ࡱ> ax`~@= ͦ~c0:p^xzy4c@|x py{y$`Ćȏ08T@)8h2-AG3:h)(u:NSSOiPA@[#iSFQp(̤wmoo2ݽoq< cY}elO;WX\qP~gb *!+9<<ҥxi߰ڙ!LgYOBwRd{Ʋ\x k!nȲj8Ole:p]J鶶6֗ҽ t1_;m+"^K<#!׭e̡[\ï4ʀ35#l(g,]*ŗ+{g7OZ^~^~./>~cccF0M]@CzT {VO!̀pn̆;- Ì2ʆo|ö!ͷ@ 1! Il'XTqUpLxoUc^7(JR3<[Wߪz[舰O+t:Fd]UD.*x|>de6#tX~B8!:F`6+.0F+zJ{{2HoV8U݋+Y{u NW8 Ǽ B?x2V&|x?z C:]1"ø*K s΋AO LCrwrDKB"N1Ɣ93' nOa\co =78o(?nba[v{D9ccigv3_yLB4C #oI_U&lCCD!>v><)rW42Cěyȿf`[!^ ?o_6:kwvq֒BcvGGvL{dn,mcٶEŘkʅ4@" ^&ٽ/D{ i\3LGq_5v:pǧs ȟ;M~Ghxqq·-찝&?c1D{)O줝"?b,)HxXn3eN:ܧ CihI wj8W83=cx[[Wo|e)ߖmVۢȧU o6[#-_,- ;ʹGҜ3?8&IlwΞl+bỿ;pnt.э?E%ΜA=L9s-+yWxQuK31ܴq%8逸wԳ;RwI}9#aM, mL6<7ѫ_ +<(;}q m{6V@F- 󃖰Z6U~کB AGkg">$Iv"q /Q➸_F~=xNbA^V򳯙c'w >3Kb>5*bꟋՄ{?7Lr GQ }ib:>dAcc+Ѩck:a:TSٚ:cG;]SkN/$/@b/V#'8 eSHX҅R}ݚ X8 +&zwp♍j}GwK7;8k0S}`q]_}naOM6o;Pⵁ}̯qB {ﯚ;qo۷ҳ/E$r&l7n5"78y;vŖ4|4I*s9Od}ңy#[WH}Ŋ|ҺFe/.|CI Ȫ"uM)v*;)v mj=[m`#8- <J)^5m CeU<^=u)lܳ u8Wl,*jžbjħjr dWh]1S7++nesbZe ASoJT> bޛh4U]{6lC;c3&Hhhf%}줢]R*OชP ;a-: |e^σxyQnVq-ʺY>}{OS' 233WZδϵ߃&\]U%LJu2=]gxP'8 sֽդ{4:K2i]{Ңi_~Iֽuo{;Xj~ҽF!U!ޱaM=}|3>.+-c͔X}:>Vtȳ p@sƜwA۩hczBSN+ A_l#1}FFzvXm$|yee,sowt i@ 6 v_Y/W +jW ɮ6mWe֣'/X #yXH:ڃ3 8'AH.еBQw9Z>*>H:߿elvn\I_u(o Žo𷗇@蓖bm)j:M|%u;_h~"#(    Chart Excel.Chart.80*Microsoft Excel Chart/ 0LDArial||0 0 0@ .  @n?" dd@  @@`` LD`(K1 %-:CEF G?$$"$ ͦ~c0:p^ 0AA@wʚ;ʚ;g4GdGd 0ppp@ <4dddd@qt 0|0<4BdBd@qt 0|0 80___PPT10 ?d-,Rev. 0 - June 13, 2002 AG Design, LLCO  =R/Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work+Andrew Gallant AG Design, LLC June 14, 2002,,Overview @O (adapted from MS PowerPoint outline) Assess the work of the ENUM Forum: Take a Project Management point of view. Look at Deliverables, Schedule, Resources. Forecast trends/time frames for completion. Consider what to do next: What are possible Forum-level alternatives? What next steps are feasible/practical? Questions/Discussion|)#T)#T9Status Summary@Original Plans (August 2001): Work start September 2001 First deliverables November-December 2001 Completion May 2002 Informal Expectations (last week): First deliverables September-October 2002 Completion TBDPZ#:Z#: Progress @Released Documents Antitrust Policy IPR Policy Letter Ballots 1004_1_0 (ARC TG) & 5000_0_9 (SEC TG) Both  failed to pass (May 2002)PGGAttention Areas@Difficult problems and complex issues Some areas include: Forum: Schedule, Content, Resources Industry: Consensus, Convergence Government: Roles (e.g., react, review) Other: Policy, Structure, The Economy(:: Schedule @Originally (as of August 2001): Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 17.5 weeks Provisioning was longest (26.3 weeks) Current trends (as of June 2002) Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 16.6 weeks Architecture is becoming the longest (16.9 weeks) Forecast trend - Forum finish  January 2005 (Time-to-complete decrease of 1 week per 9 months leads ,B!,N-8 ,B! ,N-8>q :Trends@ 8Unified Deliverable  1 of 2@Unified deliverable proposed on Tuesday. Experimental version with extracts: Current length: 52 pages Scoping estimates: Estimated final length: 60 to 100 pages Estimated labor needs: 60 to 1,000 hours Estimated labor resource at current levels: 4 to 16 hours per dayPMM;8Unified Deliverable  2 of 2@Estimated range of completion dates: Optimistic Midrange Pessimistic July 2002 Jan 2003 July 2003 Assumptions  scope/stability/support: Readiness for consensus/ballot only (approval cycle not included in estimates). Requires shared acceptance of stable text. Requires sufficient participation, cooperative work, and commitment of resources.P%='%=' #Costs and Dependencies@Participation is voluntary and free. No membership or participation fees. The Forum has no budget for its own use. Costs are absorbed by participants. Hosting conference calls and/or meetings. Labor, travel, support (web site, production). Forum depends on members: content and infrastructure; vulnerabilities are highlighted using  project management view.x%N%Y]%N%Y]  +Possible Alternatives@Three possible alternatives for the Forum: Continue  as is Re-constitute structure/methods/& ? Disband the Forum? Continuing  As Is : Easiest for now; path of least resistance. Trend analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce deliverables on any kind of schedule. Resource analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce consensus-approved deliverables.P+G+G8 Next Steps? @Re-constituting structure/methods/& ? Difficult in many ways. Takes resources and attention in very near term. Disband the Forum? Easy in some ways, difficult in other ways. Are there any feasible/practical alternatives? Summary: x%I[ %I[    ` 33` Sf3f` 33g` f` www3PP` ZXdbmo` \ғ3y`Ӣ` 3f3ff` 3f3FKf` hk]wwwfܹ` ff>>\`Y{ff` R>&- {p_/̴>?" dd@$~?" dd@  " @ `@ n?" dd@   @@``PR    @ ` ` p>> p(    60t  `}  T Click to edit Master title style! !  0v  `  RClick to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level!     S  0t} ^ `  >*  0 ^   @*  0؆ ^ `  J Page *H  0޽h ? 3380___PPT10. D Default Design0 zr0  (      0  P    P*     0     R*  d   c $ ?     0  0  RClick to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level!     S   6H _P   P*     6 _   R*  H   0޽h ? 3380___PPT10.0Dx  0(  x  c $4>  x  c $`. `    H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.`G+D=' = @B +}  @$(  r  S   `}   r  S  `  H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.@@L+D=' = @B +  P0(  x  c $  `}   x  c $ `  H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.@@L+D=' = @B +}  0$(  0r 0 S ̓ `}   r 0 S  `  H 0 0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.MO+D=' = @B +  @B(  @r @ S  `}    @ <  `  H @ 0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.0P+D=' = @B +}  `$(  `r ` S  `}   r ` S 0 `0  H ` 0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.pT+D=' = @B +  ` X(  x  c $# `}     0 TA AA ? `0  H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.pT+D=' = @B +}  t$(  tr t S  `}   r t S  `  H t 0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.W+D=' = @B +  p(0(  (x ( c $ `}   x ( c $ `  H ( 0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.W+D=' = @B +}  P$(  r  S  `}   r  S D` `0  H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i."Z+D=' = @B +}  $(  r  S  `}   r  S @ `  H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.00]+D=' = @B +}  $(  r  S X `}   r  S  `  H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.Jc+D=' = @B +*x} tWZ-nlY[jITK"NvIXȖ3$<f,0"%F!="O9 8 MG7L7efc_{)*9mp[ S2![w]3/JiEN 7?nob%=(ÝWe?,2N>9aY =Z(} J&>#V|ZbGa{gōn_+<;Zk@BZk:!,X+aXkaٰ`m&Xamus7!k;v:v kX{au!`u1K`] 2X m5 CuaWհu-`}a n؆[` 6Zaqq;Q:̬>CD(痻 61|K*2mx8*Bz5ݥ*2WZƾϟxsYđymu .zrx*tF~+N=B㸕[TX7~e{>1CHc͗G$?,_;u!~䮣( 9< [l#Coe@N{W7O~Qo's:Fvj ̱K:!!+Yί^@(n`YNt:o_?2td>/~ \晗es.(Dk/8L7?W=Nx+ !~!^?1P$,^vo'ax)(F R A0(&PgϷzg;uF`眞>l B{1=zqzCF.2|2G\9>9~r^襜\USjAOu˼Zݝ]83Բ;75B> M1*tp` s RegwWc4v6-:HPUJF-llAL Y,XdWr|ӸchRzZ|[= 2g՞pLG`o8Bk>;aT'p[Qe#Eo0NӴ+zY%Tw6wv-޽]RaٕRoOǥ*a+IҞDIi|Ȋgd ,ŎXT5v_L  ޯ ؙn_pqE;[y+)OJp忘ܜ\ rZeP>/#-]]iλǎ6P}d|llto=0J=jB&n ,=<;OvNw;pY  &&k=*޸=¼~_oaϖQuET1DR106]_pd\,}11Y蕲2i-ޑOUBU!$5I-Sg3z@tѩ{1f4x]=yjQtA>NgFaԅb&1!@xp)ms@mAS溆O)Զ2:HI ʂ)c؜DZ)}ﲯy,zCL|3v]*2WCMtxn/i-p4 jNi2-co g\Qq=V'mԚR hYMӲfm\fq<#,~X1lчHW_x4 Њ x4*&#ž Ëz7C 2MZ{hYbc;w %y!]ŋ=.Cхnrrұ7 hWhmyԀ1ws)Q< Cp|VȞ!JRJJ+]^eT,"YqdDNþJZcJ/6t^*tR_I,UWa~q2J紐#[^C$Ho~[]HLER$V@Ⳙu%"1IHXIyj+1HB HQ8J Eb*"jWb(S7>^|+1HBĒ$tޗcTZ>ּR_:-=LѼM{?9~rn9ue4_{-W+]~y#o[=/sET?{pV=_9SRݳ KuCI{6.qHBs#I캗Y3_sflǖ.^WGGs=E{?~~C{'ٿP{?K￷S{QW sXc)E9TBb+I6X-M^p%!R'6 B6I2 nL/X!zQž06(aA\ ^%? cmi|nby`̅L;7+nHse"٤T= ƖaX m]?O"FGQ>i Ө2-cv9!ϴià358ox*dV 9b^NH@5Ma]U;ԜTrҲ"0KE8y5\m۲4 qD C886ӣ-m{t|7MdmvTTVyQu̥DL6f: ~LF[̥ l )26"[#foE[xACo|q>Do!]9U#4EUި-$B[xK:YM\z$B.oo!7fy&-yxoT#4U]<,͒x<ޞ/ݳeI|y.5Om9[dȖfl]bU%v\[aVX_TH@5Mc*oF[aVN-KZֳf 6ղ[zZղ[xZįe|x0"~-˭ ivK|"[D-x8Ufo74KBB[xZmWr>8uoQ[ *}>oQ-*eE2[T%[O-'x1b.o+c1-xySU#մy!o1-- l---'=񆻉<}xxG1XԖC5PMkC$qy,p<=qh`qy#Oyqq8:G>x'⌸>nSU#4U޼G\Kqqq[\O%D\\uq[#.|oz|[7U5PM|=o[[>-_[74K|o:= =o |xK0HDUT4w[B-xKh݄>ExKxK"[}P8_8_@0 = Eg(@ $ oڞ@_,& t=Cg(x+dPP   B[>SU#մ(Gp[[!PyCx+Ep㭈xK[7B|^"""⭈V[5PMӴ;x+Bފ$ފoE oσEěXIr-fbKF[-vbToNH@5 ڙbtXr9ZԠŞ%>R9Ж8hK%h sď sFiPEG˺%hh sDjRh) )GRm-e}jnH@5 ڹRtTrTs! ;m2J1EP+sЕce̱2} jT`A(C$X )Xe^ 3G1PeJh+ r9Z1U#4%*1hhsB c YY|$?K,,,rtstQU5PMY,YYZGgyVJ&`+Iҁ[IV2O+ AU;DO+%O+=lFH#kdK42lFB#ȰVܘRSJۘRƔƔS5kL)1^DDDh@40 D@4ZѨѨш % DtkbWanǪ0O܄$M ssB0. -if`$iւiփiF0fY{X90l-k0FL-~,gwOs';tB>N)aꔈO |mG7_k,^7 / /` w1]<B].p!h*fyTѭ5ݭ7ݍ%tb:Lyp֞R˖Ni4Lb@ttL0=^fdj{RWۋ&{%db{3٧7ه&$}dbr!3 /M/L/d*1ӋxH/¾Ehzdz3H1L^_WKqLoMK~bfz1kM/֛^K3ӋK%^5Doz ^"^L/QL/e2^jWuhmKM/EK%K饊edM/22H^ouM/M/C$X\LY `纜`,c3\y\krĵ\µZp-ZZ;Z\+V  kE׊kZ\z\k@5p 0\A\.;VxgQq?|{ q>|1"}N`ThȆ4ٰF6Vkdk4:lFQ#ۤmȶhd[5mvFlFvFS#ۥnn[F!Œ=d!!# k2 AkGZ\z\kP5p 2\A\\C %אkbV2\+8qZǵqpdV2\+Vp 3\~0װkfFhqq  5pqpbVpv*=UkkõZĵ*k5õǺVqF\%\ \k5<^ŵFk Z#Zpaq ZpQZ-z\kZ Zk-õ6km:kiqZI1\uA\$\89}7 hMQ4 Bmc-5NW7?p\7-K$>HνJlK ql E҂mlpL6XmIH 캅 ;]&&?ƤȈMdĕMZ##=#n&#~6^ 4Ykdbdgdv`m!#x fE%^v[hnm%s?[lULnLnLM*%4կmmmힹ~IKEߗ%}$u;ěo2Q1*] 7*;<~OIw(v0d$Hɛ<7$&In7I͕X^hw$aINNä;;;ɤ{–=$hrgrߵa]JC- ܥܥZtRܭܭܭ3y!aқvt3kG7KŎ/NG"{^8T{:"^IJ"̧[Ag4 ?4U3ڣݦݮF5}~FvFvF6 ǭ& ؿ=7?ؿ#? g`X`H_P|<;qFvR#;hdg5G4s٣cٓSyiFF赋 ;z-'9Sc>Aq|9ٌi}] ޸zgH ÿY/$͝]??SǏǕ?b6{Ƞ=dhf>a}4%X.b̮OŘ]qo/;bn`1Xv)Pu^$b̮?3u:X'2h9 ZN*I%p>I*TូPNR䅚] 5~4 5T]/W 5NW@ٹ] lb/:X UzMN)S8249 MN)z }>+/TzÁơSTWyfB?sBͮ 9^uP>)^uPO}Ϭ 5j晷־|Ktp4,TOSO">Me+?A4Ts=Me>i-Bi*[lI mv,O5s)^ulSSk V6KE(:X'&bه LJ LJCY>̧VVֆ+&b &(%<5yF1y&ɳ<9>gY,&G?dHS"sJpN1hQ>Y2(*FU<yOQ>L=LQ>Ʀ(S|OL>LL><#PPb)SʤSʤS|Ҽ+CCCOiƧ2zZ)CO+V ]z er22M5w:Rhy OSUzJFG;d̫;̓YS !>-&i|x>?26EQmor]JKomUE"t_!.ISI|\)ޠ7_›akz:MFNe7EUQUkhjwa+(%ߏUx i3(;9EA`s/D1o_ Z YR_ xwbߕy^XMk@#׸@#Wb62@A@ Mŀ9mW':6ދs,Ntm34 Bghzhп.Pjhԡmt}rh;ԡti~kt#ԡr hFTE`A&&`^ Rw3Of@ Rf(AO<@ R[f%z nufqa Ea@_k:D+?WO㵦Ww Mqh/4oA?`;x)Gk_Vwc:/4N_h`XЍA\ᅦBU,Pv).4VAyһ ԯ=Gs40i).P$" )KIDDIL)"W$ ERH ~r%A6 CaP06 CaP06 CaP06 NlI SaT06L SaT06L SaT06L SaCʕ)l6B !FHa#R)l6B !†+ a)lX †a)lX †a)lX †a16/S{.wϥs,y\*Kxϥ6o{2a_f1,KO2˷ zb!.xP$ͯ-se*o[~3ƻ~wC^EWQ ԾF^V+p|{G>QWi_| ; wd+0c'֛Y᳃٤_ !q7'o7n1E40o z2qV2tbaF{"SW/pP%Zc@f/#f)w(Ǥ=۞-9Uo%@ f:8.HSP_⌏|,R h{= zݒ'~ɷ aLJ^M&NiAOY : !H]]Eq'=vY;tYC.rL-#3*68@;=h@EJAMO0B+HKR 2}#(   ՜.+,0      On-screen Show AG DesignSh5e  ArialTimes New RomanDefault DesignMicrosoft Excel ChartSlide 00Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work OverviewStatus Summary ProgressAttention Areas ScheduleTrendsUnified Deliverable 1 of 2Unified Deliverable 2 of 2Costs and DependenciesPossible Alternatives Next Steps?  Fonts UsedDesign TemplateEmbedded OLE Servers Slide Titles 2 &_KAndrew GallantAndrew Gallant-. 2 bC June 13, 2002.LDArial0<$ 0< 04@ .  @n?" dd@  @@`` LD`(K1 %-:CEF G?$$"$ ͦ~c0:p^ 0AA@wʚ;ʚ;g4GdGdT 0ppp@ <4ddddqt 00<4BdBdqt 00 80___PPT10 ?d-,Rev. 0 - June 13, 2002 AG Design, LLCO  =/Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work+Andrew Gallant AG Design, LLC June 14, 2002,,Overview @ (adapted from MS PowerPoint outline) Assess the work of the ENUM Forum: Take a Project Management point of view. Look at Deliverables, Schedule, Resources. Forecast trends/time frames for completion. Consider what to do next: What are possible Forum-level alternatives? What next steps are feasible/practical? Questions/Discussion & |)#T)#T9Status Summary@Original Plans (August 2001): Work start September 2001 First deliverables November-December 2001 Completion May 2002 Informal Expectations (last week): First deliverables September-October 2002 Completion TBDPZ#:Z#: Progress @Released Documents Antitrust Policy IPR Policy Letter Ballots 1004_1_0 (ARC TG) & 5000_0_9 (SEC TG) Both  failed to pass (May 2002)PGGAttention Areas@Difficult problems and complex issues Some areas include: Forum: Schedule, Content, Resources Industry: Consensus, Convergence Government: Roles (e.g., react, review) Other: Policy, Structure, The Economy(:: Schedule @4Originally (as of August 2001): Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 17.5 weeks Provisioning was longest (26.3 weeks) Current trends (as of June 2002) Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 16.6 weeks Architecture is becoming the longest (16.9 weeks) Forecast trend - Forum finish  January 2005 Some deliverables take longer. Some deliverables never get finished. ,B!,N-E ,B! ,N-1:Trends@ 8Unified Deliverable  1 of 2@Unified deliverable proposed on Tuesday. Experimental version with extracts: Current length: 52 pages Scoping estimates: Estimated final length: 60 to 100 pages Estimated labor needs: 60 to 1,000 hours Estimated labor resource at current levels: 4 to 16 hours per dayPMM;8Unified Deliverable  2 of 2@Estimated range of completion dates: Optimistic Midrange Pessimistic July 2002 Jan 2003 July 2003 Assumptions  scope/stability/support: Readiness for consensus/ballot only (approval cycle not included in estimates). Requires shared acceptance of stable text. Requires sufficient participation, cooperative work, and commitment of resources.P%='%=' #Costs and Dependencies@Participation is voluntary and free. No membership or participation fees. The Forum has no budget for its own use. Costs are absorbed by participants. Hosting conference calls and/or meetings. Labor, travel, support (web site, production). Forum depends on members: content and infrastructure; vulnerabilities are highlighted using  project management view.x%N%Y]%N%Y]  +Possible Alternatives@Three possible alternatives for the Forum: Continue  as is Re-constitute structure/methods/& ? Disband the Forum? Continuing  As Is : Easiest for now; path of least resistance. Trend analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce deliverables on any kind of schedule. Resource analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce consensus-approved deliverables.P+G+G8 Next Steps? @Re-constituting structure/methods/& ? Difficult in many ways. Takes resources and attention in very near term. Disband the Forum? Easy in some ways, difficult in other ways. Are there any feasible/practical alternatives? Summary: Assessments show that real problems exist. Need to consider these while reviewing work plans. ________________ %I[ ^%I[ p C}  @$(  r  S ̨  `}   r  S   `   H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.@@L+D=' = @B +}  $(  r  S   `}   r  S H ` `   H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.Jc+D=' = @B +r!8 ֦+&(    Chart Excel.Chart.80*Microsoft Excel Chart/ 0LDArial0<$ 0< 04@ .  @  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGcIKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_bdefghijklmnopqrstuvwJz{|}HRoot EntrydO)y@ PicturesCurrent UserJSummaryInformation(8PowerPoint Document( 5DocumentSummaryInformation8(< Chart Excel.Chart.80*Microsoft Excel Chart/ 0LDArial0<$ 0< 04@ .  @n?" dd@  @@`` LD`(K1 %-:CEF G?$$"$ ͦ~c0:p^ 0AA@wʚ;ʚ;g4GdGdT 0ppp@ <4ddddqt 00<4BdBdqt 00 80___PPT10 ?d-,Rev. 0 - June 13, 2002 AG Design, LLCO  =[/Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work+Andrew Gallant AG Design, LLC June 14, 2002,,Overview @O (adapted from MS PowerPoint outline) Assess the work of the ENUM Forum: Take a Project Management point of view. Look at Deliverables, Schedule, Resources. Forecast trends/time frames for completion. Consider what to do next: What are possible Forum-level alternatives? What next steps are feasible/practical? Questions/Discussion|)#T)#T9Status Summary@Original Plans (August 2001): Work start September 2001 First deliverables November-December 2001 Completion May 2002 Informal Expectations (last week): First deliverables September-October 2002 Completion TBDPZ#:Z#: Progress @Released Documents Antitrust Policy IPR Policy Letter Ballots 1004_1_0 (ARC TG) & 5000_0_9 (SEC TG) Both  failed to pass (May 2002)PGGAttention Areas@Difficult problems and complex issues Some areas include: Forum: Schedule, Content, Resources Industry: Consensus, Convergence Government: Roles (e.g., react, review) Other: Policy, Structure, The Economy(:: Schedule @4Originally (as of August 2001): Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 17.5 weeks Provisioning was longest (26.3 weeks) Current trends (as of June 2002) Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 16.6 weeks Architecture is becoming the longest (16.9 weeks) Forecast trend - Forum finish  January 2005 Some deliverables take longer. Some deliverables never get finished. ,B!,N-E ,B! ,N-1 :Trends@ 8Unified Deliverable  1 of 2@Unified deliverable proposed on Tuesday. Experimental version with extracts: Current length: 52 pages Scoping estimates: Estimated final length: 60 to 100 pages Estimated labor needs: 60 to 1,000 hours Estimated labor resource at current levels: 4 to 16 hours per dayPMM;8Unified Deliverable  2 of 2@Estimated range of completion dates: Optimistic Midrange Pessimistic July 2002 Jan 2003 July 2003 Assumptions  scope/stability/support: Readiness for consensus/ballot only (approval cycle not included in estimates). Requires shared acceptance of stable text. Requires sufficient participation, cooperative work, and commitment of resources.P%='%=' #Costs and Dependencies@Participation is voluntary and free. No membership or participation fees. The Forum has no budget for its own use. Costs are absorbed by participants. Hosting conference calls and/or meetings. Labor, travel, support (web site, production). Forum depends on members: content and infrastructure; vulnerabilities are highlighted using  project management view.x%N%Y]%N%Y]  +Possible Alternatives@Three possible alternatives for the Forum: Continue  as is Re-constitute structure/methods/& ? Disband the Forum? Continuing  As Is : Easiest for now; path of least resistance. Trend analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce deliverables on any kind of schedule. Resource analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce consensus-approved deliverables.P+G+G8 Next Steps? @Re-constituting structure/methods/& ? Difficult in many ways. Takes resources and attention in very near term. Disband the Forum? Easy in some ways, difficult in other ways. Are there any feasible/practical alternatives? Summary: x%I[ %I[    @B(  @r @ S l+ `}    @ <,  `  H @ 0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.0P+D=' = @B +}  `$(  `r ` S H-  `}   r ` S . 0 `0   H ` 0޽h ? 33___PPT10i.pT+D=' = @B +r} 5 }&(    Chart Excel.Chart.80*Microsoft Excel Chart/ 0)*+,-./01234&_5Andrew GallantAndrew Gallant    (0Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum WorkAndrew GallantrAndrew Gallantr28rMicrosoft PowerPoint St@p @Ƃ"@0Gg  7  x-- @ !x--'@Arial-. 2 b June 14, 2002C."SystemH-@Arial-. 2 bAG Design, LLC.-@Arial-. 2 bPage 7.-@Arial-.  2 b1.-@Arial-. 72 M Assessing the Project Status of     .--M-@Arial-. 2 ENUM Forum Work .--h-@Arial-. 2 Andrew Gallant    .-@Arial-. 2 AG Design, LLC    .-@Arial-. 2  June 14, 2002C   .-.&_Andrew GallantAndrew Gallant .-@Arial-. 2  June 14, 2002C   .-n?" dd@  @@`` LD`(K1 %-:CEF G?$$"$ ͦ~c0:p^ 0AA@wʚ;ʚ;g4GdGdT 0ppp@ <4ddddqt 00<4BdBdqt 00 80___PPT10 ?R-June 14, 2002 AG Design, LLCO  =/Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work+Andrew Gallant AG Design, LLC June 14, 2002,,Overview @ (adapted from MS PowerPoint outline) Assess the work of the ENUM Forum: Take a Project Management point of view. Look at Deliverables, Schedule, Resources. Forecast trends/time frames for completion. Consider what to do next: What are possible Forum-level alternatives? What next steps are feasible/practical? Questions/Discussion & |)#T)#T9Status Summary@Original Plans (August 2001): Work start September 2001 First deliverables November-December 2001 Completion May 2002 Informal Expectations (last week): First deliverables September-October 2002 Completion TBDPZ#:Z#: Progress @Released Documents Antitrust Policy IPR Policy Letter Ballots 1004_1_0 (ARC TG) & 5000_0_9 (SEC TG) Both  failed to pass (May 2002)PGGAttention Areas@Difficult problems and complex issues Some areas include: Forum: Schedule, Content, Resources Industry: Consensus, Convergence Government: Roles (e.g., react, review) Other: Policy, Structure, The Economy(:: Schedule @4Originally (as of August 2001): Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 17.5 weeks Provisioning was longest (26.3 weeks) Current trends (as of June 2002) Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 16.6 weeks Architecture is becoming the longest (16.9 weeks) Forecast trend - Forum finish  January 2005 Some deliverables take longer. Some deliverables never get finished. ,B!,N-E ,B! ,N-1:Trends@ 8Unified Deliverable  1 of 2@Unified deliverable proposed on Tuesday. Experimental version with extracts: Current length: 52 pages Scoping estimates: Estimated final length: 60 to 100 pages Estimated labor needs: 60 to 1,000 hours Estimated labor resource at current levels: 4 to 16 hours per dayPMM;8Unified Deliverable  2 of 2@Estimated range of completion dates: Optimistic Midrange Pessimistic July 2002 Jan 2003 July 2003 Assumptions  scope/stability/support: Readiness for consensus/ballot only (approval cycle not included in estimates). Requires shared acceptance of stable text. Requires sufficient participation, cooperative work, and commitment of resources.P%='%=' #Costs and Dependencies@Participation is voluntary and free. No membership or participation fees. The Forum has no budget for its own use. Costs are absorbed by participants. Hosting conference calls and/or meetings. Labor, travel/calling-in, support (web site, production). Forum depends on members: content and infrastructure; vulnerabilities are highlighted using  project management view.x%N%d]%N%d]  +Possible Alternatives@Three possible alternatives for the Forum: Continue  as is Re-constitute structure/methods/& ? Disband the Forum? Continuing  As Is : Easiest for now; path of least resistance. Trend analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce deliverables on any kind of schedule. Resource analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce consensus-approved deliverables.P+G+G8 Next Steps? @Re-constituting structure/methods/& ? Difficult in many ways. Takes resources and attention in very near term. Disband the Forum? Easy in some ways, difficult in other ways. Are there any feasible/practical alternatives? Summary: Assessments show that real problems exist. Need to consider these while reviewing work plans. ________________ %I[ ^%I[ p   ` 33` Sf3f` 33g` f` www3PP` ZXdbmo` \ғ3y`Ӣ` 3f3ff` 3f3FKf` hk]wwwfܹ` ff>>\`Y{ff` R>&- {p_/̴>?" dd@$~?" dd@  " @ `@ n?" dd@   @@``PR    @ ` ` p>> p(    6s  `}  T Click to edit Master title style! !  00v  `  RClick to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level!     S  0| ^ `  >*  0 ^   @*  0h ^ `  J Page *H  0޽h ? 3380___PPT10. D Default Design}  P$(  r  S   `}   r  S $ ` `0   H  0޽h ? 33___PPT10i."Z+D=' = @B +rox 08 Kq&(     Chart Excel.Chart.80*Microsoft Excel Chart`/ 0DArialNew h1<$ 0< 04"DTimes New Roman<$ 0< 04@ .  @n?" dd@  @@`` TLh ,L= %-:CEF GH ?$$"$ ͦ~c0:p^ 0AA@wʚ;ʚ;g4GdGdT 0ppp@ <4ddddqt 0@1<4BdBdqt 0@1 80___PPT10 ?R-June 14, 2002 AG Design, LLCO  =</Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work+Andrew Gallant AG Design, LLC June 14, 2002,,Overview @ (adapted from MS PowerPoint outline) Assess the work of the ENUM Forum: Take a Project Management point of view. Look at Deliverables, Schedule, Resources. Forecast trends/time frames for completion. Consider what to do next: What are possible Forum-level alternatives? What next steps are feasible/practical? Questions/Discussion & |)#T)#T9Status Summary@Original Plans (August 2001): Work start September 2001 First deliverables November-December 2001 Completion May 2002 Informal Expectations (last week): First deliverables September-October 2002 Completion TBDPZ#:Z#: Progress @Released Documents Antitrust Policy IPR Policy Letter Ballots 1004_1_0 (ARC TG) & 5000_0_9 (SEC TG) Both  failed to pass (May 2002)PGGAttention Areas@Difficult problems and complex issues Some areas include: Forum: Schedule, Content, Resources Industry: Consensus, Convergence Government: Roles (e.g., react, review) Other: Policy, Structure, The Economy(:: Schedule @4Originally (as of August 2001): Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 17.5 weeks Provisioning was longest (26.3 weeks) Current trends (as of June 2002) Planned  time to complete per deliverable: Average for all: 16.6 weeks Architecture is becoming the longest (16.9 weeks) Forecast trend - Forum finish  January 2005 Some deliverables take longer. Some deliverables never get finished. ,B!,N-E ,B! ,N-1:Trends@ 8Unified Deliverable  1 of 2@Unified deliverable proposed on Tuesday. Experimental version with extracts: Current length: 52 pages Scoping estimates: Estimated final length: 60 to 100 pages Estimated labor needs: 60 to 1,000 hours Estimated labor resource at current levels: 4 to 16 hours per dayPMM;8Unified Deliverable  2 of 2@Estimated range of completion dates: Optimistic Midrange Pessimistic July 2002 Jan 2003 July 2003 Assumptions  scope/stability/support: Readiness for consensus/ballot only (approval cycle not included in estimates). Requires shared acceptance of stable text. Requires sufficient participation, cooperative work, and commitment of resources.P%='%=' #Costs and Dependencies@Participation is voluntary and free. No membership or participation fees. The Forum has no budget for its own use. Costs are absorbed by participants. Hosting conference calls and/or meetings. Labor, travel/calling-in, support (web site, production). Forum depends on members: content and infrastructure; vulnerabilities are highlighted using  project management view.x%N%d]%N%d]  +Possible Alternatives@Three possible alternatives for the Forum: Continue  as is Re-constitute structure/methods/& ? Disband the Forum? Continuing  As Is : Easiest for now; path of least resistance. Trend analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce deliverables on any kind of schedule. Resource analysis suggests low confidence in ability to produce consensus-approved deliverables.P+G+G8 Next Steps? @Re-constituting structure/methods/& ? Difficult in many ways. Takes resources and attention in very near term. Disband the Forum? Easy in some ways, difficult in other ways. Are there any feasible/practical alternatives? Summary: Assessments show that real problems exist. Need to consider these while reviewing work plans. ________________ %I[ ^%I[ p > RJune 14, 2002 AG Design, LLC    ,$ (  , , 6B@  qThis document is offered to the ENUM Forum as a basis for discussion and is not a binding proposal on AG Design, LLC. AG Design, LLC specifically reserves the right to amend or withdraw the statements contained herein. z0 " " <" " " " V"  LB , c $DRB , s *DoLB , c $D  RB , s *Do   , 6Tw ]CONTRIBUTION #: GEN0033R0(0  , 6^@p@' eSource: AG Design, LLC20  4  , 6ip@  BContributor: Andrew Gallant abgallant@aol.com +1 301 762 40246C0 ``&@p``  , 6(p p@  Date Submitted: June 14, 200260``@p``  , 6z p  8Title: Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work B90``/`p``  , 6` _ENUM FORUM CONTRIBUTION,0"H , 0޽h ? ̙33rr+< 5-Oh+'0 `h    (0Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum WorkAndrew GallantrAndrew Gallantr28rMicrosoft PowerPoint St@p @Ƃ"@0Gg  f  x-- @ !x--'@"Arial-. 72 Gw This document is offered to the ."SystemH-@"Arial-. 2 G ENUM Forum.-@"Arial-. ?2 G"%as a basis for discussion and is not .-@"Arial-. (2 Q|a binding proposal on .-@"Arial-. 2 QAG Design, LLC.-@"Arial-.  2 Q . .-@"Arial-. 2 QAG Design, LLC.-@"Arial-. (2 QSspecifically reserves .-@"Arial-. f2 [?the right to amend or withdraw the statements contained herein..---%)dd--'--%)hh--'--%)--'--%)##--'@"Arial-. -2 ^CONTRIBUTION #: GEN0033R0t      .-@"Arial-. 2 ;Source: .-@"Arial-. 2 AG Design, LLC  .-@"Arial-. 2 ; Contributor: .-@"Arial-. 2 Andrew Gallant   .-@"Arial-. !2 abgallant@aol.comr  .-@"Arial-. 2 +1 301 762 4024.-@"Arial-. 2 ;Date Submitted:   .-@"Arial-. 2 June 14, 2002d.-@"Arial-. 2 ;Title:.-@"Arial-. N2 /Assessing the Project Status of ENUM Forum Work      .-@"Arial-. *2 #~ENUM FORUM CONTRIBUTION     .-