Page 564 - Handbook of Modern Telecommunications

Network Organization and Governance 4-95

TABl E 4.5.2 Customer File with SLA Entries
Customer/Client Site A Site B Site C
Service ID SID1: FR2MEG SID1: VOIP SID1: FR2MEG
SID2: ATM64MEG SID2: Managed E1 Line SID2: Managed E1 Line
SID3: IP-VPN SID3: IP-VPN SID3: IP-VPN

• Description of processes: Each problem triggers specific escalation steps that may contain both
automatic and manual steps. Also the time windows are determined for each step.
Another table (Table 4.5.2) is constructed for each customer (client). This table details the services of
the client for each site. This table shows an example for two sites. Considering all the sites, each service
must have at least one source and one destination site.
The list of offered services is summarized in another table (Table 4.5.3). The service ID describes the
specific ID used by service providers. Also the metrics may be added onto this table.
This service portfolio table is generic. All service providers customize it to their own needs. This is the
first step. In the second step, KPIs are defined and offered for each of the services.
The actual SLAs, standardized as far as possible, are maintained in a separate database. In best inter-
est of clients and service provider, the total number of SLAs should be kept to a minimum. When reports
are requested, this SLA database is going to be used (Table 4.5.4) for periodic and ad hoc reports.
In establishing such a table, different views may be represented:
• SLAs could be different for each client
• SLAs may be agreed upon for each SID depending on metrics, timestamps, and sites
• Converging all SLAs for clients by the service provider may reduce the administration require-
ments significantly
In every case, simplification, unification, and standardization of SLAs are the main goal.
4.5.3.3.6 Determination of Peering Points
In determining the peering points, the following tasks should be considered:
• Geographical identification of peering points
• Decision about the peering alternative
• Clarification of ownership at the peering point
• Testing data collection capabilities
• Testing administration software
• Testing processing capabilities of collected data for multiple purposes
• Testing back-up capabilities, when administration is separated by service provider
• Checking the completeness of collected data for service providers settlements
• Trial operations emulating problem cases
• Checking the efficiency of escalation procedures
• Checking the accuracy of collected data
The total path between end points can be frequently broken down into multiple subpaths (see
Figure 4.5.6):

• LAN at site A
• WAN1
• WAN2
• LAN at site B
Each subpath is usually measured separately from each other. Between these so called disjunctions
points, peering points are located. Basically, there are two cases: