[SLE Team] Names SLEs Data Review - Meeting Notes (21 July 2016 @ 21:00 UTC)

[Nathalie Vergnolle]

Dear members of the Names SLEs work group,

Please see below the meeting notes and chat history from yesterday's Names SLEs Data Review call.

The presentation material, audio and AC room recordings are now posted at https://www.icann.org/stewardship-implementation under "Meetings & Work Sessions" section.

*** Meeting Notes ***

Names SLEs Data Review
21 Jul 16 @ 21:00 UTC

Attendees:
Ali Mohammadi

Allan MacGillivray

Chuck Gomes (RySG)

Elaine Pruis - Donuts

Jay Daley

Jeff Neuman

Jeffrey Eckhaus

Kim Davies

Mary Uduma

Naela Sarras

Nathalie Vergnolle

Patricio Poblete

Paul Kane

Trang Nguyen

W Murray

Yuko Green



Notes:

Data report walk-thru:
Link to the Names SLEs preliminary data report: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160715/92175b9a/PreliminarySLEData-0001.pdf

[Post-meeting note] Description of Change Requests Categories:

*        Category I: Routine updates impacting Root Zone File

*        Category II: Routine updates not impacting Root Zone File

*        Category III: Creating or Transferring a gTLD

*        Category IV: Creating or Transferring a ccTLD

*        Category V: Other Change Requests

General notes:
The purpose of the call was to initiate discussions with the DT-A. It was not intended that thresholds be formally set during this meeting.
The recommendations presented in the report were developed by staff, and the data reflects the new SLE data that has been collected since early March 2016, when the corresponding changes in RZMS were deployed. All data collected is in calendar days.
It was suggested to add to the report any DT-A recommendations that may have been made in previous discussions.
The dashboard will make visible thresholds and actual performance, and will also highlight any missed thresholds.
The following notes are specific to each measurement.

Processing Performance (Submission):
Support from group for proposed recommendation, which is aligned with DT-A's initial recommendation of 1min (95%).

Time for lodgment of email requests:
Group requested that a target be set for this measurement, even in the absence of data. Group suggested threshold of 2 days.
Further discussions needed for this threshold.

Time to return results for technical checks following submission of request via automated submission interface:
Suggestion to align Category III and IV threshold to 50 min (95%) for both categories.

Time to return results for subsequent performance of technical checks during retesting due to earlier failed tests:
No comments from the group.

Time to return results for performance of technical checks during Supplemental Technical Check phase:
Suggestion to align Cat. III and IV to 5 min (95%).

Time for authorization contacts to be asked to approve CR:
No comments from the group.

Time for response to be affirmed by IANA:
No comments from the group.

Time to complete all other validations and reviews by IANA and release request for implementation:
Suggested thresholds:
Cat I - 5d (90%)
Cat II - 5d (90%)
Cat III - 5d (90%)
Cat IV - Group agreed that the percentage limit should be low. In the absence of data available, threshold could be set to what would be considered a reasonable time to perform the work.
This measurement requires further discussion.

There was no time to go through the rest of the measurements. It was agreed that further discussions will be carried out via the mail list and another call scheduled if necessary.

Dashboard demo:
A real-time dashboard has been developed and the beta was demonstrated to the group. It will be ready to be deployed by the time of the transition.
In addition to presenting the data as customizable charts, the tool also provides the ability to download anonymized raw data to allow for further analysis.
It was suggested to add the region or the language of the requester to the log file. ICANN acknowledge that this is a good suggestion, but will need to be implemented as an enhancement post transition.
A request was made to share a beta version of the dashboard with the group. This request will be looked into by staff, as authorization from NTIA would be necessary.



Chat History:
Yuko Green: Hello, welcome to Names SLEs Data Review meeting!

Paul Kane: Kim - can you remind me your job title

Kim Davies: Director, Technical Services

Paul Kane: Thanks

Jay Daley: Just to clairfy - this document was shared a week ago (15th) not a couple of weeks ago

Chuck Gomes (RySG): I am 1754

Yuko Green: Thank you Chuck!

Yuko Green: Who may be the phone number 1108?

Jeff Neuman: correct

Mary Uduma: no audio

Jeff Neuman: DTA asked for the data so that we could determine the specific metrics

Jeff Neuman: correct

Jeff Neuman: we were hoping to have 6 months of data, but 3 will have to do

Mary Uduma: Audio breaking

Yuko Green: @Mary, we hear everything without breaking up. May I suggest that you try calling back or re-logging back into the room?

Jeffrey Eckhaus: the sound via computer / adobe connect is clear for me

Yuko Green: @Jefferey, thank you for confirming

Jay Daley: Patricio - can you mute your line?

Yuko Green: All, please mute your phone/microphone when not speaking

Elaine Pruis - Donuts: chuck and jeff mute?

Jay Daley: Mary - can you mute your microphone please

Jeffrey Eckhaus: that is why I was so quick to agree to the 60s

Jeffrey Eckhaus: we had already liked that number as a group

Patricio Poblete: I was referring to CWG- DT-A - SLE - for discussion in Istanbul - DRAFT.pdf

Jeff Neuman: you can use business days

Jeff Neuman: 2 business days

Jeff Neuman: I agree with Jay, but not sure this is the SLA where is would matter

Jeff Neuman: Category III seem awfully high

Jeffrey Eckhaus: Hi All , need to drop off a little early, but will catch up on the last 20 minutes or so later today

Elaine Pruis - Donuts: would the host please add the definitions of the categories to teh "notes" section

Elaine Pruis - Donuts: or add a window with the info

Jeff Neuman: I also thing there are ways to account for months were there are fewer transactions.  Understand that assigning a percentage is difficult, but that should not preclude setting reasonable targets

Jeff Neuman: Foe example, in a given month if there are 5 applicable transactions, rather than a percentage, you can say that 4 out of the 5 should meet the target

Jay Daley: happy for the demo

Jay Daley: I agree Jeff

Chuck Gomes (RySG): I have to jump off so let me share a few comments: 1) With regard to Root Zone Maintainer thresholds, it is essential that performance definitions are the same as in the RZMA agreement; 2) performance measures should exclude planned outages; 3) as a CWG member and not a member of DT-A, I would really appreciate it if DT-A would eventually present its recommended thresholds to the CWG.

Paul Kane: Compare DTA's Presnted report for SLE with IANA's proposal; No blanks, use historical data, no discrimination between gTLDs and ccTLDs,  Need to enter into dialogue with DTA to refine,  Seems to be double dipping, Add notes are to categories to help reader

Paul Kane: Exclude NTIA's process time

Jeff Neuman: Good comment Jay

Jeff Neuman: Thanks Kim.  I do think it was a good first draft and appreciate the walk through

****************

Thanks,
Nathalie.

Direct line: +1-310-578-8957
Mobile: +1-310-938-1037
Skype: nathalie.vergnolle.icann
Jabber: nathalie.vergnolle at jabber.icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt1/attachments/20160722/53addb1c/attachment-0001.html>