The latter case may include the need to use cell sites at a distance outside the boundaries of the alert area. WEA 2.0 requires presentation to all mobiles within the best approximation of the alert area. As WEA 2.0 mobiles that receive the alert will also present it, unless prevented by user settings, the broadcast area determined by the network selection of cell/sectors roughly equates to the area within which the mobiles will present the alert. WEA 3.0 requires presentation to all mobiles in 100% of the alert area, with the allowance of 0.1 miles overshoot. This allows for the network to choose cells/sectors ensuring 100% of the alert area is covered. The coverage of some selected cell/sectors will go beyond the alert area boundaries in the attempt to ensure 100% coverage; however, WEA 3.0 mobiles receiving the broadcast would check their location before presenting the alert. Under these same circumstances, however, WEA 2.0 mobiles would present the alert without checking their location. This may result in overshooting well beyond 0.1 mile. There is a mixture in the field of WEA 2.0 and WEA 3.0 cell/sector selection algorithms, and a mixture of mobiles with WEA 1.0, WEA 2.0 and WEA 3.0 capabilities. It will likely take years before the market approaches a very high percentage (>90%) penetration of mobile devices that support WEA 3.0, meaning that well have a large number of mobile devices behaving differently for some time. ATIS has been asked to take a closer look at the inconsistencies occurring in the field to determine what steps, if any, may be taken to bring more uniformity to the field results.
  • Resolution: This issue was resolved with the publication of ATIS-0700047, ATIS WTSC White Paper on the Impacts of Cell Selection for WEA Geo-Targeting.
  • Status: Final Closure

  For more information, visit the WTSC home page or contact Anna Karditzas.

Definitions

• New Issue: Business, operational, or technical needs that a committee has reached consensus to address.
• Issue in Initial Closure: Issues for which a committee has reached consensus on a proposed resolution. The industry has a 21 calendar day period to review and comment on the consensus resolution developed by the committee. The committee's consensus resolution concludes its work on an issue unless new or substantive information is brought forth. During the 21 day review period, comments on a consensus resolution may be provided to the committee contact and committee leaders.
• Issue in Initial Pending: Issues previously in Initial Closure for which new and substantive information impacting the consensus resolution has been received. An issue may also be in Initial Pending if output that may impact the consensus resolution is expected from another industry group, regulatory body or similar organization.
• Issue in Final Closure: Issues for which work is completed and the resolution accepted by the industry.

Recently Approved ATIS Standards

INC

• Document Number: ATIS-0300055(2020-11)
• Title: NPA Allocation Plan and Assignment Guidelines
• Type: Revision
• View Here
• Document Number: ATIS-0300119(2020-11)
• Title: Thousands-Block (NPA-NXX-X) & Central Office Code (NPA-NXX) Administration Guidelines (TBCOCAG)
• Type: Revision
• View Here

NGIIF

• Document Number: ATIS-0300010(2020-11)
• Title: NGIIF Reference Document Part II- Installation and Maintenance Responsibilities for Switched Access Services Feature Groups
• Type: Revision
• View Here
• Document Number: ATITS-0300008(2020-11)
• Title: Next Generation Interconnection Interoperability Forum (NGIIF) Reference Document
• Type: Revision
• View Here

PTSC

• Document Number: ATIS-1000092
• Title: Signature-based Handling of Asserted information using toKENs (SHAKEN): Delegate Certificates
• Type: New
• View Here
• Document Number: ATIS-1000093
• Title: ATIS Standard on Toll-Free Numbers in the SHAKEN Framework
• Type: New
• View Here

Recent Policy Filings

NGIIF

• Date: 11/03/2020
• Description: Ex Parte providing an update on the NGIIF call completion issues and progress.
• View filing