Intelligent Network Services in Multi
Operator and Multi Network Scenario Regulations, 2006[1] [27th November,
2006] In exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 36, read with sub-clauses (ii), (iii), (iv), (vi) and (vii) of clause
(b) of sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of
India Act, 1997 (24 of 1997), the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India hereby
makes the following regulations, namely:— (1) These regulations may be
called the Intelligent Network Services in Multi Operator and Multi Network
Scenario Regulations, 2006 (13 of 2006). (2) These regulations shall
come into force from the date of their publication in the Official Gazette. In these regulations, unless the context
otherwise requires,— (a) “Act” means the Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (24 of 1997); (b) “Access Providers” includes
the Basic Operator, Cellular Mobile Service Provider and Unified Access Service
Provider; (c) “Authority” means the
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India established under sub-section (1) of
Section 3 of the Act; (d) “Basic Operator” means a
service provider who has been granted a licence under Section 4 of the Indian
Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885) and who provides basic telephone service in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the licence; (e) “Cellular Mobile Telephone Service
Provider” means a Cellular Mobile Telephone Service Provider who has been
granted a licence under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of
1885) and who provides Cellular Mobile Telephone Service in a specified service
area in accordance with the terms and conditions of the licence; (f) “Eligible Service Provider”
means service provider who has been granted a licence under Section 4 of the
Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885) and who is eligible to provide the
service in accordance with terms and conditions of licence; (g) “Interconnection” means the
commercial and technical arrangements under which the service providers connect
their equipment, networks and services to enable their customers to have access
to the customers, services and networks of other service providers; (h) “Intelligent Network” means
a network architecture for the operation and provision of new services which is
characterized by— (A) extensive use of
information processing techniques; (B) efficient use of network
resources; (C) modularisation and
reusability of network functions; (D) integrated service
creations and implementation by means of the modularised resuable network
functions; (E) flexible allocation of
network functions to physical entities; (F) portability of network
functions among physical entities; standardised communication between network
functions via service independent interfaces; (G) service subscriber control
of some subscriber-specific service attributes; (H) service user control of
some user-specific service attributes; standardised management of service
logic; (i) “Service Control Point”
means a real time database— (A) which stores customer
records; (B) which executes one of the
range of software routines customized for particular applications, when
accessed by an enquiry from it; (C) which sends instruction
back to the Service Switching Point to process the call; (j) “National Numbering Plan”
means the National Numbering Plan 2003, or, any such plan, made subsequently by
the Government of India, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology,
Department of Telecommunication; (k) “Service Switching Point”
means the Switching Point providing the users with access to the network and
performing any necessary switching functionality which— (A) consists of the hardware
switch and basic call control software with the added functionality of
Intelligent Network; (B) allows access to the set of
Intelligent Network capabilities; and (C) contains detection
capability to detect request for Intelligent Network based services; (l) “regulations” means the
Intelligent Network Services in Multi Operator and Multi Network Scenario
Regulation, 2006; (m) “Unified Access Service
Provider” means a Unified Access Service Provider who has been granted a
licence under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885) and who
provides Unified Access Service in a specified service area in accordance with
the terms and conditions of the licence; (n) all other words and
expressions used in these regulations but not defined, and defined in the Act
and the rules and other regulations made there under, shall have the meanings
respectively assigned to them in the Act or the rules or other regulations, as
the case may be. All Basic Operators, Cellular Mobile Service
Providers and Unified Access Service Providers shall provide interconnection to
all the Eligible Service Providers for the purpose of giving an option to subscribers
of all Access Providers to exercise option for using the Intelligent Network
Services of other Eligible Service Providers. No Basic Operator, Cellular Mobile Service
Provider and Unified Access Service Provider shall directly or indirectly deny
its consumers accessing Intelligent Network Services of his choice which are
available in multi-operator multi-network scenario. All Basic Operators, Cellular Mobile Service
Providers and Unified Access Service Providers shall have switches capable of
resolving the access codes allotted as per National Numbering Plan made by the
Government of India, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology,
Department of Telecommunication for the Intelligent Network Services available
in multi-operator multi-network scenario. All Eligible Service Providers shall follow
the Numbering plan for the Intelligent Network Services in accordance with the
National Numbering Plan. All Eligible Service Providers shall launch
the Intelligent Network Services in Multi-Operator Multi-Network scenario after
obtaining adequate access code allocation from the Administrator of the
National Numbering Plan or the Licensor, as the case may be. All Eligible Service Providers providing the
Intelligent Network Services in Multi-Operator Multi-Network scenario shall use
such type of network equipment (including circuit or packet switches) which
conform to the International Telecommunication Union and Telecommunication
Engineering Centre standards and standards of the industry: Provided that in the case of new technologies
where no standards have been determined, all Eligible Service Providers shall
deploy type of network equipment (including circuit or packet switches)
approved by the Central Government and the Licensor. (1) All Eligible Service
Providers engaged in providing, directly or indirectly, Intelligent Network
services shall ensure that there shall be no deterioration in the Quality of
Service standards applicable to the underlying bearer network. (2) The Quality of Service
standards specified for voice services or applicable to voice services shall
apply to Intelligent Network Services, which includes all circuit switched, or
Packet Switched Voice Services. (1) All Eligible Service
Providers shall provide the Intelligent Network Services in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the licence granted to them under Section 4 of the
Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885). (2) Without prejudice to the
conditions of the licence granted to the Basic Operator, Cellular Mobile
Service Provider and Unified Access Service Provider and other telecom service
provider under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885), such
Basic Operators, Cellular Mobile Service Provider and Unified Access Service
Provider and other telecom service provider may use resources of any other
telecom service provider for Intelligent Network Services under commercial and
technical arrangements or agreements entered among themselves as per mutually
agreed terms and conditions. [2][(2-A) All Eligible Service
Providers providing Intelligent Network Services shall enter into
interconnection agreement with all Access Providers under Regulation 3 on such
commercial and technical arrangements or agreements, as may be mutually agreed
between them;] (3) Every arrangement or
agreement entered under [3][sub-regulation
(2) and sub-regulation (2-A)] shall specify architecture for implementation of
Intelligent Network Services. (4) Every arrangement or
agreement under sub-regulation (2) shall be entered into within ninety days
from the date of commencement of these regulation for providing Intelligent
Network Services to subscriber of other telecom service providers: Provided that in a case any Basic Operator or
Cellular Mobile Service Provider or Unified Access Service Provider fails to
enter into arrangements or agreement under sub-regulation (2), the Authority
may, on an application made by the concerned service provider and having regard
to the interest of the service providers and consumers of the telecom sector,
extend the said period of three months to six months. [4][(4-A) Every arrangement or
agreement under sub-regulation (2-A) shall be entered into within ninety days
from the date of commencement of the Intelligent Network Services in Multi
Operator and Multi Network Scenario (Amendment) Regulations, 2012 for providing
Intelligent Network Services to subscribers of Access Providers: Provided that every Eligible Service Provider
who starts offering Intelligent Network Services on or after the date of
commencement of the Intelligent Network Services in Multi Operator and Multi
Network Scenario (Amendment) Regulations, 2012 shall enter into arrangements or
agreements under sub-regulation (2-A) with all Access Providers with ninety
days from the date of commencement of such service: Provided further that every arrangements or
agreement under sub-regulation (2-A) shall be entered into with the Access
Provider with starts providing services after commencement of Intelligent
Network Service in Multi Operator and Multi Network Scenario (Amendment)
Regulations, 2012 within ninety days from the date of commencement of service
by the Access Provider: Provided also that in case any Eligible
Service Provider fails to enter into arrangement or agreement under
sub-regulation (2-A), the Authority may, on an application made by the
concerned service provider and having regard to the interest of the service providers
and consumers of the telecom sector, extend the said period of ninety days to
one hundred eighty days.] (5) All Eligible Service
Providers providing Intelligent Network Services shall furnish call data
records of all the calls handled by him as and when required by the Central
Government or any authority specified by it or the Authority. (6) Every arrangement or
agreement entered under [5][sub-regulation
(2) and sub-regulation (2-A)] shall be submitted to the Authority for
registration within fifteen days from the date of entering into such agreement. (7) The arrangements or
agreement entered under [6][sub-regulation
(2) and sub-regulation (2-A)] shall come into force within thirty days from the
date of entering into such arrangements or agreements. (8) In case any [7][Eligible
Service Provider] fails to enter into agreements or arrangements within the
stipulated time, they shall intimate within fifteen days of such failure to the
Authority with complete details thereof and after examining such failure and
details furnished by the service providers, the Authority shall specify the
interconnection arrangement. (9) All the provisions of these
regulations shall apply to the commercial and technical arrangements or
agreement entered into under which licensed Access Service Providers shall
connect their equipment, networks and services to enable their customers to
have access to the Intelligent Network of other Service Providers. (1) Without prejudice to
provisions of the rules made under the Act, other regulations made and
directions issued thereunder, the charges and sharing of revenues for the
service features, network architecture and resources used for Intelligent
Network Services shall be determined on reciprocal basis and on
non-discriminatory basis by the [9][Basic
Operators, Cellular Mobile Service Providers, Unified Access Service Providers,
or Eligible Service Provider] themselves under the arrangements or agreements
entered under [10][sub-regulation
(2) and sub-regulation (2-A)] of Regulation 10. (2) Every Basic Operator,
Cellular Mobile Service Provider, Unified Access Service Provider and other
telecom service provider (here referred to as the first party) shall pay the
same charges and share the same revenues for the service, network architecture
and resources used for Intelligent Network Services referred to in under
sub-regulation (1) to the other Basic Operator, Cellular Mobile Service
Provider, Unified Access Service Provider and other telecom service provider
(hereafter referred to as the second party) which are payable by the second
party to the first party for similar service, network architecture and
resources used for Intelligent Network Services. (3) The charges and sharing of
revenues under sub-regulation (1) shall be in addition to the interconnection
charges specified under the Telecommunication Interconnection Usage Charges
Regulation, 2003 (4 of 2003) made under the Act. Note.—An Explanatory Memorandum below
explains the provisions of these regulations. Explanatory
Memorandum (1) Intelligent Network (IN) as
a concept was born amidst the inability of the competing Service Providers to
offer advanced services to their subscribers in the face of dissimilar service
implementation in the Switching Systems supplied by different vendors.
Intelligent Network is a Telecommunication Network Architecture for
provisioning of advanced services quickly. (2) IN Services add value to
Voice and Date Bearer Services through Number Translation, Alternate Billing
etc. These features are provided with the help of network databases (also known
as Service Control Points-SCPs) endowed with query-response protocols using
which the underlying bearer network entities such as PSTN/ISDN Switches, Mobile
Switching Centres (MSC) and Media Gateways (MG) communicate with it. The bearer
network entities designated to communicate with the SCPs are known as the
Service Switching Points (SSPs). (3) With respect to the
physical Architecture, the SCPs and the SSPs can be within the same Node,
co-located or remotely located and communicate over the SS7 signalling network.
The rest of the bearer network entities are independent of the IN Nodes. This
independence lets the network providers to utilize the same IN Infrastructure
for a variety of networks viz. Fixed, WLL-F, WLL-M, Cellular Mobile, VoIP.
Therefore, IN can provide twin advantages of new revenue streams and investment
protection. (4) With the induction of new
Basic and Cellular Operators in the Indian Telecommunication network, a
Multi-Operator environment has emerged and therefore Authority decided to
constitute an Expert Committee (hereinafter referred as Committee) vide its
Order No. 416-2/2003-FN, dated 28th February, 2003 on IN Services in
Multi-Operator Multi-Service Scenario. The Committee included members from
TRAI, DOT, TEC, CDOT, NLDOs and ILDOs (BSNL, VSNL, Reliance, BTSOL), MTNL and
other Access Providers represented through Associations of Operators, i.e. COAI
and ABTO (now AUSPI). (5) The Authority had mandated
the Committee mainly to finalize necessary Technical and Regulatory inputs as
may be required for the introduction of Intelligent Network(IN) Services based
on the IN platform and Inter-Network accessibility in a Multi-Service
Multi-Operator environment in the country along with consideration of Network
Architecture, Interconnection, Interoperability and Charging and Billing
issues. (6) The Committee held a number
of meetings to deliberate upon the issues and submitted its Report in
September, 2005. In its Report, the Committee observed that from a Regulator's
perspective, Intelligent Network (IN) Services pose a challenge due to— — Non-availability of B number, i.e. Called Party
Number at the Originating Network Interfaces, in many cases, — Alternate billing options, i.e. Calling
party pays in full or part, — Called party pays in full or part or a
third party pays, and, — Distributed location of Functional
Entities, — Difficulties in transparent application of
the Interconnect regime that could be termed as equitable and mutually
beneficial to the Interconnecting operators. (7) Authority analyzed the
Committee's Report in great detail and observed that there was consensus among
all Service Providers for sharing their Intelligent Network (IN) platform. The
Authority also observed that there is consensus among all service providers on
all issues except Architecture. (8) Authority also examined all
the pros and cons of all the three Architecture suggested by the Committee in
the background of the present License conditions of various categories of
Service Providers. (9) IN Services as defined in
TEC Generic Requirement (GR) document are shown in Appendix-I, Table 1. The
Table also defines present allocation for Intelligent Network (IN) Services in
the National Numbering Plan (NNP) 2003 and Rental/Revenue Share components. (10) It was also noted by
Authority that, in most of the developed countries, Intelligent Network (IN)
Services are easily accessible by all the users. As such, any subscriber of any
Access Provider is able to access the Intelligent Network (IN) Services
provided by any other Service Provider from anywhere in the Access Provider's
Network. In contrast, in India at present subscribers are able to access the
Intelligent Network (IN) platform of their own Access Service Provider only. (11) All telecom Service
Providers in India operate their network under the provision of their
respective licences granted by Department of Telecommunication. The operators
have been granted full freedom by the licensor to deploy technology of their
own choice within their network. Also, Intelligent Network (IN) Service is not
a separate service, as neither New Telecom Policy (NTP) 99 recognizes this as a
separate Service nor licensor has categorized it as a separate Service. It is a
Network Architecture wherein centralized logic is built in to enable the
Service Providers to provide services to its customers in their licensed
Service Areas as per the terms and conditions of their License. (12) Taking all these aspects
into account, the authority released a draft IN regulation dated 2-12-2005 to
all the stakeholders for consultation. This draft regulation discussed various
issues, in particular three different network architecture suggested by IN
committee. (13) The regime notified in this
draft regulation took account of all the divergent inputs on number of issues
provided during the consultation process. The Authority thus had to weigh the
various inputs and licence conditions and an attempt has been made to provide a
regulation which mainly caters towards benefits to the consumers. This
regulation was a step toward the overall policy framework being developed by
the Authority for improving the availability of modern telecommunication
services across the country. (14) The draft regulation
recalled many issues in particular wide range of issues arising out of
implementing one or other architecture. The extensive comments were received
from the stakeholders as written submission and during the meeting held with
COAI, AUSPI and BSNL. Authority further analyzed the matter especially
regarding Implementation Architecture and decided to have a meeting with the
service providers on 8-8-06. Summary of the main comments are as follows:— (15) Summary of the main
comments of Stakeholders:— (i) Network architecture
wherein the SSP of originating access provider connects to the SCP of the
interconnecting operator over CCS-7 link for authentication and other purposes
has a number of technological pitfalls, integrating SSPs based on different
technologies within existing SCPs is a difficult task. (ii) It would be very difficult
and cost prohibitive for any Access Provider to not only procure SCP equipment
to cater to its own customer base but also to size it for current and future
customer base of all other Access Provider's in the absence of any knowledge of
the business plans of the competitor. (iii) For services which rely
only on signalling network, and do not rely at all on bearer network, this
would require investment on small signalling platforms to be able to screen and
account signalling messages and generate CDRs for inter-operator billing. (iv) Appropriate TEC GR does not
define the capability set for SCPs supporting all protocols on one platform. In
the absence of this and limitations of existing SCPs, implementation and that
too uniform implementation across all operators is doubtful. (v) IN service is a value
addition over Basic services. Such value added services have so far not been
regulated by TRAI. Accordingly, IN services also need a similar treatment. (vi) All efforts should be made
for Integrating SSP of all technologies with SCP of different technologies as
SSP of one Service Provider interacting with SCP of different Service Providers
at signalling interconnect level is the final solution for all kind of IN
services. Protocol for IN services needs to standardized. (vii) There is an overlap in the
domains of Access Providers and NLDOs and the service can be provided jointly
by Access Provider and NLDO. These services will yield the best result if left
for mutual arrangements to be made amongst the operators. (viii) Commercial arrangements and
revenue share for IN services should be left for the mutual negotiation between
the operators. (ix) IN regulations should be in
conformity with the various court orders/license agreements/commercial
requirements. (x) Security aspect will need
to be kept in mind while finalising the IN Regulation. (xi) The issue of interconnect
seeker and interconnect provider will need to be addressed. (xii) A list of allowed/not
allowed services should be given to help in avoiding potential
misinterpretation of the regulation and subsequent litigations. (xiii) In order to avoid ambiguity
and achieve the objective of providing free choice to all subscribers for IN
services of all Intelligent Network Service Providers (INSPs), very clear
billing, charging and revenue share guidelines for each type of IN service need
to be specified. (xiv) The start up cost for IN
services and also for continued investment for platform upgrades for deployment
in a Multi Operator, Multi Service environment will have to be borne by INSPs. (xv) The issue who provides
intelligent peripherals (like announcement) needs to be addressed. (xvi) How the location based IN
services—when accessed by a subscriber of other access provider will be
handled. (xvii) Issue of how the national
and international roamers could use the IN services needs to be addressed. (xviii) There are chances of
misuse, if 18×× call is handed over by the access provider to the INSP. Access
provider will not able to know what service INSP is providing, once call is
handed over to INSP. (xix) The interest of access
provider should be protected. (xx) There are IN service
providers (generally vendors) outside India who already have infrastructure and
workable architecture for providing these services. These models should be
studied and analysed in our context. Option of IN services provided by the
third parties should also be explored. (16) Analysis of the issues.—The
Authority has taken the various comments and inputs into consideration and
analysed the matter in details. The views of the Authority on main issues are
as follows:— (i) The Authority observed that
most of the service providers are of the opinion that integrating SSP based on
different technologies with an existing SCP of other operators may not be
feasible at all times. Inter-working of SSP and SCP of different vendors may
require software and hardware modification. This may be time consuming process.
This may also add unnecessary cost to the operators. Because of this, most of
the service providers are of the opinion that SSP and SCP are to be owned by
the Service Provider who is providing IN services and all access providers
would hand over the 18××(IN) calls as voice call to the closest POI switch
designated for this purpose. (ii) Authority has also noted
the points made by the representatives of MTNL that integrating SSP based on
different technologies with an existing SCP of other operators would be the
final solution for all IN services. Authority has also noted that TEC GR does
not define the capability set for SCP supporting all protocols at one platform.
Therefore, operator may also require to implement different protocols for fixed
line, wireless [WLL(M), WLL(F), Cellular] etc. Therefore Integrating SSP of one
service provider with all SCP of all other service providers would be a time
consuming process. (iii) In view of the above,
Authority is of opinion that exact implementation of the architecture should be
left open to the operators. They themselves may decide the Architecture on
case-by-case basis. (iv) A crucial factor in favour
of leaving architecture open for service providers is that IN service would get
implemented quickly at least for Free Phone Service and VCC. The Authority has
also noted the technical difficulties in implementing location based
Intelligent Network Services as well as provision of services through
Intelligent Peripherals in case the architecture is specified. IN committee
also recognised that Free Phone and VCC (Voice Calling Cards) should be the
first set of IN services to be implemented. (v) Authority has also noted
the fact that as of now all operators have dimensioned their IN resources as
per their own requirements and subscribers base. Once it is opened for
interconnection with other operators there may be requirement of more
signalling links and other resources like enhancement of Intelligent
Peripherals etc. In fact, requirement of signalling will increase substantially
as many IN services rely more on signalling network i.e. tele-voting etc. There
may also be some legacy switches in the incumbent's network which may require
extensive up-gradation in hardware and software. (vi) Therefore, Authority is of
the opinion that one more month after agreement be required to the operators
for implementing the IN in multi operator multi network scenario after their
mutual agreement take place. Authority expects that at many places
implementation may happen in a shorter span where switches do not require much
up-gradation or no up-gradation at all. (vii) Authority considered the
fact that signalling information may cross the boundaries of the service area
to make IN services available nationwide, it may lead to usage of SCPs of NLDOs
by Basic Operators/CMSP/UASL as provision of the services by Access Provider is
limited to their service areas only. Authority has also noted that as per
license conditions NLDOs/ILDOs cannot access subscriber directly. In a
communication to one of the NLDOs on 28-10-2005 the licensor had clarified that
Toll Free Number services and split charge (UAN) services by NLD operator is in
contravention to the NLD license conditions because these services are
subscriber based and an NLDO cannot directly access the subscriber in terms of
Clause 2.2(a) of NLD license. (viii) In this regard, submission
has been received from one of the NLDOs on 15-9-2006 wherein it was requested
that decision on the subject of IN regulation should be in the perspective of
its general applicability and need of the industry taking care of the interconnection
issues of the IN network/services of the Long Distance Service Providers as
well. It further mentioned that any restriction on provision of IN based bearer
services by the Long Distance operators would tantamount to rewriting of the
license provision of these Long Distance operators in terms of placing new
prohibitions in the license. (ix) Authority has taken note of
the submissions of the NLDO and of the view that all service provider should
provide the IN services as per terms and conditions of their Licenses and legal
position and access the subscriber only if they are permitted to do so by the
licensor. (x) During the meeting with
Cellular Operators' Association of India (COAI), members of the Association
mentioned that charging and revenue sharing guidelines for each type of the IN
Services need to be specified. But for this purpose COAI has not been able to
provide the relevant data for analyzing the above requirement, yet. (xi) Authority has taken note of
the fact that in general members of the Committee were of the opinion that
charging, billing and sharing of the revenue depends on the service features
and therefore, charging, billing and sharing of revenue for resources used for
IN Services may be decided by the concerned service provider through mutual
commercial arrangement. The Authority accordingly, accepts the suggestion of
the Committee in this regard. However, Authority is also in the process of
finalising the standard agreement which would be applicable if service
providers are not able to arrive at mutually acceptable agreement within a
specific time. Authority would also ask the relevant data from the service
providers shortly. (xii) IN Services as such, is not
a separate class of services neither NTP '99 recognizes this as a separate
service nor has licensor categorized it as a separate service. It is only a
different means of providing a service. Therefore, Interconnect Usage Charges
(IUC) as applicable from time to time will apply for the IN services provided
by operator in multi-operator multi-network scenario. Interconnect Agreement
between Service Providers shall include Intelligent Network (IN) access. (xiii) In the interest of
security, the Service Providers shall make suitable arrangement so that Service
Providers in mutual association can provide data records of all the calls
handled by them as per the requirement of Security Agencies/License Conditions. (xiv) During the meeting, members
of the COAI have also raised issue of seeker and provider for IN Services. As
mentioned above, IN service as such is not a separate class of service, it is
only a means of providing advanced services. Therefore, there is no separate
case of seeker and provider in this scenario. Present Point of Interconnection
(POI) will continue for IN Services also. There would be only additional
requirement of signalling links which may be mutually negotiated among the
service providers. (xv) As set of IN services
currently defined are all Circuit Switched or Packet Switched Voice Services,
the Quality of Service (QoS) already mandated for voice services, shall apply.
Therefore, all Service Providers involved will be required to ensure that there
shall be no dilution in the Quality of Service (QoS) standards applicable to
the underlying Bearer Network. (xvi) The Numbering Plan for the
IN Services shall be as per applicable National Numbering Plan (NNP). All
Service Providers shall ensure that IN Services on Multi-Operator,
Multi-Network platform are launched after getting adequate Access Code
allocations from the NNP Administrator (Licensor). APPENDIX-I Table
1 IN Services as defined in
TEC GR'S IN Services Paying Party Old Levels Level as per National Number Plan 2003 Network Charge Information Charge Rental/Revenue Share Freephone (National) Called 1-600 1-800 Yes No Rental Universal Access (Local) Calling 1-901 1-860 Yes No No Universal Access (Long Distance) Calling and Called 0-901 0-901 Yes No Rental Virtual Private Networks (VPN) Group ID 1-901 1-801 Yes No Rental according to VPN size Tele-voting (Chargeable to caller) Calling 1-902 1-803 Yes No Yes (subscriber) Tele-voting (not chargeable to caller) Caller 1-603 1-861 Yes No Yes (subscriber) Pre-paid calling (VCC, ACC, CCC) Card 1-602 (VCC) 1-604 (ACC) 1-802 (VCC) 1-804 (ACC) Yes No No No No Premium Rate Calling 0-900 0-900 Yes Yes Yes Universal Personal Telecommunication Calling and Called 0-902 0-902 Yes No Yes [1] Vide Notification No.
416-2/2003-FN, dated 27th November, 2006, published in the Gazette of India,
Extra., Pt. III, S. 4, dated 27th November, 2006, pp. 23-39. [2] Ins. by Noti. No.
416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f. 18-9-2012). [3] Subs. for
“sub-regulation (2)” by Noti. No. 416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f.
18-9-2012). [4] Ins. by Noti. No.
416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f. 18-9-2012). [5] Subs. for
“sub-regulation (2)” by Noti. No. 416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f.
18-9-2012). [6] Subs. for
“sub-regulation (2)” by Noti. No. 416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f.
18-9-2012). [7] Subs. for “Basic
Operator, Cellular Mobile Service Provider or Unified Access Service Provider”
by Noti. No. 416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f. 18-9-2012). [8] Subs. for
“sub-regulation (2)” by Noti. No. 416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f.
18-9-2012). [9] Subs. for “Basic
Operators, Cellular Mobile Service Providers or Unified Access Service
Providers” by Noti. No. 416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f. 18-9-2012). [10] Subs. for
“sub-regulation (2)” by Noti. No. 416-1/2010-I&FN, dt. 18-9-2012 (w.e.f.
18-9-2012).Intelligent Network Services in Multi
Operator and Multi Network Scenario Regulations, 2006