[SLE Team] Names SLEs proposals - next steps
nathalie.vergnolle at icann.org
Wed Aug 3 23:00:33 UTC 2016
Dear Jay, dear all,
I'd be happy to send out a doodle poll to set up a follow-up call if the group would like to reconvene , maybe for this Friday, August 5th?
From: Jay Daley [mailto:jay at nzrs.net.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 3:48 PM
To: Nathalie Vergnolle <nathalie.vergnolle at icann.org>
Cc: dt1 at icann.org; Naela Sarras <naela.sarras at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [SLE Team] Names SLEs proposals - next steps
I would very much prefer a call of the design team for us to discuss and agree a consensus position and I’m uncomfortable giving a view without doing so. However, since I’m asked, this is my view below but there remains the possibility that one of my colleagues on DT-A raises an issue that I am currently unaware of and I agree with.
1. The intent is to set targets that reasonably approximate current performance; and 2. The difference between this level of specification and the previous NTIA specification is so large that there are many new areas being introduced; and 3. The CSC will be able to address any outstanding areas as needed.
and with the one reservation that the negotiation of the RZMA was not conducted with any community input and so the figure of 72 hours has not been verified by the community as representing the current performance,
then I am happy to accept this as the final SLE targets.
> On 4/08/2016, at 5:44 AM, Nathalie Vergnolle <nathalie.vergnolle at icann.org> wrote:
> Dear members of the Names SLEs work group,
> The attached document reflects the various conversations that were held on the topic of Names SLEs:
> · It lists all the measurements as defined by the work group in the report issued in September 2015 (https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocwgdtstwrdshp/DT-A+Service+Levels+Expectations?preview=/52891144/56135156/IANA%20Service%20Level%20Expectations%20-%20APPROVED.pdf )
> · Column D reflects the discussions held in Istanbul in March 2015 ( please note that the measurements discussed then were slightly different from the final measurements listed here, and mapping was left to staff's appreciation. Some values may have have been improperly mapped here.)
> Link to the Istanbul March 2015 document:
> · Column E reflects the IANA proposal as per the document circulated by Kim Davies on 15-July16 (http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt1/attachments/20160715/fc7cd83b/PreliminarySLEData-0001.pdf )
> · Column F reflects the discussions held on the DT-A call of 21-July-16 (links to the recordings can be found under the Meetings & Work Sessions section of the Implementation pagehttps://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation )
> · Column G reflects the discussions held on the DT-A call of 01-Aug-16 (links to the recordings can be found under the Meetings & Work Sessions section of the Implementation pagehttps://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation ).
> · As requested by the group on August 1st, IANA has reviewed the latest proposals and provided feedback in the Notes section (column H).
> Since this document was only circulated yesterday, and in order to give you more time to review, we have cancelled today’s call on Names SLEs.
> Kindly asking all members of the Names SLEs work group to provide their feedback through the mailing list no later than Friday, August 5th.
> We plan to circulate this document to the CWG mailing list no later than Monday, August 8th, so that final discussions can be held during the following CWG call scheduled on August 11th , with the hope to finalize a set of performance targets in time for the August 12th NTIA report.
> Thank you for your collaboration,
> <SLA proposals
> dt1 mailing list
> dt1 at icann.org
desk: +64 4 931 6977
mobile: +64 21 678840
More information about the dt1