[DTA - SLE] Notes DTA call 8 June 2015

[Bart Boswinkel]

Agenda DT A 8 June 2015, 20.00 UTC

Roll call and apologies

Apologies: Jeff, Elise

Jay Dailey on the call, phone only


i) Update from Kim, and Adam on progress of formulating an acceptable SLE

ii) An agreement from the Working Group to work with IANA staff to

capture all of IANA's processes and complete the SLE after the 8th June.

iii) Approval of a statement from the SLE Design Team to be included in

the Proposal (attached).

iv) Volunteers to give Presentations for participants at ICANN meeting

in BA interested in the work of the SLE Working Group.

v) Any other business.


Welcome chair DTA

Change of working format

CWG needs to endorese approach suggested by DTA

To be raised by Paul at meeting 9 June 2015

1) Update from Kim, and Adam on progress of formulating an acceptable SLE

Kim Davies: Green light to Evolve Document and needs further development. The draft circualted calls out principles

Adam: No Mike

Question to group: Group agree to work together post 8 June 2015?

Post June 8 deadline?

What is standing of the group post 8 June. once teh CWG has completed its proposal?

Note work continue under CWG umbrella

Jay: Customer needs to be involved in the discussions

Conclusion: Adam and Kim will continue to work and report to group on a weekly basis . Paul to check status of group during the call of 9 June 2015


iii) Approval of a statement from the SLE Design Team to be included in

the Proposal.

Run through of the document by Bernie Turcotte

Background section

Change word suggesting, -> recommending

No objection (accepted)

IRT => IFRT

Jef Ackhaus: Last sentence: not clear to what wide time window is refferring to.

Only recently, some particpant raise that NTIA SLA should be used. Not acceptable to DTA: NTIA no longer part post transition. SLA no longer fit for purpose.

Clarifying language may needed.


Principle section

Paragraph 1. No comments

2.Overall Metrics

Patricio: should be reported by IANA. Should external parties be alowed be informed

Raw data is already made available. Should be re-iterated.

Agreed

3. Relevance:

Elaine: it is confusing

Jay: Rewrote section. Initial relevance was for analysis. Not strong enough meaning.. Attempt to  narrow, focus on customers. Critical measures was already in

Kim: Distinction betwen what IANA is to measure and report on and threshold for none compliance

Community should defien what it considers relavant versus threshold measures ( critical metrics)

Patricio: Relevant data is dat that should be checked for compliance.

Question: Relevant what is deemed relevant for community.

Kim: guard against that every is measured is part of threshold

 Analysis for customer service

Proposed wording

insert word " customer"  -> customer critical metrics

4. Clear defintion

No Comments

5 Defintion of thresholds

Jay: should be set on 'Initial" data

Include "Initial"

Threshold should be set against expected service level.

Starting point is what IANA is doing.

Currently estimation of what DT A thinks is reasonable. Now need to be cautious, to set wrong expectations. Based on actual data, not prescribe

Defintio of thershold taken on board, but measurement are needed

Specific Threshold undefined an define until data has been colelcted

Alternatively: set threshold but note it needs to be underpined later

Include word Initial in document, and include in SLE it self additional language


6. Review Process

No Comment

7. Regular Reporting

Near real time seems excessive

Add "As and when collected" after real time


Section Capturing status-quo

 Paragraph 1.  No comment

Paragraph A

No comment

Paragrpah B

No Commetns

Paragraph  C

No Commetns

Paragraph D

No Comments


Monitoring Past Performance

Minor grammatical error

Jay: Use of the word registry  to refer is confusing (IANA also registry), registry needs to be ameneded

Agreed

Omit text to clarify need to clarify needs to


Escalations

No comments


Expression of support and comments of Members

Elaine Supports with edits

Jeff: Ibidem

Patricio: supports

Jay: supports

Paul: supports

Action Paul: Move forward to CWG to be included in proposal


v) Volunteers to give Presentations for participants at ICANN meeting

in BA interested in the work of the SLE Working Group.

Invite members DTA to present for various groups

Jay: Available to present to Tech Day, ccNSO meeting and other relevant groups

Jeff: Wil be at the meeting -> gTLD registry

Patricio: present LACTLD and at ccNSO


Slides: prepare standard slide deck

AOB

Conclude edits today (8 June )

Closure 21.03 UTC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt1/attachments/20150609/fed41073/attachment-0001.html>