Archived System CR SCR022703-26 Detail |
| Title: Documentation update (valid values on AVR and CSR response fields) | |||||
| CR Number |
Current Status Date |
Level of Effort |
Interface/ Release No. |
Area Impacted |
Products Impacted |
|
|
|||||
| SCR022703-26 |
Closed 4/22/2003 |
50 - 150 | 2/ | PreOrdering | UNE-P |
| Originator: Balvin, Liz |
| Originator Company Name: WorldCom |
| Owner: Notarianni, Lynn |
| Director: |
| CR PM: Stecklein, Lynn |
| Description Of Change |
|
WCom request valid values be provided for the following: 1) Developer Worksheet CSRR9 PGRTIND. 2) Developer Worksheet CSRR10 CSRSIZE 3) Developer Worksheet CSRR77 and CSRR92 USOCQTY. 4) Developer Worksheet CSRR123 and CSRR127 ERRNUM. 5) Developers Worksheet, Appendix A field SWTYPNUM. 6) Developers Worksheet Appendix A, field NMNUM. 7) Developers Worksheet, Appendix A field MCNUM.
Expected Deliverable: That Qwest provide the valid values for each field identified that is currently lacking in the documentation.
|
Status History |
| Date | Action | Description |
| 2/27/2003 | CR Submitted | |
| 3/3/2003 | CR Acknowledged | |
| 3/7/2003 | Clarification Meeting Held | See (Project Meeting Minutes) |
| 3/7/2003 | Status Changed | Status changed to clarification |
| 3/13/2003 | Draft Response Issued | |
| 3/20/2003 | Qwest Response Issued | CMP MARCH MEETING- new LOE given |
| 3/20/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | CMP March Meeting, see meeting minutes |
| 4/7/2003 | Release Ranking | 14.0 Prioritization- Ranked #48 out of 53 |
| 4/22/2003 | Status Changed | Status changed to closed - See Project Meeting Minutes 4/17/03 |
| 4/29/2003 | Release Ranking | Rank changed due to Late Adders- Ranked #49 |
Project Meetings |
| 4/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting An agreement was reached with the CLEC Community in the April CMP Systems Meeting on SCR022703- 26 Documentation update valid values on AVR and CSR response field. This change request will be 'crossed over' to product and process and closed. Qwest agreed to 'cross over' this CR with the caveat that Qwest does not agree that this is Process work and believes it to be a system request. 4/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that there is one more walk on to discuss regarding, from Liz Balvin. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she was expecting a follow up call from Qwest last month and never got one. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that nothing has changed in regard to this issue. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that WorldCom submitted process CRs and Qwest unilaterally processed them as systems CRs. Liz stated that if Qwest objected to MCI’s issuing these CRs as Process CRs, then Qwest needs to take this to the oversight committee. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that Judy Schultz needs to address this issue and that Judy will be returning to the meeting after lunch. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that WorldCom wanted the CRs reverted back to Product/Process and sees that it was not done. Liz stated that she does not know if Judy is aware of that. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Judy is aware of your position on that. Lynn stated that from a standpoint of resolution, Qwest’s position is that we would not be escalating on ourselves on an issue that we feel that the decision was made congruent with how we’ve treated these types of issues in the past. Lynn stated that these CRs do need and take systems resources in order to do the work. Kit Thomte/Qwest recommended that we break for lunch and reconvene at 1:00 p.m. MT. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that WorldCom submitted 3 CRs as document changes and Qwest unilaterally changed them to systems CRs. Liz stated that this conversation has gone round and round. Liz stated that she tried to change the language back in December because she did not want these to impact IMA resources. Liz stated that the Qwest EDI implementation team changes documentation if Qwest finds a problem. Liz stated that if Qwest believes that WorldCom inappropriately sent these as Product/Process, Qwest needs to do something. Liz noted that any time there has been a cross over we’ve agreed to it in this forum and stated that she sees Qwest as out of process and doesn’t know how to better address that. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that it is important to have this discussion and feels that we are at an impasse. Judy apologized if in the past Qwest has made unilateral decisions without communicating those decisions to change the CRs from Product/Process to Systems. Judy stated that Qwest is in the unique position of knowing which it should be and when there will be an impact to the systems. Judy stated that you might think it is just a process change, but we do know our internal systems and can say when a request would really impact a system. Judy noted that on the other hand, some changes come in as systems and we can look at it and determine that it would not require systems restraints and so we suggest crossing those CRs over to Product/Process. Judy stated that an email is sent to state if processed as a Product/Process or a Systems CR. Judy stated that the one issue that we are a little bit apart on is what to do with these systems documentation changes. Judy stated that in Section 8, which describes systems changes, the deliverables do include the system’s documentation, which is Sue’s (Stott) team. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she agrees that the initial documentation to documented system enhancements per release should be included, but this is after it is implemented and a CLEC identifies a flaw with the documentation. Liz stated that in December, she said that the change was not intended to change existing documentation or previously existing versions, we just want issues addressed going forward. Liz stated that resources are required for new release documents, but once the document is used and a defect is identified, they should be corrected. Liz noted that the CLECs work with the EDI documentation team and when an issue is identified, that team fixes the problem. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that her team handles those in the same manner as a production support bug. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that these CR’s are for the issues that the EDI team said Qwest would not do as a bug fix. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that those were ones that Qwest viewed as enhancements rather than a bug in the documentation. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T asked if after a release is implemented and a bug is identified in the documentation, WorldCom sends an email to someone? Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that should go through production support. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that the production support help desk would not know this stuff. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that they do work with the EDI team and were told to issue these CRs. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that they are not a bug because the information is already there, it is an enhancement. Wendy noted that a lot of the time Qwest fixes issues that a CLEC brings forwards through that team but in this case you were requesting something a bit bigger than simply a clarification or a bug fix. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that it is not an enhancement because the documentation is incorrect. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that we are disagreeing about a gray area, one side views as an enhancement and one side views as a bug. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that her consumer team is finding this a challenge, they are trying to work with a manual and are feeling the same frustration. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she understands Qwest’s position to not look at every data field so agreed to change the CR. Liz stated that the guidelines are for Qwest to focus on documentation going forward. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that there is a process for documentation issues when Qwest and the CLECs believe that it is a bug. Liz Balvin/MCI stated is for when Qwest believes it to be a bug. Judy Schultz/Qwest asked when it happens that something in the documentation that a CLEC sees as a defect and Qwest doesn’t, would it satisfy the CLECs if going forward as fields are impacted in the course of a release, the documentation would be changed going forward to adhere to those expectations. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that this is currently occurring. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that in reference to this CR, they were told to issue a CR., as well as for the other 2 CRs. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that where it gets gray is when further clarification is needed for a field. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that these items are not gray, they are adding valid values or formats. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that the bigger issue for IT documentation is Qwest has people working on the releases and when they get a request for a documentation update, the people have to be diverted from the release in order to do the documentation updates. Sue stated that maybe the answer is less capacity for a release. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that she wants to make sure that we’re clear. Judy noted that if there were 200 different fields to update, that would be a big effort. Judy stated that she thought she heard that IT was going forward in trying to follow the proposed guidelines. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that IT does that today and noted that her concern is, if you are an EDI user you are not going to pay close attention to the new release right away and that Qwest will not be made aware of issues until much later. Randy Owen/Qwest stated that Qwest needs to be careful because you cannot update for some products and not all, that would create other problems. Randy stated that we need to look at updates across the board, maybe a legend should be developed. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that the EDI documentation is going to come along because you now have users. Liz noted that consistency is an excellent point, if you only do that on one field then it could create inconsistency. Liz stated that she liked the idea of a legend but would need to check with her coders to see if one would work for them. Liz stated that she could possibly only be looking at a specific field and would need a guide to tell her what to look at first. Judy Schultz/Qwest asked what if we do a running cheat sheet. Randy Owen/Qwest stated that we saw that this CR might take us there and started down that path. Then heard that is not what was wanted. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that we have to carefully scrutinize to ensure that a documentation change doesn’t also mean a system change. It is so tightly related, the difference can be as subtle as an and/or difference. Sue stated that is another reason why system resources are needed. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that she understands that it is the same resources and is just trying to explore if IT can do a piece at-a-time. Judy asked if there are ever any times when it would be logical do to this kind of work. Is there ever a time in development when we could spend time doing this? Sue Stott/Qwest stated that it would still take systems resources to do that and stated that the issue is if it affects the voting capacity for a release. Sue stated that in many cases the same resources are used for coding and documentation. Liz Balvin/MCI asked if she could update the single source CR with a title change to ‘Guiding Principals to Qwest Documentation on Going Forward Basis, When Documentation Happens’, and will list the 10-items that you say you are using. Liz stated that the CR would then be moved back to Process and the documentation would be done when the regular document comes out. Liz stated that when new documentation comes out in future releases and sees that the guidelines are not being adhered to, and when it severely impacts her ability to do business then she would bring it forward. Liz stated that she would be willing to do that in order to get these off the table. Liz stated that she understands where Qwest is coming from and that believes that Qwest understands where she is coming from. Kit Thomte/Qwest asked how the guidelines would be updated. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that they would be closed with this CR and for other items that come up, new CRs would be issued. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if they are to call the Help Desk if problems after in production. Randy Owen/Qwest stated that the documentation team is to be contacted if prior to 30 days after production, after the 30 days, you contact the Help Desk. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that we took the principles and looked at redesigning to be 1 document for both EDI and GUI. Wendy stated that she did not know if that is still on the table. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that that was not the intent of the CR. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest asked if the guiding principles are separate from SBCs document. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that within the current format, will use the 10 guiding principles. Judy Schultz/Qwest asked if we should have a ‘guiding principles’ standing agenda item to identify what can be removed from the list. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that things would never be crossed off the list because they are principles and are there forever. Liz Balvin/MCI shared Judy’s concern and stated that they just came across a situation where they reserved TNs in the GUI and submitted the order in EDI. The reps populated the PON manually, typing them in lower case, but went out the door in upper case. Liz stated that it is not documented that they have to be in upper case. Liz stated that it would be helpful to have a tab for Documentation Experiences/Discussion. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that there is a tab for design walkthrough’s and we can have one for documentation. Lynn noted that it could have something in it, or not. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she understands Qwests position and stated that she did not know that she could call the Help Desk for documentation issues, that is a value add from this discussion. Sue Stott/Qwest asked that instead of a standing agenda item or separate tab, maybe we could add documentation issues to the SATE portion of the meeting. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that that would be fine. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that it could be EDI/SATE. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she would review her 3 CRs to see if they are guiding principles. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that if Liz wants to close as a process CR, is ok with that as long as it is noted that Qwest does not agree that this is Process work. Judy stated that Qwest truly believes them to be systems requests. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she was not clear on closing the CR as a Process CR. Judy Schultz/Qwest responded that that is what Liz wanted. Randy Owen/Qwest stated that the guiding principles can be closed, Qwest has adopted them. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that when a CLEC submits a CR, Qwest looks at it and determines if it is an impact for Product/Process or Systems. Judy stated that Qwest would email the CLEC if the category is different. Judy asked if that was an acceptable way to communicate. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she did receive emails and that she responded that she did not agree with the assigned category. Judy Schultz/Qwest asked that when the email is sent, what happens if we cannot reach agreement, how do we break that stalemate? Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that in that case, if a CLEC says it is a Product/Process CR and Qwest says that it is not, it could result in a denial based on infeaseability. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that it could result in a denial. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she would not be unreasonable. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that she is just stating that it could be a risk. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that the stalemate is due to the category of product/process or systems, and stated that she thinks that we have flushed out why each of us believes the way we do. Liz asked if these CRs are going to remain as Process CRs as they were originally intended? Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that she is ok with the change back to Process and closing it out, with Judy adding a note that Qwest believes the CR to be a Systems change. Judy stated that she has an obligation to represent Qwest’s position. Judy stated that in the future, as CRs come in the door, my team will send out an email with the category, and if you don’t agree you need to let us know and we will call a meeting to discuss. Judy asked if that was acceptable to the CLECs. Liz Balvin/MCI said yes. Lynn Stecklein/Qwest asked how the CRs that are marked as both Product/Process are to be handled. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that in some instances the CR may be both, could be a systems CR and an MN. Judy stated that if the CR is for both P/P and Systems, the CRPM would ask that separate CRs be issued. Lynn Stecklein/Qwest clarified that all 3 CRs will be crossed-over to Product/Process and will be closed. There were no additional questions or comments. 3/20/03 CMP systems meeting Wendy Green/Qwest provided the revised LOE of 50 to150 hours, and noted that this CR will be reflected on the ballot for 14.0 Liz Balvin/WorldCom stated that this does not impact the GUI and that the interface should be EDI. Wendy Green/Qwest confirmed that it should be EDI because it’s associated with the developer worksheets. 2/26/03 Qwest recommendations re: EDI Documentation Liz, Based on Qwest's analysis of the documents you submitted on 2/25/03, Qwest makes the following recommendations: 1. Questions 75, 76, 107, 115, 190, 195, 202 (Appendix A in the attached document) Create a systems CMP CR titled "Explicitly state valid values on AVR and CSR Response Fields." This CR should incorporate adding the valid values for each of the fields referenced in the questions listed above. 2. Question 81 (Appendix B in the attached document) Create a systems CMP CR titled "Add date format to valid values to ORIGDATE on CSR response." 3: Question 34 (Appendix G in the attached document) Create a product/process CMP CR "Add Pre-order abbreviations to QLSOG". 4. Questions 256, 270, 16 (Appendix D in the attached document) Qwest will initiate an internal CR to update the documentation in the next release of the IMA Disclosure Document. 5. Questions 7, 18, 19, 23, 25 (Appendix E in the attached document) Each of these questions relate to the documentation of differences between EDI vs. GUI. Qwest would like to initiate an action item to discuss the usage of the current documents and whether these updates are needed in the March systems CMP meeting. 6. Question 15 (Appendix F in the attached document) Qwest would like to initiate a CMP action item to discuss this question in the March systems CMP meeting. 7. Questions 1, 2, 4, 31 (Appendix C in the attached document) Qwest would like to address these questions as part of the ongoing documentation restructuring efforts. 8. Questions 99, 100, 12, 22: Qwest is still researching these items. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thanks, Lynn Stecklein CRPM Systems lsteckl@qwest.com 303 896-0547
|
CenturyLink Response |
| DRAFT RESPONSE March 13, 2003 RE: SCR022703-26 Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-26. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 450 to 725 hours for this IMA Change Request and SATE impacts of 5 to10 hours. At the March Systems CMP Meeting, CMP participants will be given the opportunity to comment on this Change Request and provide additional clarifications. Any clarifications and/or modifications identified at that time will be incorporated into Qwest’s further evaluation of this Change Request. This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization. Sincerely, Qwest
|
Information Current as of 1/11/2021