NeuStar Response to VeriSign's Inaccuracies

["Ganek, Jeff" <jeff.ganek@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> To Whom It May Concern:
> In VeriSign's response to the .net Request for Proposals (RFP), statements 
> were made about NeuStar's (NeuLevel> '> s parent company) performance with 
> regard to transition of the .US TLD and to the implementation of Wireless 
> Number Portability (WNP) in North America. VeriSign> '> s statements are 
> inaccurate. The following are the facts.
>       The .US domain was successfully transitioned from VeriSign to NeuStar 
> in November 2001.  In April 2002, NeuStar upgraded registry operations to a 
> real-time, EPP Shared Registration System (SRS). Introduction of the SRS 
> included a land rush that supported 103,000 registrations during the first 24 
> hours; of which 90,000 occurred in the first 6 hours. To be clear, there were 
> no > "> flaws> ">  with the transition of .US, nor with the implementation of 
> the SRS. Registrants were always able to make modifications to their domains. 
> The .US land rush was executed flawlessly and has operated to the most 
> stringent SLAs in the industry since launch. 
>       The NPAC (Number Portability Administration Center) is a real-time, 
> central registry of telephone numbers analogous to a domain registry.  The 
> registry updates the entire telecommunications routing infrastructure of 
> North America (i.e., the SS7 networks) within minutes of a number being > "> 
> ported> ">  (i.e. transferred).  Operated by NeuStar since 1997, the 
> registry> '> s database maintains 136 million registrations and supports 
> nearly every telecommunications service provider (TSP) in North America.  
> Essentially, NeuStar acts as the registry for these numbers and the TSPs act 
> as registrars.  In November 2003, WNP was implemented using the NPAC.   
>       The issue referred to by VeriSign was not related to the NPAC (the 
> central Registry), but rather to a related process called Intercarrier 
> Communications Process (ICP) that occurs between wireless service providers 
> prior to their interaction with the NPAC.  ICP proved to be difficult for the 
> entire industry due to late decisions on the selection of software vendors 
> and lack of industry testing.  A company purchased by NeuStar (NightFire) 
> shortly before WNP implementation provides ICP services to some wireless 
> service providers. Some of our customers, along with most wireless service 
> providers, experienced problems with their ICP operations in the early days 
> of WNP.   NeuStar, and the industry as a whole, rapidly addressed and 
> subsequently resolved the issues. 
>       To reiterate, the NPAC registry supported the implementation and growth 
> of WNP flawlessly.  NeuStar increased the capacity of the NPAC in preparation 
> for WNP and has supported tens of millions of additional registrations since 
> the implementation of WNP without incident.  There was not, as VeriSign 
> claimed, inadequate capacity planning on the NPAC side. As an OSS provider, 
> VeriSign should know issues related to the implementation of ICP are 
> completely unrelated to the operation of the NPAC registry for purposes of 
> wireless number portability.  
>       If ICANN> '> s evaluators for Sentan> '> s .net application require any 
> further details on these matters, please do not hesitate to contact me. 
> 
> 
> Yours sincerely, 
> Jeff Ganek
> Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
> NeuStar, Inc