Subject: [Modern] Question on draft-peterson-modern-problems-00: Actors

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:15:24 -0400

I have a question on one of the Actors enumerated in Section 2. Specifically, what is a Communication Service Provider? My read of the text is a CSP is anyone and everyone: "It also encompasses users who operate services on their own behalf.” This is more pronounced given the rationale for something new is “the user would have full control of their TN”.

The term “Communication Service Provider” never appears in the text other than in the Actors section. However, there is mention of a “privileged service provider.” Is that what a CSP is?

---

From: "Peterson, Jon" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:58:23 +0000

Under the model sketched here, a CSP is an entity who runs a
communications service which relies on TNs as identifiers. In this
document, that means a CSP could be pretty much anyone, yes, since I could
run my own SIP service if I wanted to - but I'm not a CSP, because
actually, I don't run my own SIP service at the moment. As is the case
today, more commonly SIP services are run by enterprises or carriers, say,
than by individuals, and thus the bulk of CSPs are entities like that.

And you will find the acronym "CSP" appears several times in the Framework
section, not only in the Actors section. If the use cases were anything
but stubs in this -00, you would see CSPs in there as well.

Today, in most jurisdictions I'd say, only certain service providers are
eligible to receive number allocations directly from national regulators
or their delegate authorities. That is what "privileged service providers"
means in that sentence. One of the points of the MODERN exercise is to
explore models where that restriction no longer applies.

Jon Peterson
Neustar, Inc.

On 3/24/15, 6:15 PM, "Eric Burger" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>I have a question on one of the Actors enumerated in Section 2.
>Specifically, what is a Communication Service Provider? My read of the
>text is a CSP is anyone and everyone: "It also encompasses users who
>operate services on their own behalf.² This is more pronounced given the
>rationale for something new is ³the user would have full control of their
>TN².
>
>The term ³Communication Service Provider² never appears in the text other
>than in the Actors section. However, there is mention of a ³privileged
>service provider.² Is that what a CSP is?
>

---

From: "Gorman, Pierce A [CTO]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:15:48 +0000

" One of the points of the MODERN exercise is to explore models where that restriction no longer applies."  Why?

I've noticed authorities which regulate limited, sometimes scarce, virtual resources get antsy when resources are wasted through profligate mismanagement.

It might be important to qualify a new-model CSP before giving them (an uncontrolled amount of?) resources.

Best regards,

Pierce Gorman
Voice Architecture
Core Planning/Sprint
913-439-4368 (Desk)

-----Original Message-----
From: Modern [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Peterson, Jon
Sent: March 25, 2015 10:58 AM
To: Eric Burger; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Modern] Question on draft-peterson-modern-problems-00: Actors

Under the model sketched here, a CSP is an entity who runs a communications service which relies on TNs as identifiers. In this document, that means a CSP could be pretty much anyone, yes, since I could run my own SIP service if I wanted to - but I'm not a CSP, because actually, I don't run my own SIP service at the moment. As is the case today, more commonly SIP services are run by enterprises or carriers, say, than by individuals, and thus the bulk of CSPs are entities like that.

And you will find the acronym "CSP" appears several times in the Framework section, not only in the Actors section. If the use cases were anything but stubs in this -00, you would see CSPs in there as well.

Today, in most jurisdictions I'd say, only certain service providers are eligible to receive number allocations directly from national regulators or their delegate authorities. That is what "privileged service providers"
means in that sentence. One of the points of the MODERN exercise is to explore models where that restriction no longer applies.

Jon Peterson
Neustar, Inc.

On 3/24/15, 6:15 PM, "Eric Burger" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>operate services on their own behalf.² This is more pronounced given
>the rationale for something new is ³the user would have full control of
>their TN².
>
>The term ³Communication Service Provider² never appears in the text
>other than in the Actors section. However, there is mention of a
>³privileged service provider.² Is that what a CSP is?
>

_______________________________________________
Modern mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/modern

________________________________

This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.

---

From: "Peterson, Jon" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:35:42 +0000

Changing the set of entities eligible to request telephone numbers from
national authorities does not mean giving away an uncontrolled amount of
resources to unqualified profligate mismanagers. Exactly what the policy
for qualification would be is not in the proposed scope of MODERN - we are
merely looking at protocol tools that could be used to request numbering
resources, say, and dropping previous constraints on the selection of such
a protocol that would depend on an architecture where only a very limited
and privileged set of entities are authorized to request said resources.
It is up to regulators to determine how their numbering resources will be
allocated.

But more materially - today, many services that use telephone numbers are
implemented by entities that are not carriers. What happens now is that
those services have a relationship with carriers to get numbering
resources. At the FCC workshop on the future of numbering administration,
this was a significant topic of discussion. There is a community of
interest in the question of how, say, enterprises, or VoIP providers, and
so on could get direct access to numbering resources, especially in the
post-transition environment, as more core telephony functions move out of
the SS7 modern. MODERN proposes to build tools that would work in such an
environment.

Jon Peterson
Neustar, Inc.

On 3/25/15, 9:15 AM, "Gorman, Pierce A [CTO]" <[email-masked]>
wrote:

>" One of the points of the MODERN exercise is to explore models where
>that restriction no longer applies."  Why?
>
>I've noticed authorities which regulate limited, sometimes scarce,
>virtual resources get antsy when resources are wasted through profligate
>mismanagement.
>
>document, that means a CSP could be pretty much anyone, yes, since I
>could run my own SIP service if I wanted to - but I'm not a CSP, because
>today, more commonly SIP services are run by enterprises or carriers,
>say, than by individuals, and thus the bulk of CSPs are entities like
>that.
>
>And you will find the acronym "CSP" appears several times in the
>Framework section, not only in the Actors section. If the use cases were
>anything but stubs in this -00, you would see CSPs in there as well.
>
>This e-mail may contain Sprint proprietary information intended for the
>sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are
>not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all
>copies of the message.

---

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:33:04 -0500

Pierce didn’t you get the memo. This is the Internet Regulatory Policy &
Business Modeling Task Force.

Tools are too hard. :-)

― 
Richard Shockey
Shockey Consulting LLC
Chairman of the Board SIP Forum
www.shockey.us
www.sipforum.org
richard<at>shockey.us
Skype-Linkedin-Facebook rshockey101
PSTN +1 703-593-2683