<div dir="ltr">Hi all,<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 20 May 2015 at 10:30, Andrew Sullivan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com" target="_blank">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 06:52:36PM +0000, Gomes, Chuck wrote:<br>
> Andrew,<br>
><br>
> Do you think that DT-A should stop on 26 May and the CWG should pick up where they leave off and the full CWG come up to speed on what they have been doing?<br>
><br>
<br>
</span>No, I don't think that will work either. But you said earlier that<br>
DT-A says it'll be another three weeks. From today, that's 9 June.<br>
DTs' outputs still have to be integrated with everything else, so it's<br>
too late no matter what happens.<br>
<br>
Therefore, unfortunately, I think DT-A is going to be too late no<br>
matter what, and the pragmatic thing to do therefore is to "cut<br>
features". Happily, we know how to do this, because there's an<br>
existing set of performance SLAs for IANA. The editors could drop<br>
those in and call it "done", right now, without further ado.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>So - DT-A is late because of ICANN's delays.</div><div><br></div><div>And therefore the IANA customers should agree an SLA/SLE framework that is far inferior to current performance?<br><br></div><div>Why on earth is that a good idea?</div><div><br></div><div>ICANN's delays have consequences for this process and they are real ones. </div><div><br></div><div>Jordan</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
For my own part, as you know, I think CWG should do that anyway, for<br>
quite different reasons. But if a DT isn't going to be ready by 26<br>
May, in my opinion one ought to declare that they're missing the end<br>
of the sprint, and simply move on. That's what any agile program<br>
manager would tell you. In agile, dates are holy, because there's<br>
always the next iteration to come.<br>
<br>
And that's an important message of confidence one ought to be able to<br>
send people: "We don't think this is the last chance to make changes."<br>
DT-A could continue to put together its important and valuable<br>
proposals for SLEs for the future. It could publish them as a<br>
follow-on proposal, complete in itself, that the community could<br>
decide to adopt shortly after the transition. That incorporation of a<br>
well-worked-out community proposal would show the transition was<br>
working.<br>
<br>
Indeed, CWG could even write _that_ into the proposal: "The DT-A is<br>
going to come up with these new proposals, and that as part of the<br>
initial $time_period evaluation of whether the transition is working<br>
successfully, the adoption and implementation of these new SLEs ought<br>
to be pursued." It'd be a specific thing to be checked in that<br>
initial evaluation.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
A<br>
<br>
--<br>
--<br>
Andrew Sullivan<br>
<a href="mailto:ajs@anvilwalrusden.com">ajs@anvilwalrusden.com</a><br>
Awkward access to mail. Please forgive formatting problems.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
CWG-Stewardship mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:CWG-Stewardship@icann.org">CWG-Stewardship@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Jordan Carter<br><br>Chief Executive <br><b>InternetNZ</b><br><br>04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)<br><a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz" target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a> <br>Skype: jordancarter<br><br><i>A better world through a better Internet </i><br><br></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>