1、 ATIS-0300118 ATIS Standard on - Next Generation Interconnection Interoperability Forum NGN Reference Document NGN Interconnection ii Foreword The Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) serves the public through improved understanding between carriers, customers, and manufacturers
2、. The Next Generation Interconnection Interoperability Forum (NGIIF) addresses next generation network interconnection and interoperability topics associated with emerging technologies. Specifically, it develops operational procedures that involve the network aspects of architecture, disaster prepar
3、edness, installation, maintenance, management, reliability, routing, security, and testing between network operators. In addition, NGIIF addresses issues that impact the interconnection of existing and next generation networks and facilitate the transition to emerging technologies. The mandatory req
4、uirements are designated by the word shall, and recommendations by the word should. Where both a mandatory requirement and a recommendation are specified for the same criterion, the recommendation represents a goal currently identifiable as having distinct compatibility or performance advantages. Th
5、e word may denotes an optional capability that could augment the standard. The standard is fully functional without the incorporation of this optional capability. Suggestions for improvement of this document are welcome. They should be sent to the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions,
6、NGIIF, 1200 G Street NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20005. At the time of consensus on this document, NGIIIF, which was responsible for its development, had the following leadership: R. Ryan, NGIIF Co-Chair (Comcast) K. Riepenkroger, NGIIF Co-Chair (Sprint) Trademark Acknowledgements iconectiv, Telco
7、rdia, and Common Languageare registered trademarks and CLCI, CLLI, LERGRouting Guide and TPMData Source are trademarks and the Intellectual Property of TelcordiaTechnologies, Inc. dba as iconectiv. iii Table of Contents 1 Scope, Purpose, therefore, the reader should ensure the latest version of this
8、 document is being referenced. This document does not replace industry standards or regulatory decisions recently made that may not have yet been reflected in this document. 2 Informative References The following standards contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisio
9、ns of this Standard. At the time of publication, the editions indicated were valid. All standards are subject to revision, and parties to agreements based on this Standard are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent editions of the standards indicated below. ATIS-100001
10、0, Support of Emergency Telecommunications Service ETS in IP Network.1ATIS-1000011, ETS Packet Priority for IP NNI Interfaces - Use of Existing DiffServ Per Hop Behaviors.21This document is available from the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) at . 2This document is available
11、from ATIS at . 2 ATIS 1000020, ETS Packet Priority for IP NNI Interfaces - Requirements for a Separate Expedited Forwarding Mechanism.3ATIS-1000023, ETS Network Element Requirements for A NGN IMS Based Deployments.4ATIS-1000062, IP Interconnection Routing.5ATIS-1000063, Joint ATIS/SIP Forum Technica
12、l Report -IP NNI Profile.6ATIS-1000065, Emergency Telecommunications Service (ETS) Evolved Packet Core (EPC) Network Element Requirements.7GSMA FCM.01, VoLTE Service Description and Implementation Guide (Version 2.0).8IETF RFC 2474, Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field) in the I
13、Pv4 and IPv6 Headers.9IETF RFC 2597, Assured Forwarding PHB Group.9IEFT RFC 2833, RTP Payload for DTMF Digits, Telephony Tones and Telephony Signals.9IETF RFC 3246, An Expedited Forwarding PHB (Per-Hop Behavior).9IETF RFC 3247, Supplemental Information for the New Definition of the EF PHB (Expedited
14、 Forwarding Per-Hop Behavior.9IETF RFC 4412, Communications Resource Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).9IETF RFC 5865, A Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) for Capacity-Admitted Traffic.9ITU-T Recommendation Y.1566, QoS and Mapping and Interconnection.10FCC-15-70, Numbering P
15、olicies for Modern Communications, IP-Enabled Services, and Telephone Number Requirements for IP-Enabled Services Providers et al.11FCC 11-161, Connect America Fund; A National Broadband Plan for Our Future; Establishing Just and Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange Carriers; High-Cost Universal Serv
16、ice Support; Developing an Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime; Federal-State Joint Board.17FCC 11-189, Connect America Fund, A National Broadband Plan for Our Future, Establishing Just and Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange Carriers, High Cost Universal Service Support et al.17FCC 15-24, Repo
17、rt and Order on Remand Declaratory Ruling and Order, In the Matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet.17WC Docket 11-119, TW Telecom Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Regarding Direct IP-to-IP Interconnection.173GPP TS 24.229, 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification
18、 Group Core Network and Terminals; IP Multimedia Call Control Protocol based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol (SDP); Stage 3.123This document is available from ATIS at: . 4This document is available from ATIS at . 5This document is available from ATIS at . 6This
19、document is available from ATIS at . 7This document is available from ATIS at . 8This document is available from the Groupe Speciale Mobile Association (GSMA) at . 9This document is available from the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) at . 10This document is available from the International Tel
20、ecommunications Union-Telecommunications Standardization Sector (ITU-T) at . 11This document is available from the Federal Communications Commission at: . 12This document is available from the 3rd Generation Partnership Project at: . 3 3 Definitions, Acronyms, SIP can provide a plethora of informati
21、on regarding calls (sessions) and SIP Interconnection introduces a tremendous amount of flexibility regarding signaling and call (session) control: o Negotiated between end carriers/providers. o Negotiated between an end carrier/provider and an intermediary provider. o Referenced in (associated with
22、) the IP Interconnection Agreement but treated as a separate technical specification. o Contains technical details such as but not limited to the following: Supported CODECs (G.711, EVRC-B, AMR-WB, etc.). Transcoding requirements - The originating carrier/provider typically transcodes to a CODEC sup
23、ported by the terminating carrier/provider. - Intermediary carriers/providers may perform transcoding on behalf of end carriers/providers. Service Level Agreement (SLA) criteria. Operations procedures. SIP specifications. - Latency, Jitter, Packet Delivery, Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS). o As
24、 carriers/providers agree to expand the scope of traffic they exchange via IP Interconnection, the SIP Interconnection Plan must be updated to provide the required technical specifications. o It is recommended that an RPH be carried across the NNI and through to the end point, without regard to whet
25、her the carrier supports priority, as this is equivalent to Calling Partys Category (CPC) = National Security and Emergency Preparedness (NSEP) in an SS7 message. 7 IP Interconnection Routing 7.1 The IP NNI Reference Model For information regarding the IP interconnection architecture interface, plea
26、se reference ATIS-I-0000045, IP Services Interconnect Technical Report: Assessment of Requirements and Specifications. 7.1.1 Points of Interconnections (POIs) RFC 3247, Supplemental Information for the New Definition of the EF PHB (Expedited Forwarding Per-Hop Behavior), or alternatively according t
27、o the Default Forwarding Per-Hop Behavior RFC 2474, Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field) (“Best Effort”). Signalling traffic leaving the sending Border Functional Entity toward the Provider Edge (PE) router must be treated according to one of the following schemes: Expedited Fo
28、rwarding Per-Hop Behavior, as specified in RFC 3246, An Expedited Forwarding PHB (Per-Hop Behavior) and RFC 3247, Supplemental Information for the New Definition of the EF PHB (Expedited Forwarding Per-Hop Behavior). Assured Forwarding Per-Hop Behavior, as specified in RFC 2597, Assured Forwarding P
29、HB Group. Default Forwarding Per-Hop Behavior, as specified in RFC 2474, Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field). 9 Regulatory Environment This section describes various FCC rules and regulations, valid as of the date of publication of this document, with the intent to assist SPs
30、interconnecting networks that use Next Generation Interconnections. Noted references are not inclusive or intended to provide legal guidance, and based on date of this document, may have been subsequently revised. State commissions may also have issued rules and regulations on the subject addressed
31、by this document. As of the publication of this document, the following orders can be used as reference for IP Interconnection: FCC 15-24, Report and Order on Remand Declaratory Ruling and Order, In the Matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet. FCC-15-70, Numbering Policies for Modern Co
32、mmunications, IP-Enabled Services, and Telephone Number Requirements for IP-Enabled Services Providers et al. 14 FCC 11-161, Connect America Fund; A National Broadband Plan for Our Future; Establishing Just and Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange Carriers; High-Cost Universal Service Support; Develo
33、ping an Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime; Federal-State Joint Board. FCC 11-189, Connect America Fund, A National Broadband Plan for Our Future, Establishing Just and Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange Carriers, High Cost Universal Service Support et al. WC Docket 11-119, TW Telecom Inc. Petition for Declaratory Ruling Regarding Direct IP-to-IP Interconnection.
