Page 534 - Handbook of Modern Telecommunications

Network Organization and Governance 4-65

19. Communication between contracting parties: Selection of phone, fax, letter, e-mail, or a combina-
tion of all the above. In addition, authorization and authentication of the sender is required. The
usual security agreements between contracting parties are in use.
20. Billing for services: This includes the price for services and discounts if objectives are not met.
Service providers publish their price structures. Bundling opportunities in case of multiple ser-
vices are strongly supported. Fixed prices or usage-based pricing are the alternatives. Conditions
and prerequisites for discounts should be defined in writing.
21. Payment regulations: Collection alternatives are agreed to in this section. Basically there are two:
flat rates for each month or usage-based payments. The manner of payment should be clarified.
Alternatives are: paper bill, direct debit, bank card, credit card, or electronic payment.
4.4.4.2 Closing Comments
• Services outlined in the agreement must be realistic; in other words, the service provider can
meet them.
• Measures for quality of service (QoS) should be accepted by both negotiating parties.
• The expected service level must measurable. If a service metric cannot be measured, it should be
left out of the SLA.
4.4.4.3 Horizontal and Vertical SLAs
There are basically two alternatives for SLAs from the perspective of service providers and network
operators:
4.4.4.3.1 Individual Service-Level Agreements
Customers (particularly large and important ones) may negotiate individually tailored SLAs with their
providers. This is because they in turn have SLAs with their own customers (the end users), and there is
a desire to make these SLAs line up. While this is certainly understandable, it is extremely difficult for
service providers and network operators to keep track of the many SLA variants that might be developed
or to respond effectively to problems when the terms of a service might vary widely from one customer
to the next. Contract management and access to contracts in real time are extremely important.

4.4.4.3.2 Standardized Service-Level Agreements
Customers that are not large enough to demand tailored SLAs are subjected to multiple SLAs from mul-
tiple service providers and network operators. They see some measures, such as availability, that may
sound the same but represent very different measures. They see multiple terms for the same thing. With
no standard terms or definitions, they are left having to make the “translation” in order to produce some
sort of measure of overall performance. Contract management and access to contracts in real time are
extremely important. It is very beneficial when both parties are using the same tools to supervise SLAs.
In summary, SLAs are either

• Generic, robust, and simple (A)
• Specific, flexible, and complex (B)
There are different types of SLAs (see Table 4.4.7). In order to certify SLAs of service providers, both
horizontal and vertical SLAs are under consideration. The axis of SLA dimensions are:
• Y-Axis: Service life cycles
• Resource utilization and billing
• Service assurance
• Service fulfillment
• X-Axis: Service portfolios
• Wireline voice services