List of comments on the draft "List of standards and /or specifications for electronic communications networks services and associated facilities and services", submitted in response to the public consultation and accessible through the World-Wide Web

List of ministries, organisations and individuals from which comments on the draft list of standards and/or specifications  for electronic communications networks and services and associated facilities and services, have been received in response to the public consultation. The corresponding comments can be accessed by using the hyperlinks (shown by the use of colour and underlining).

Omitted from the list are those who requested that their contribution was not to be published.

Please inform us by e-mail of any possible errors or omissions in the list.

• Alcatel
• Danish IT- and Telecom Agency
• DR (Danish national public service broadcaster)
• ETNO (European Telecommunications Network Operator’s Association)
• ETSI (Comments gathered from ETSI technical bodies)
• FICORA (Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority)
• France Télécom
• German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology
• INTUG (International Telecommunications Users Group)
• Norwegian Post and Telecommunications Authority
• OFCOM (Federal Office of Communication, Switzerland)
• OFTEL (Office of Telecommunications, UK)
• PTS (National Post and Telecom Agency, Sweden)
• RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People, London)
• RTVV (Swedish Radio and TV Authority)
• Telenor

Alcatel is taking a great interest in the implementation of the new regulatory framework for electronic communications networks. We were pleased to receive the first draft (dated 5 July 2002) of the proposed list of standards and/or specifications for electronic communications networks that has been prepared with respect to Article 17 of directive 2002/21/EC.

Alcatel understands that this new List of Standards will replace the former ONP list and that the current draft is based on the 6th edition of the ONP list.

Alcatel notes that this draft was issued in July 2002 for comments from Member States and interested parties with responses due by 30 August 2002.

At this stage we wish to make the following comments:

1. The document is currently structured around the original ONP list and so we consider that it may not be a best starting point to later evolve to cover the entire scope of the framework directive and in particular article 17. At the same time, we understand that the existing ONP text needs a "home" within the new framework, at least for a transition period. We therefore propose that the document be restructured, with the original ONP text moved to an annex and the body of the document developed from a "clean sheet of paper".

2. With respect to the List of Standards, one of the most significant differences between the ONP Directive and the new Framework Directive is that the architecture for interconnection is no longer implicit and so its needs to be clearly defined before a corresponding formal list of standards can be determined. This architecture could include some, or all, of the following elements:

- end user

- local loop

- access provider

- value added services provider (VMNO, ISP, VAS, content provider, etc.)

- trunk or backbone provider

- appropriate interfaces between these elements

3. Building on from such an interconnection architecture, the document could then list the corresponding complusory (part A) and voluntary (part B) standards for each interface.

Alcatel is naturally interested in maintaining a dialogue on the task of preparing and maintaining this List of Standards. To this end, we propose that an open "Technical Advisory Committee", or similar body, be created to assist the Commission, European standards organisations and the Communications Committee, in this task.

__________

ALCATEL

For further enquiries please address :

Stephane Ducable

Alistair Urie

The Danish IT- and Telecom Agency welcomes the opportunity to comment on the draft "List of standards and/or specifications for electronic communications networks, services and associated facilities and services".

Regarding the specific content of the reference list the Danish IT- and Telecom Agency has no comments, but wish as a general concern to draw the attention to the need to ensure, that the standards are revised regarding references to EU documents.

__________

For further enquiries please address :

Ebbe Brigsted

DR has with interest read the draft list of standards and specification related to digital broadcasting. DR fully supports the list of standards and specification and welcomes in particular the listing of the Multimedia Home Platform (MHP) for Application Programming Interfaces as we see this as an important step to ensure interoperability of interactive digital TV services.

__________

DR (The Danish national public service broadcaster)

For further enquiries please address :

Lis Grete Möller

The new regulatory framework refers explicitly to the existing list of ONP standards which includes inter alia 'compulsory' standards for leased lines up to 2 Mb/s and voluntary standards/specifications for other services.

ETNO welcomes the opportunity to comment on the first issue of the draft list mentioned above. In order to meet the requirements of the new framework, some issues need an in-depth revision and some clarification.

ETNO is generally concerned with the compulsory standards and the status of this part in conjunction with the Directives, particularly the Universal Service Directive and the requirement for market analysis.

While the reference in the Universal Service Directive to the compulsory minimum set of leased lines (Article 18.1) to be offered presumably is made to bridge the current leased lines Directive and the new framework this compulsory part of the list may lead to inadequate consequences for the following two reasons:

1. Inaccurate market analysis.

The market analysis foreseen in the Universal Service Directive's Article 17 identifies ex-ante items in the compulsory list as relevant markets. However, this will inevitably lead to a situation where an operator under the regulatory obligation to offer these services and associated facilities will be the primary provider and accordingly will be found to have s.m.p. It is therefore of utmost importance to enable withdrawal of regulation when de facto substituting and competing offerings are available.

As the procedure for market analysis is described in the Recital 25 or Article 18.1 of the Universal Service Directive, it is important to ensure a flexible approach in the revision of the list in order to properly reflect the developments of services and of user's demand by reducing the number of compulsory standards. In particular, it should be made clear in the list that the "minimum set" of the Universal Directive’s Article 18 and the regulatory obligation of Annex 7 are restricted to Part A, Chapter 1 of the list.

Some of the sub-markets identified by the list of compulsory standards (Part A, Chapter 1) as requested by Recital 28 of the Universal Service Directive's may for practical reasons be less relevant as the demand is met by other products. In other words the demand that nevertheless may be identified exists only because of the regulatory obligation to deliver the services at non-commercial conditions. This may for example be the case for leased lines products such as analogue qualities, for 64 Kb or for structured 2 Mb/s, which have been replaced by the presence of services such as xDSL, nx64Kb/s or even ISDN. In this case, not only is the actual degree of competition not properly reflected but markets may be identified with only a very restricted demand. Therefore ETNO recommends:

• that the use of mandatory standards as the basis for market analysis is applied very carefully so that the actual substituting products such as MPLS, frame relay, xDSL are taken into account when assessing these markets

• that the list of mandatory standards is revised so that products such as:

- Special Quality Voice Bandwidth.

- 2 048 kbit/s - E1 ( structured )

- 64 kbit/s

are deleted from the compulsory list in order to adhere to Article 17.5 of the Framework Directive as they in many cases do not represent actual markets and as their presence may unnecessarily oblige a number of companies to uphold costly and commercially irrelevant products.

ETNO welcomes voluntary technical harmonisation insofar as competition and innovation are not disturbed. In the case of leased lines ETNO finds it appropriate to preserve the existing technical harmonisation by moving Special Quality Voice Bandwidth, 2 048 Kbit/s - E1 (structured) and 64 Kbit/s to the voluntary part of the list.

Regarding retail capacity above 2 Mb/s, it should be emphasised that these standards are voluntary, and that there is no linkage to the regulatory requirements of the Universal Service Directive's Article 18. The development of alternative solutions for transmission capacity via IP, GMPLS or dark fibre are entering the markets as substituting products.

ETNO notes the lack of technical specification of services requested in the Data Protection Directive (e.g. for ACR). This may among other be explained by the lack of demand for these services, which again should be taken into consideration when monitoring the implementation of the Directive.

With regards to a possible resolution in the European Parliament on the imposition of MHP as a single European standard for digital TV, ETNO wishes to caution against the legal imposition of technical standards not yet tested under market conditions.

Indeed, MHP has already been revised shortly after its adoption by ETSI and it is likely that additional corrections will have to be made. DVB has recognized that the conformance test suite is not complete so far. This may lead to a lack of interoperability, which is unacceptable. Furthermore, MHP does not cover all network operator requirements nor their customers’ expectations for affordable, simple consumer devices.

Therefore, ETNO thinks that it would be premature to include MHP, which should first prove to be an accepted, stable and interoperable API standard.

__________

ETNO (The European Telecommunications Network Operator’s Association)

For further enquiries please address :

Fiona Taylor

General comment: There are many instances of the text: "The attachment requirements for terminal equipment to be connected to xxxxxxx are specified in ETSI TBR xxx". This is misleading since the TBR gave the attachment requirements under the former regime. It would be better to say: "The attachment requirements for terminal equipment to be connected to xxxxxxxx under Directive 91/263/EEC were specified in ETSI TBR xxx and this specification may still be useful for equipment designers even though the regulatory approach has changed and market access and attachment are now controlled by the R&TTE Directive (please insert reference)."

Ordinary quality voice bandwidth (2-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 450 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 450.
"Common Technical Regulation 15 (CTR 15)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 15.

Ordinary quality voice bandwidth (4-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 453 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 453.
"Common Technical Regulation 17 (CTR 17)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 17.

Special quality voice bandwidth (2-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 450 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 450.
"Common Technical Regulation 15 (CTR 15)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 15.

Special quality voice bandwidth (4-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 453 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 453.
"Common Technical Regulation 17 (CTR 17)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 17.

Digital

64 kbit/s
ETSI EN 300 288/A1 has to be deleted. The information is incorporated into EN 300 288.
"ETSI ETS 300 290 as amended by ETSI ETS 300 290/A1" should be replaced by "ETSI EN 300 290".
"Common Technical Regulation 14(CTR 14)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 14.

2 048 kbit/s - E1 (unstructured)
ETSI EN 300 247/A1 has to be deleted. The information is incorporated into EN 300 247.
"ETSI ETS 300 248 as amended by ETSI ETS 300 248/A1" should be replaced by "ETSI EN 300 248".
"Common Technical Regulation 12(CTR 12)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 12.

2 048 kbit/s - E1 (structured)
ETSI ETS 300 420 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 420.
"Common Technical Regulation 13 (CTR 13)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 13.

34 368 kbit/s - E3
ETSI ETS 300 689 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 689.
"Common Technical Regulation 24 (CTR 24)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 24.

139 264 kbit/s - E4
ETSI ETS 300 690 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 690.
"Common Technical Regulation 25 (CTR 25)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 25.

Should be added to the list : N x 64 kbit/s (EN 300 766: Multiple 64 kbit/s digital unrestricted leased lines with octet integrity presented at a structured 2 048 kbit/s interface at either or both ends (D64M); Connection characteristics and network interface presentation).

ISUP
ETSI 300 356-21 should be added to the list.

MAP
ETSI TS 100 974 covers Phase 2+, Releases 1996-1999.
ETSI TS 129 002 covers Phase 2+, Release 1999 and Release 4 and 5

A section on quality should be added. TR 101 949 specifies quality parameters for interconnection and associated measurement methods. It has just been published.

Section title should be "Access to Service Providers"

Chapter V

Very high-speed Digital Subscriber Line (VDSL) should be added to the list (ETSI TS 101 270-1 and –2).
Comments should state that "ETSI is developing specifications for DSL splitters in the TS 101 952 series. Parts or TS 101 952 have already been published."

A section on quality should be added. There is a 2-part voluntary standard (EG 202 057) currently under final voting that STQ has produced and that should be referenced. By the time that the list is finally agreed the ETSI vote will be complete. These standards are more comprehensive than the one required under Part A.

Single line analogue interface and telephone tones
Network Termination Point (NTP) analogue interface
ETSI EG 201 188 should be replaced by ETSI ES 201 970.
Comments should state :
"The objective of ES 201 970 and EG 201 188 is to specify the physical and electrical characteristics at a 2-wire analogue presented NTP for short to medium length loop applications, particularly suitable for use by new network operators. ETSI EG 201 188 is a study previous to the standard ETSI 201 970. The attachment requirements for terminal equipment to be connected to the analogue presented NTP are specified in TBR 21, EN 301 437 and TBR 38."

Additional facilities

Dual Tone Multi-Frequency (DTMF)
"Alternative sender for multifrequency signalling system to be used for push-button telephones" should be replaced by "Multifrequency signalling system".
ETSI ES 201 235-3 (Receivers) should be added to the list.

ETSI ES 201 235 parts 2 (for terminals) and 4 (for remote DTMF receivers) describe other parts. If the interpretation of the text of directive 2002/22/EC shall be that it is "DTMF dialling" that shall be supported, it is the DTMF receiver in the network that shall be specified here. This means that ETSI ES 201 235-1 and –3 should be mentioned. If the interpretation of the text in the directive shall be that is just "end-to-end DTMF signalling" that shall be supported, this just means that the network shall be transparent for the DTMF frequencies and this is not an issue for ES 201 235 (from the terminal perspective, end-to-end signalling is dealt with in ES 201 235-4).

One possibility might be to refer to ES 201 235-1, -2 and –3. In that case network reception of DTMF dialling and also sending DTMF for CLI (a system used by a few operators) will be covered.

Calling-line identification in PSTN-Networks
Signalling protocol for support Calling Line Identification
ETSI EN 300 659-3 (Data link message and parameter codings) should be added.
Comments should state :
"EN 300 659 protocols may be used for services other than CLI. This may be better understood in the part 3 of the document. The associated standard for terminal equipment is ETSI ES 200 788."

A section "Telecommunications access from consumer television infrastructures" should be added with following technical interfaces and/or service features :

Digital Television Broadcasting
"MPEG Implementation Guide-lines for the professional use of MPEG-2" should be replaced by "Implementation Guide-lines for the use of MPEG-2 Systems, Video and Audio in Contribution Applications".

"Service information (DVB-SI) and two relevant implementation guidelines" should be replaced by "Specification for Service Information (SI) in DVB (DVB-SI) and two relevant implementation guidelines"
ETSI ETR 211 should be replaced by ETSI TR 101 211
ETSI ETR 162 should be replaced by ETSI TR 101 162

Application Programme Interfaces (APIs)

Multimedia Home Platform
"MHP specification 1.0.2" should be replaced by "Multimedia Home Platform (MHP) specification 1.0"
ETSI TS 101 812 V1.2.1 should be replaced by ETSI TS 101 812.
"MHP specification 1.1" should be replaced by "Multimedia Home Platform (MHP) specification 1.1"

__________

For further enquiries please address :

Gavin Craik

Christian Julien

It is unclear what is the role of Part B Voluntary standards. It is said in the document that the purpose is to encourage the provision of harmonized electronic communications services. It is very difficult, if not impossible to make such a list complete enough. The situation is also different in different Member States. The final selection of standards in the voluntary areas covered by Part B can thus only be made in each Member State.

There are references to CTRs in the document. As the CTRs do not exist any longer, these references should be replaced by references to existing documents. At this stage the TBRs may be the best alternative.

Instead of ETSI ETS 300 248, 300 290, 300 420, 300 450, 300 453, 300 689, 300 690, reference should be made to a newer ETSI EN.

In Chapter III ETSI EN 300 776 should be added.

In Chapter IV all ISUP versions standardized by ETSI , ISUP1, ISUP2, ISUP3 and ISUP4, should be mentioned, because telecommunication networks development is in different phase in different Member States. In most Member States there are also own implementation details based on ITU-T/ETSI standards. In Chapter IV all Capability Set versions, CS-2, CS-3 and CS-4 should be mentioned, because telecommunication networks development is in different phase in different Member States. EN 301 931 and EN 302 039 should be added to the list.

In Chapter V standards TS 101 270-1 and –2 should be added.

In Chapter VIII all MHP versions should be mentioned, because telecommunication networks development is in different phase in different Member States.

__________

FICORA (The Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority)

For further enquiries please address :

Harri Rasilainen

France Télécom souhaite rappeler qu’elle a toujours été favorable à la définition de standards et de spécifications pour le secteur des communications électroniques, de manière à garantir la plus grande interopérabilité possible entre les réseaux.

Toutefois, cette liste de standards ne doit pas se transformer en un frein à l’innovation et à l’introduction de nouveaux équipements mais au contraire accompagner les évolutions technologiques du secteur des communications électroniques. Cette liste doit être ouverte et évolutive. Elle doit privilégier l’intégration plutôt que l’exclusion. A cet égard, le considérant 30 de la directive cadre rappelle à juste titre que « Il convient que la normalisation demeure un processus essentiellement conduit par le marché ».

En outre, ces standards doivent être définis avec les opérateurs de réseaux et s'appuyer sur les travaux de l'ETSI. En particulier, l’introduction d’un nouveau standard, a fortiori si celui-ci entre dans la catégorie des standards obligatoires, doit faire l’objet d’une consultation auprès des acteurs concernés sur une durée suffisante pour que chacun puisse analyser les conséquences de l’introduction dudit standard et pour qu’il puisse s’exprimer. A cet égard, le projet de document nécessite clairement des mises à jour dont nous ne donnons pas ici une liste exhaustive. Un travail complet de vérification nécessiterait une période de consultation plus longue.

Enfin, le nouveau cadre réglementaire prévoit des standards obligatoires concernant des liaisons louées et les paramètres de qualité de service. La partie concernant les liaisons louées nécessite un suivi très précis et une actualisation très régulière de manière à ne pas maintenir des standards obligatoires lorsque le marché s'est déporté sur d'autres systèmes. Le maintien d’équipements ne répondant plus à une attente du marché pourrait en final s'avérer très coûteux pour les opérateurs de réseaux et surtout injustifié. Il est donc nécessaire de bien veiller à une application rigoureuse du paragraphe 5 de l’article 17 de la directive cadre, qui stipule que les normes ou spécifications doivent être retirées de la liste dès qu’« elles ne contribuent plus à la fourniture de services de communications électroniques harmonisés ou ne répondent plus aux besoins des consommateurs ou entravent le développement technologique ».

De la même manière, il faut aussi prendre garde à ne pas introduire un nouveau standard obligatoire de manière prématurée. Il y aurait alors un risque réel de figer une technologie avant même que le marché n’ait pu se prononcer.

Concernant la partie relative aux paramètres de qualité de service, il y a sur le fond une certaine incohérence à introduire une référence à des normes extraites d’un « ETSI Guide » dans un chapitre consacré aux standards obligatoires (cette partie renvoie au document ETSI EG 201 769-1). Il ne s’agit pas à proprement parler de standards obligatoires mais d’un référentiel de définitions normalisées. Sans doute faudrait-il ouvrir un chapitre particulier pour ces paramètres.

A noter également qu’il faudrait indiquer que les versions des documents ETSI de référence sont implicitement les dernières versions disponibles. L’indication du numéro de version pour le document ETSI EG 201 769-1 (paramètres de qualité de service) prête à confusion.

Les remarques suivantes concernent le document lui-même, principalement la partie « Standards obligatoires » et les chapitres III et VIII.

• Partie A, chapitre I : dans les "Comments" il faut remplacer partout "Common Technical Regulation XX (CTR XX)" par "ETSI TBR XX". Par exemple, dans le premier "Comment" : "Common Technical Regulation 15 (CTR 15)." est à remplacer par "ETSI TBR 15." Une correction analogue est à faire dans les 6 autres "Comments".
• Partie A, chapitre I, Digital, 64 kbit/s : l’amendement ETSI EN 300 288/A1 n'existe plus, il a été inclus dans la dernière version (V1.2.1 du 1/07/2001) d'ETSI EN 300 288. De plus, le "Comment" doit être complété : il faut remplacer "Common Technical Regulation 14 (CTR 14)" par "ETSI TBR 14 and its Amendment 1".
• Partie A, chapitre I, Digital, 2 048 kbit/s (unstructured) : l'amendement ETSI EN 300 247/A1 n'existe plus, il a été inclus dans la dernière version (V1.2.1 du 1/07/2001) d’ETSI EN 300 247. De plus, le "Comment" doit être complété : il faut remplacer "Common Technical Regulation 12 (CTR 12)" par "ETSI TBR 12 and its Amendment 1".

• Partie B, Chapitre III, la désignation "N x 155 520 kbit/s" ne nous paraît pas correcte. Il faudrait mettre à la place : "SDH VC4, VC3, VC2, VC1". De plus, dans la même ligne, il y a inversion des "notes" : en face de EN 301 164, on doit mettre "Connection characteristics", et en face de EN 301 165, on doit trouver "Interface presentation".
• Partie B, chapitre VIII, systèmes d’accès conditionnels : il manque des standards, lesquels apparaissent ci-dessous :

• Partie B, chapitre VIII, systèmes de transmission : il manque également des standards, lesquels apparaissent ci-dessous :

• Partie B, chapitre VIII, systèmes de transmission : après le tableau « Digital Television Broadcasting » et avant le tableau "Digital Radio Broadcasting", ajouter le tableau "Interaction Channel" ci-dessous :

__________

FRANCE TELECOM

For further enquiries please address :

Claude Mariotte

Die zur Kommentierung veröffentlichte Liste ist in die Teile „A", Compulsory Standards und „B", Voluntary Standards unterteilt, wobei das englische Wort „Standards" in der deutschen Sprache sowohl Normen als auch sonstige technische Spezifikationen beinhaltet.

Nach hiesiger Auffassung können nur technische Spezifikationen, die das vorgeschriebene Abstimmungsverfahren durchlaufen haben, also Normen, für verbindliche Regelungen herangezogen werden. Dies ist bei den unter „A" gelisteten Dokumenten der Fall.

Anders verhält es sich bei der Listung „B", den freiwilligen Standards. Hier sind neben Normen auch zahlreiche ETSI Produkte gelistet, die einerseits sehr unterschiedliche Abstimmungsverfahren durchlaufen haben und andererseits sehr unterschiedliche „Reifegrade" besitzen. Technische „reports" und „guides" geben Gedanken wieder, die nicht immer in allen Ländern bzw. von allen Beteiligten akzeptiert und verwendet werden können. Guides und Reports können von nur wenigen Personen (vielleicht vier oder gar weniger) geschrieben und dann - meist als Diskussionsgrundlage - von ETSI veröffentlicht werden.

Vor diesem Hintergrund muss es als kritisch erachtet werden, derartige Dokumente in einem Kommissionspapier in dieser Weise zusammen zu stellen und es so einer öffentlichen Anhörung zu unterziehen. Es könnte geschlussfolgert werden, dass diese öffentliche Anhörung das Normenverfahren quasi ersetzt und dass nach erfolgreicher Anhörung diese Dokumente von der Kommission Normen gleichgestellt werden. Diese hier gesehene Problematik ist bereits mündlich gegenüber der Kommission (Mr. P. Scott) zum Ausdruck gebracht worden.

Im übrigen liegen hier verschiedene Anregungen für Korrekturen und Ergänzungen der Normenliste vor. Auf die Weitergabe an dieser Stelle wird jedoch verzichtet in der Annahme, dass ETSI von sich aus entsprechende Änderungs- und Ergänzungsvorschläge einbringen wird.

__________

GERMAN FEDERAL MINISTRY OF ECONOMICS AND TECHNOLOGY

For further enquiries please address :

Ulrich Schuchert

INTUG welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Commission's draft List of standards.

The judicious adoption of standards by regulators can ensure that users of have better and more consistent access to communications services.

Article 17 of the Framework Directive gives the European Commission and NRAs the necessary powers to ensure the appropriate provision of services, within appropriate safeguards and for clear policy goals.

Leased lines

In our comments on the Commission's Draft Recommendation on Market Definitions we asked for a substantial increase in the maximum speed of the minimum set of leased lines. This was necessary because of the increased demand for greater bandwidth, driven by technological advances and more widespread adoption of those technologies. Additionally, there is a political change, in that customers outside major cities are much less inclined to wait for newer technologies or to accept that they will never have the same quality of services.

INTUG strongly believes that the maximum speed for compulsory standards needs to be increased to 155M bps, though not yet to 622 M. The list of voluntary standards should also be extended up to speeds of 2.5G.

The consequence of this increase in the minimum set of leased lines would be that NRAs would have to examine a greater scope of provision and decide which measures to apply.

Number portability

INTUG supports the inclusion of the standards for number portability.

The adoption of number portability for both mobile and fixed numbers is of considerable importance to users. So much so that it is required in Article ?? of the Universal Service and Users' Rights Directive (2002/22/EC). It must not only be available in some theoretical sense, but that must be available to users without detailed technical knowledge, without protracted waiting or wrangling and without unnecessary cost. Our experience is that number portability remains too difficult, too slow and too inconsistent.

As far as possible the same methods should be used in all member states. Thus the adoption of the proposed standards is potentially beneficial to users and also to operators.

There is recent evidence from the United Kingdom that certain implementations of number portability run into difficulties when operators cease to trade.It is necessary to ensure that this sort of problem is avoided in implementations of number portability and in other standards.

Caller location for 112

During the period when 3G was seen as a potential bonanza for mobile operators great play was made of Location-Based Services (LBS). In recent months it has become clear that while the operators remain hopeful, neither the technology nor the services are going to be available any time soon. It is very uncertain what the LBS market will look like in three or four years time.

While the concerns of the emergency services are important, they should not be allowed to impose an inappropriate financial burden on the users of mobile telecommunications. Nor should they be allowed to distort the development of commercial LBS.

INTUG believes that the Commission should follow closely market developments in both fixed and mobile networks, but must not push the operators too quickly. The adoption of standard for caller location should be undertaken with care.

The experience of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in its introduction of E911 should be a warning to the Commission of what can go wrong.

Conclusion

INTUG supports the inclusion of the standards listed by the European Commission in its draft document. The exception being the request for additional standards in the categories for leased lines, both compulsory and voluntary.

There are two aspects of the implementation which require attention. Every effort should be made to achieve the highest possible levels of interoperability and interworking. The burden of conformance testing should be reduced to the lowest possible level.

INTUG

INTUG, the International Telecommunications Users Group asbl, is an association of national telecommunications users associations, based in Brussels.

INTUG was founded in 1974 in Den Haag at the suggestion of Vicomte Etienne Davignon, then a European Commissioner, to act as a single voice for users of telecommunications. The mission of INTUG is to ensure that users have access to affordable, interoperable telecommunications services and that their voice is heard wherever telecommunications policy is decided. For over 25 years INTUG has argued for the introduction of competition in telecommunications and that all users must have access to the benefits of such competition.

INTUG Europe combines the European interests of the members of INTUG including national associations, corporations and individuals - telecommunications users across Europe. It represents the many thousands of telecommunications managers in businesses across Europe, from the largest corporations to small enterprises, who are purchasing and managing the company infrastructure on which are being built the new e-commerce applications.

__________

INTUG (The International Telecommunications Users Group)

For further enquiries please address :

Ewan Sutherland

Page 9 and 10

Ordinary quality voice bandwidth (2-wire)
Comments:
ETSI ETS 300 450 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 450.
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 15 (CTR 15)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 15.

Ordinary quality voice bandwidth (4-wire)
Comments:
ETSI ETS 300 453 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 453.
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 17 (CTR 17)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 17.

Special quality voice bandwidth (4-wire)
Comments:
ETSI ETS 300 450 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 450.
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 15 (CTR 15)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 15.

Special quality voice bandwidth (4-wire)
Comments:
ETSI ETS 300 453 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 453.
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 17 (CTR 17)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 17.

Digital
64 kbit/s
Reference
ETSI EN 300 288/A1 has to be deleted. The information is incorporated into EN 300 288.
Comments:
"ETSI ETS 300 290 as amended by ETSI ETS 300 290/A1" should be replaced by "ETSI EN 300 290".
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 14(CTR 14)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 14.

2 048 kbit/s - E1 (unstructured)
Reference
ETSI EN 300 247/A1 has to be deleted. The information is incorporated into EN 300 247.
Comments:
"ETSI ETS 300 248 as amended by ETSI ETS 300 248/A1" should be replaced by "ETSI EN 300 248".
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 12(CTR 12)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 12.

2 048 kbit/s - E1 (structured)
Comments:
ETSI ETS 300 420 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 420.
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 13 (CTR 13)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 13.

Page 12 - Part B - Voluntary Standards
Digital
34 368 kbit/s - E3
Comments:
ETSI ETS 300 689 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 689.
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 24 (CTR 24)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 24.

139 264 kbit/s - E4
Comments:
ETSI ETS 300 690 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 690.
Second sentence (The attachment requirements . . . ) is no longer relevant and should be deleted. If the sentence is kept "Common Technical Regulation 25 (CTR 25)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 25.

We are missing N x 64 kbit/s - Should not ETSI EN 300 776 be listed (Multiple 64 kbit/s digital unrestricted leased lines with octet integrity presented at a structured 2 048 kbit/s interface at either or both ends (D64M); Connection characteristics and network interface presentation).

Page 14
ACCESS
Technical Interfaces and/or service features
Reference
ETSI EG 201 897 "Service provider access requirements in a fixed and mobile environment" and ETSI EG 201 916 "Development of standards to support open inter-network interfaces and service provider access" should be included.
If included the we propose to add the following under
Comments:
"ETSI EG 201 897 is based on ETSI EG 201 722 and lists the second set of network access requirements that service providers have in delivering telecommunication services including second and third generation mobile, cordless and fixed services, over one or more public telecommunication networks."
"ETSI EG 201 916 contains information to enable service providers and network operators to determine and compare standardized facilities that are available in published ETSI protocols (e.g. DSS1, ISUP, INAP) to support the introduction of new services and third-party service provision."

Page 17
Unbundled access to the local loop
Symmetrical single-pair high bit rate Digital Subscriber Line (SDSL)
ETSI TS 101 524-1 and 2 should be deleted. These versions were replaced by TS 101 524 in June 2001.

The standards for VDSL may be immature, however the inclusion for the standards should be considered. The standards are:
TS 101 270-1 - Functional requirements, and
TS 101 270-2 - Transceiver specification

Single line Analogue interface and telephone tones
Reference
ETSI EG 201 188 should be replaced by ETSI ES 201 970 which is a standard and seems to be an updated version of EG 201 188.
We also recommend adding the following sentence:
"The associated standard for terminal equipment is ETSI EN 301 437."

We are missing "digital interface" i.e. ISDN access standards.
The following standards seem to be relevant:

EN 300 012-1 (basic rate) and EN 300 011-1 (primary rate)
ETS 300 125
EN 300 403-1 to 3
ETS 300 403-4 and 5
EN 300 403-6 and 7
(Maybe not all parts of 300 403 are relevant in this context.)

Relevant terminal specification is I-ETS 300 245-2 or TBR 8.

Maybe also standard for bearer services should be included.
Relevant services are:
Circuit-mode 64 kbit/s unrestricted bearer service
Circuit-mode speech bearer service
Circuit-mode 3,1 kHz audio bearer service
Packet-mode bearer service (D channel)
Packet-mode bearer service (B channel)

Page 18
Standard for services and other measures for disabled users
Technical Interfaces and/or service features
We propose to add:
"Guidelines for ICT products and services: "Design for All"", and under reference
ETSI EG 202 116

Page 20 - Additional facilities
Dual Tone Multi-Frequency (DTMF)
Reference and Notes
Note for 201 235-1 should be "Part 1 - general principles"
ETSI ES 201 235-3 should be included under reference followed by the note: "Part 3 - receivers"
Under comments should the following be included:
ETSI ES 201 235-2 describe senders for terminals and ES 201 235-4 describe remote DTMF receivers (e.g. receivers in terminals)

Calling-line identification in PSTN - Networks
Signalling protocol for support Calling Line Identification Services
Reference
ETSI EN 300 659-3 should be added with the following note: "Data link message and parameter coding"
The following could be included under Comments:
"The associated standard for terminal equipment is the ETSI ES 200 778 series"

__________

For further enquiries please address :

Rasmus Trevland

Ordinary quality voice bandwidth (2-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 450 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 450.
"Common Technical Regulation 15 (CTR 15)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 15.

Ordinary quality voice bandwidth (4-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 453 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 453.
"Common Technical Regulation 17 (CTR 17)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 17.

Special quality voice bandwidth (2-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 450 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 450.
"Common Technical Regulation 15 (CTR 15)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 15.

Special quality voice bandwidth (4-wire)
ETSI ETS 300 453 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 453.
"Common Technical Regulation 17 (CTR 17)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 17.

Digital
64 kbit/s
ETSI EN 300 288/A1 has to be deleted. The information is incorporated into EN 300 288.
"ETSI ETS 300 290 as amended by ETSI ETS 300 290/A1" should be replaced by "ETSI EN 300 290".
"Common Technical Regulation 14(CTR 14)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 14.

2 048 kbit/s - E1 (unstructured)
ETSI EN 300 247/A1 has to be deleted. The information is incorporated into EN 300 247.
"ETSI ETS 300 248 as amended by ETSI ETS 300 248/A1" should be replaced by "ETSI EN 300 248".
"Common Technical Regulation 12(CTR 12)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 12.

2 048 kbit/s - E1 (structured)
ETSI ETS 300 420 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 420.
"Common Technical Regulation 13 (CTR 13)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 13.

Digital
34 368 kbit/s - E3
ETSI ETS 300 689 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 689.
"Common Technical Regulation 24 (CTR 24)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 24.

139 264 kbit/s - E4
ETSI ETS 300 690 should be replaced by ETSI EN 300 690.
"Common Technical Regulation 25 (CTR 25)" should be replaced by ETSI TBR 25.

No reference is made (possibly not needed) to EN 300 766: Access and Terminals (AT); Multiple 64 kbit/s digital unrestricted leased lines with octet integrity presented at a structured 2 048 kbit/s interface at either or both ends (D64M); Connection characteristics and network interface presentation.

Access
Section title should be "Access to Service Providers".

Chapter VI

Single line analogue interface and telephone tones
Network Termination Point (NTP) analogue interface
ETSI EG 201 188 should be replaced by ETSI ES 201 970.
We propose the following comments :
"The objective of ES 201 970 and EG 201 188 is to specify the physical and electrical characteristics at a 2-wire analogue presented NTP for short to medium length loop applications, particularly suitable for use by new network operators. The attachment requirements for terminal equipment to be connected to the analogue presented NTP are specified in TBR 21, EN 301 437 and TBR 38."

Additional facilities
Calling-line identification in PSTN-Networks
Signalling protocol for support Calling Line Identification
ETSI EN 300 659-3 (Data link message and parameter codings) should be added.
We propose to add to the comments :
"EN 300 659 protocols may be used for services other than CLI. This may be better understood in the part 3 of the document. The associated standard for terminal equipment is ETSI ES 200 788."

We propose to add a section entitled "Telecommunications access from consumer television infrastructures" with following technical interfaces and/or service features :

__________

OFCOM (Federal Office of Communication, Switzerland)

For further enquiries please address :

François Maurer

1. Explanatory note

In the last paragraph correct "International Telecommunications Union (ITU)" to "International Telecommunication Union (ITU)".

2. Chapter I - Attachment requirements

Each of the entries in Chapter I is followed by a comment indicating where the relevant attachment requirements can be found. With the coming into force of the R&TTE Directive, these attachment requirements no longer apply. We consider that the comments could be retained for information by simply changing the word "...are described..." to "were described...".

3. Chapter I – Digital 64 kbit/s

ETSI EN 300 288/A1 is incorporated in the latest edition of ETSI EN 300 288.

4. 3 Chapter I – Digital 2048 kbit/s –E1 (unstructured)

ETSI EN 300 247/A1 is incorporated in the latest edition of ETSI EN 300 247.

5. Chapter III – Digital 34368 kbit/s and 139264kbit/s

Each of these entries in Chapter III is followed by a comment indicating where the relevant attachment requirements can be found. With the coming into force of the R&TTE Directive, these attachment requirements no longer apply. We consider that the comments could be retained for information by simply changing the word "...are described..." to "were described...".

6. Chapter III – Digital N x 155520kbit/s

The reference numbers appear to be reversed. ETSI EN 301 165 specifies the interface presentation and 301 164 the connection characteristics.

7. Chapter IV Network Interconnection - ISUP

ETSI EN 300 356 –31 to –36 concern PICs and test methods. The reference to them should only be informative.

8. Chapter IV Network Interconnection - SCCP

ETSI EN 300 009 –2 and ETSI ETS 300 009–3 concern PICs and test methods. The reference to them should only be informative.

9. Chapter IV Network Interconnection - MTP

ETSI EN 300 008 –1 should have a note recording that it only relates to international interconnection.

10. Chapter IV Network Interconnection - MTP

ETSI EN 300 008 –2 concerns PICs. The reference to it should only be informative.

11. Chapter IV – Access

ETSI EG 210 722 and 201 807 only deal with enhanced telephony services. Access may be available to other network termination points for which harmonised standards are not available.

12. Chapter IV – Number portability and carrier selection

All references in this section should be prefaced by "ETSI".

13. Chapter IV

A section on quality should be added. ETSI TR 101 949, which has just been published, specifies quality parameters for interconnection and associated measurement methods.

14. Chapter VI– Single line

Title should make clear that this is single PSTN line.

15. Chapter VI – network termination point

This reference applies only to an analogue interface of the PSTN.

16. Chapter VI – Additional facilities DTMF

ETSI ES 201 235-2, -3 and –4 may also be relevant.

17. Chapter VI – Calling line identification in ISDN networks - CLIP

ETSI EN 300 092 –2 to –6 concern PICs, PIXIT and test methods. The reference to them should only be informative.

18. Chapter VI – Calling line identification in ISDN networks – CLIR

ETSI EN 300 093 –2 to –6 concern PICs, PIXIT and test methods. The reference to them should only be informative

19. Chapter VI

A section on quality should be added. There is a two-part voluntary standard (ETSI EG 202 057) currently under final voting and this vote should be complete before the final version of the list of standards is published. EG 202 057 is more comprehensive than EG 201 769-1 required in Chapter II

20. Chapter VIII – Transmission systems – digital broadcasting

The reference for Multipoint Video Distribution Systems below 10 GHz should be ETSI 300 749, not 301 749

21. General – "ITU" references

These should be "ITU-T"

22. General – Version of Reference

It would be helpful if the text of the introductory explanatory note indicated how a reader could ascertain which version of a reference applies. Many of the ETSI documents referenced have undergone revision on one or more occasions.

__________

OFTEL (Office of Telecommunications, UK)

For further enquiries please address :

Keith Bowman

The National Post and Telecom Agency (PTS) has the following comments regarding the document for consultation.

Standards can be used for different purposes. An individual standard can often be used both for voluntary and regulatory purposes depending on the actual regulatory situation. It would in our opinion be of value to clarify this in the list of standards.

Other comments:

In part B chapter VII the documents related to mandatory requirements in the area of data protection can be moved to the section standards used for regulation in part A.

In the preface part 4 the ITU-Ts recommendations and CEPT SF handbook should be presented as well since they are referred to in this document. Before referring to the SF handbook it should however be confirmed that it is publicly available.

In the preface part 7 the regulation for LLUB EC/2887/2000 is referred to. In chapter V unbundled access to the local loop the recommendation 2000/417/EC is referred to. Since there now is a regulation for LLUB EC/2887/2000 the reference to recommendation 2000/417/EC may need to be amended.

There are many references to CTRs (Common Technical Regulations) in the document. It is our understanding that these regulations ended when the new R&TTE directive 99/5/EC entered into force on the 8/4 2000. These references should be removed since there are no mandatory interconnection requirements for telecommunications terminal equipment anymore. If, for some good reason, the references are kept, it must be clearly stated in the list that these standards are not mandatory and in some areas obsolete. Where the CTR:s have been developed to other relevant documents, it would be beneficial to the readers if this too was clearly written in the documents.

Page 12 chapter IV Network interconnection: Why is there no reference to ISUP 2000 from ITU-T? The Note referring to ISUP version 3 is partly unclear and should be changed to ETSI version 3.

Chapter IV access: We want to put your attention to the fact that ETSI within short is going to release a new package of standards regarding access. Therefore this section may need to be amended.

Chapter VI singel line analogue interface and telephone tones, network-generated tones: Here the reference to ETSI TR 101 041-1 might be to comprehensive since it also contains a report on network tones ordered by the commission. We propose to replace or complement the ETSI TR 101 041-1 with ITU-T E.180 and E.182.

Chapter VI directory enquiry services: Here is a reference to ITU-T F.510. We have a questionmark how much this standard is used on the market for enquiry services. ITU-T E.115 is for example used for searching between different countries databases for subscriber information.

Chapter VI European telephone access codes (‘388X’): This standard is used for regulation according to the universal service directive article 27. Therefor this section can be moved to part A of the document.

Chapter VI additional facilities: This seems to be a standard used for regulation for some operators according to the Universal Service Directive. This section should be moved to part A of the document.

Chapter VIII calling and connection line identification services: In the second frame it is unclear what the meaning is. It should be amended so that it is clear what article in the data protection directive it referrers to.

Chapter VIII location data for public telephone services: It is unclear why it is placed here since there is a section for caller location in chapter VII on page 18.

__________

PTS (National Post and Telecom Agency, Sweden)

For further enquiries please address :

Karoline Boström

Broadly, RNID notes that anything beyond Chapters I and II in Part A, all other sections are voluntary. We believe that at least Chapter VIII's Interoperability and Conditional Access Systems (pages 23/24) should be made compulsory.

The Interoperability paragraph refers to the Peritel or SCART connecter, (as it known outside France). An essential requirement for Switch Over is the need to connect digital set top boxes to the main TV and this is achieved by the SCART. But just a single SCART is often not sufficient if you also wish to connect the output of a VCR or DVD to the receiver as well. So, Peritels need to be mandatory and a minimum requirement of two sockets not just the one needs to be introduced.

Conditional Access (CA) is equally important if we are to achieve commonality between different set top boxes (and idTV's) operating with different service providers such as DTT and Satellite (and even variations between satellite operators). There has always been a lot of argument about the merits and demerits of different mechanisms to allow access to various service providers. Two forms have evolved- Simulcrypt (as mentioned in the Directive) and Multicrypt.

Simulcrypt, the proposed format, allows different decoders with different Conditional Access methods to decode different bouquets of channels from different service providers if the appropriate smartcard present. However, it adds to the complexity to the service providers' equipment - it needs more than one type of decoding signal but does allow the use of existing receivers without modification.

We wholeheartedly support the requirement for fitting a Common Interface (CI) to all decoders. C I sockets should be fitted directly to all decoders.

The DVB subtitling standard ETS 700 743 is missing from the document, we would welcome its inclusion. We understand it to be progressing within ETSI but at present not harmonised. However the standard is at "standstill" thus restricting the development of other competing forms which would dilute the work already done in this area.

The other important element is that of Multimedia Home Platform (MHP) – we note there has not been any mention of standardisation progress within ETSI since last year.

RNID also recommends that MHP may provide a good basis for standardisation for technology platforms for interactive services in future. Migration to MHP is already taking place and the system is compatible with Javascript, which will allow Internet content to be broadcast on television.

__________

RNID (Royal National Institute for Deaf People, London)

For further enquiries please address :

Mark Hoda

RTVV welcomes the Commission initiative to add the new broadcasting chapter to the list of standards and/or specifications. From a regulators perspective, it will be most helpful in the work of encouraging the operators to use an open API.

Page 23: The Article 24 and Annex VI, 2., of the Universal Service Directive applies to interoperability for both analogue and digital television sets. The first paragraph refers to the Cenelec EN 50 049-1:1997 standard for analogue television sets. The second paragraph does not refer to a specific standard or specification, but mentions as an example the DVB common interface connector. It would be clearifying if a reference to a standard or specification was added to the the list of standards on this point (TS 102 201 or EN 502 01?).

Page 24: The reference regarding Common interface specification for conditional access and other DVB decoder applications (DVB-CI) should be to CENELEC EN 50221. The reference to the report CENELEC R206-001 could be removed since a corrigendum to the EN 50221 makes the report consistent with the standard.

Page 25: The reference regarding Multipoint Video Distribution Systems below 10 GHz (DVB-MC) should be to the ETSI EN 300 749.

__________

RTVV (The Swedish Radio and TV Authority)

For further enquiries please address :

Peter Schierbeck 

Telenor appreciates the opportunity to comment on the draft list of standards and/or specifications for electronic communications networks and services and associated facilities and services, issue 1.

We find the inclusion of the MHP standard for APIs under chapter VIII of the list of standards to be a timely and positive follow-up of the decision by the Council and European Parliament in the Framework Directive art. 18. We believe that the publication of the standard in the Official Journal, together with other activities by the Commission to promote use of the standard across Europe, will be of crucial importance for the development of interoperability of digital interactive television services and the successful take-up of digital television.

__________

TELENOR

For further enquiries please address :

Harriet E. Berg