Solution proposal for the tldn conflict in the international call delivery
Download
1 / 11

Solution proposal for the TLDN conflict in the international call delivery - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 72 Views
  • Uploaded on

Solution proposal for the TLDN conflict in the international call delivery. IFAST-14 Lima, Perú October 4-5, 2000. The TLDN conflict.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Solution proposal for the TLDN conflict in the international call delivery' - nero


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Solution proposal for the tldn conflict in the international call delivery

Solution proposal for the TLDN conflict in the international call delivery

IFAST-14

Lima, Perú

October 4-5, 2000


The tldn conflict
The TLDN conflict call delivery

  • The TLDN conflict appears in the international call delivery scenario when there is an exchange of a 10 digit temporal local directory number (TLDN) between two countries with different numbering plans.


Ex 1 a chicago user roams to mexico city current status
Ex. 1: A Chicago user roams to Mexico City call delivery(current status)

Chicago MIN:

312-224-1234

5.- The Chicago switch

adds the international

prefix to deliver the call

because the TLDN begins

with 52X

2.- The Chicago switch sends a

ROUTREQ (312-224-1234)

3.- The Mexico switch

allocates a 10 digit

TLDN in the range

52-5101-5200

Û

52-5101-5299

Switch

Chicago

4.- The Mexico switch returns a

routreq (TLDN = 52-5101-5212)

Switch

Mexico

6.- The Chicago switch

makes the international call

011-52-5101-5212

7.- The PSTN delivers

the call to the Mexico switch

PSTN

1. A Chicago user

calls the roamer


Ex. 2: A Chicago user roams to Mexico City call delivery(assume a new NPA 525 assigned in New York)

Chicago MIN:

312-224-1234

5.- The Chicago switch does

not know if the TLDN is from

Mexico or New York and can

fail the call delivery

2.- The Chicago switch sends a

ROUTREQ (312-224-1234)

3.- The Mexico switch

allocates a 10 digit

TLDN in the range

52-5101-5200

Û

52-5101-5299

Switch

Chicago

4.- The Mexico switch returns a

routreq (TLDN = 52-5101-5212)

Switch

Mexico

6.- The Chicago switch makes

the call: 1-525-101-5212

PSTN

1. A Chicago user

calls the roamer

7.- The PSTN delivers th call

to thewrong destiny 525-101-5212

in New York

Switch

New York


Ex. 3: A Chicago user roams to Mexico City call delivery(Mexico increases the natl. number from 8 to 10 digits)

Chicago MIN:

312-224-1234

5.- The Chicago switch does

not know if the TLDN is from

Mexico or a North America

city with NPA 555

2.- The Chicago switch sends a

ROUTREQ (312-224-1234)

3.- The Mexico switch

allocates a 10 digit

TLDN in the range

52-55-5101-5200

Û

52-55-5101-5299

Switch

Chicago

4.- The Mexico switch can return a

routreq (TLDN = 55-5101-5212)

Switch

Mexico

6.- The Chicago switch makes

the call: 1-555-101-5212

PSTN

1. A Chicago user

calls the roamer

7.- The PSTN delivers th call

to the wrong destiny 555-101-5212

in a North America city with NPA 555

Switch

USA


Alternative #1 to handle the TLDN conflict call delivery

  • The visited switch could send the IRM in the TLDN field and the home switch would have to translate the IRM to a real directory number of the country that sends the TLDN.

  • The drawback of this alternative is that the switch would have to store translation tables of IRM’s of all the countries with roaming agreements.


Alternative #1: A Chicago user roams to Mexico City and translation tables are used to deliver the call

Chicago MIN:

312-224-1234

5.- The Chicago switch

analyzes the first 6 digits of

the TLDN and determines

through tables that this number

is from Mexico City and have

to be routed to the actual

DN in Mexico City:

52-55-5101-5212

2.- The Chicago switch sends a

ROUTREQ (312-224-1234)

3.- The Mexico switch

sends the IRM of one

actual TLDN, say

52-55-5101-5212

Switch

Chicago

4.- The Mexico switch returns a

routreq (TLDN = 059501-5212)

Switch

Mexico

6.- The Chicago switch

makes the international call

011-52-55-5101-5212

7.- The PSTN delivers

the call to the Mexico switch

PSTN

1. A Chicago user

calls the roamer


Alternative #2 to solve the TLDN conflict translation tables are used to deliver the call

  • The switches would have to handle the international option in the field “nature of the number” of the parameter “digits” of IS-41C to determine if a TLDN is coming from another country.

  • Additionally, to manageTLDN’s of lengh different from 10, the parameter “digits” of IS-41C has to be activated to variable lenght up to 15 digits, as allowed in IS-41C.


Alternative #2: A Chicago user roams to Mexico City and the proper parameters of IS-41C are used

Chicago MIN:

312-224-1234

5.- The Chicago switch

identifies the international

nature of the number and can

handle the 12 digits lenght of

the TLDN

2.- The Chicago switch sends a

ROUTREQ (312-224-1234)

3.- The Mexico switch

sends a 12 digits TLDN

in the range

52-55-5101-5200

Û

52-55-5101-5299

Switch

Chicago

4.- The Mexico switch returns routreq

(digits destination=52-55-5101-5212,

nature of number=international)

Switch

Mexico

6.- The Chicago switch

makes the international call

011-52-55-5101-5212

7.- The PSTN delivers

the call to the Mexico switch

PSTN

1. A Chicago user

calls the roamer


Conclusions proper parameters of IS-41C are used

  • The TLDN conflict has been avoided through provisional solutions but in general, these schemes do not work because the differences in the numbering plan of the countries.

  • The TLDN conflict is specially relevant in those countries with national numbers of length different of 10 digits.


Conclusions (cont.) proper parameters of IS-41C are used

  • The first alternative proposed to handle the conflict is to use translation tables to relate IRM’s to TLDN’s. However, this alternative can be complex to implement.

  • The second alternative is activating the proper fields of IS-41C in the mobile systems to accept international and variable length TLDN’s. This is the best solution but implies a certain cost and a strong cooperation of industry to implement this solution internationally.


ad