1. © 2007, PETER-SERVICE Minimizing Effect of Defects and Abnormal Conditions by Loosely Coupled Architecture of Convergent Billing Solution Maxim Samsonov TeleEvo-2007 Moscow, October 8-11, 2007

2. billing.ru Contents The Importance of Speed Revenue Assurance in the Real Time Technical Considerations

3. billing.ru Credits Steve Harris, T-Mobile UK Eric Priezkalns, T-Mobile UK @ IIR Prepaid Mobile Conference

4. billing.ru The Progress Is Defined by Faulures

5. billing.ru The Importance of Speed Delay is the principal cause of revenue loss for prepay services –delay in updating the customer’s balance for services recorded at the time of sale but where balance update was abnormally delayed –delay in recovery following outage The Importance of Speed

6. billing.ru “Even with perfect execution of transactions, the time it takes to update balances represents a risk that can be mathematically quantified” The Wedge Model Good = Very Fast Real Time = Good Real Time = Very Fast – which is not necessary true Loss Time The Importance of Speed

7. billing.ru The Event Based Model / Single account The Importance of Speed Loss Time Event 1 Event 2 Event 3 “Within the sequence of events each of them not processed before the next event represents a risk that can be statistically estimated only” Perfect = Before The Next Event Acceptable = Most Likely Before The Next Event Real Time = Within Predefined Constraints – as it is formally defined in computer science No loss if unprocessed

8. billing.ru The Exponential Impact / Multiply Accounts Loss Time We can assume that “quick enough” actions can reduce risk of loss significantly “Quick enough” The Importance of Speed

9. billing.ru Error Centric View Revenue Assurance in the Real Time Loss Time Fault ProactiveReactive Recovery

10. billing.ru Alarm Centric View Loss Time Fault Alarm Proactive Reactive Recovery Revenue Assurance in the Real Time

11. billing.ru Active Actions Loss Time ProactiveReactive Active Fault Alarm Recovery Revenue Assurance in the Real Time

12. billing.ru Active revenue assurance Fault-conscious design –Fail-over mechanism –Caching system Independent –Second control loop –Different algorithm –Loosely coupled and not locked step –Another chance to get it right Quick enough to avoid exponential loss No special tools needed –Always there Revenue Assurance in the Real Time

13. billing.ru Scope of the Solution Converged Billing System –Converged (“in a single box”) prepaid\postpaid –Converged (“in a single box”) on-line \ CDR charging –Other convergences not relevant to the subject … Active revenue assurance for specific outages –Lost of control – SCF and beyond –Link failure – Rо –Can not rate – OCS Can be inversed –Lost of CDRs – CDF\CGF Outages –Fault –Abnormal condition Technical Considerations

14. billing.ru As Simple As That ProactiveReactive CDR-based offline charging Fault of online charging Alarm Recovery of online charging Standards' evolution and maturing will quickly make this solution impossible Technical Considerations

15. billing.ru Billing Domain ONLINECHARGING OFFLINECHARGING WLAN BGCF MGCF MRFC SIP AS PCRF AF CDF CS-NE SGSN CGF OCS IMS GWF P-CSCF I- S- Service - NE GGSN PCEF 3GPPs “Ubiquitous Charging Architecture” Rating & account balance management Technical Considerations

16. billing.ru Online and Offline Charging If required by the operator, CDRs may additionally be generated for online charged subscribers. One way of achieving this is by performing online charging and offline charging simultaneously for these subscribers (3GPP TS 32.240) Rated CDRs Alternatively, the OCS can accomplish this by the use of the appropriate offline charging functions … Technical Considerations

17. billing.ru Practical Impact of Existing Approach Service platform with tightly coupled charging function Billing system with tightly coupled charging function Different values for online and offline rating No way to switch from online to offline charging Revenue loss due to faults and abnormal conditions in online charging Technical Considerations

18. billing.ru Recommended Architecture CTFCTF CFCF CDFCDF CGFCGF ABMFABMF RFRF SCFSCF Billing domain Redundant Cashed billing data Contract Technical Considerations

19. billing.ru Conclusions There are simple solutions to minimize impact of outages Current trend discourages them in favor of tightly coupled service platforms

20. © 2007, PETER-SERVICE Maxim Samsonov Maxim.Samsonov@billing.ru www.billing.ru Thank you ! © 2007, PETER-SERVICE