<p dir="ltr">Jay,</p>
<p dir="ltr">This excellent stuff - could we use it in the official FAQ once updayed?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Thanks</p>
<p dir="ltr">B</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jun 22, 2015 4:21 PM, "Jay Daley" <<a href="mailto:jay@nzrs.net.nz">jay@nzrs.net.nz</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thanks Kim, very useful.<br>
<br>
> On 22/06/2015, at 4:06 pm, Kim Davies <<a href="mailto:kim.davies@icann.org">kim.davies@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi Jay,<br>
><br>
> No strong concerns about the FAQ (some of it relates to DT-A’s opinions, and I can’t really comment on that), but some comments inline for what they are worth.<br>
><br>
>> Q: Does the DT-A team have an agenda here, such as forcing through the automation of IANA?<br>
>><br>
>> A: No. The team has taken the view from the outset that it is not our role to change the processes in any way. IANA have already started a process of automation of some elements of their service, as presented at various ICANN meetings, and we are trying to keep up with that but we are not introducing any agenda of our own.<br>
><br>
> I think there is an unavoidable aspect that some details of the process need to be changed in order to be able to adequately measure state transitions that are relevant to the SLAs. For example, the reason we don’t have an accurate recording of state changes between IANA staff and customers is that it is not objectively clear when a customer has provided a response to an enquiry. In order to measure when the “IANA clock” starts to respond to a customer query, we need to constrain the ways the customer can submit such a query/response to a mechanism where it can always be tracked and timed (for example, lodged via a response form within the RZMS system).<br>
><br>
>> Q: How important is it that these elements are in place before transition?<br>
>><br>
>> A: The view of the DT-A team is that a full SLE/SLA needs to be in place by the start of the transition however IANA have noted that there are some pre-requisites that must be met before they can implement it. These are:<br>
>><br>
>> 1. The current IT system needs to have features added to extract the required measurements. This development can only begin once there is certainty that this transition is going ahead on this basis and IANA can only turn those changes on after transition given the nature of their agreement with the NTIA. It should also be remembered that IANA will need to make a case for development resources to the ICANN executive team as IANA has no development resources of its own.<br>
>> 2. IANA staff will need time to adapt to the changes in their working practices to implement this measurement.<br>
><br>
> It is not clear to me what “be in place” means in this context. I think it is worth noting there is a possible interim path, the community and ICANN could agree tighter thresholds for the existing performance standards (i.e. from the existing IANA contract) in the short term, while the requisite software and process development to support the future model is being developed, tested and finalised.<br>
><br>
> cheers,<br>
><br>
> kim<br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Jay Daley<br>
Chief Executive<br>
NZRS Ltd<br>
desk: <a href="tel:%2B64%204%20931%206977" value="+6449316977">+64 4 931 6977</a><br>
mobile: <a href="tel:%2B64%2021%20678840" value="+6421678840">+64 21 678840</a><br>
linkedin: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/jaydaley" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.linkedin.com/in/jaydaley</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
dt1 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:dt1@icann.org">dt1@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/dt1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/dt1</a><br>
</blockquote></div>