<div dir="ltr">I would certainly like to meet in Marrakech. Please send some proposed times as my schedule is filling up fast.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:26 AM, Paul M Kane - CWG <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:paul.kane-cwg@icb.co.uk" target="_blank">paul.kane-cwg@icb.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Trang<br>
<br>
Many thanks for the email reminder.<br>
<br>
I sent out the presentation some weeks ago to the members directly (I was<br>
experiencing mailing list issues so direct guaranteed circulation) and there is<br>
interest in having a call before or meeting at ICANN Marrakech to discuss.<br>
Fundamentally, despite being offered access to the raw data mid December, then<br>
12 Jan, then end Jan.<br>
<br>
Many of the Working Group will be in Marrakech and I found our Dublin meeting<br>
with Akram very useful so would it be possible to arrange a similar meeting<br>
(same ICANN staff list) in Marrakech.<br>
<br>
I believe Jay, Patricio, Elaine and the two Jeffs will be present. I will not<br>
be in Marrakech but it would be good for you to hear from other members of the<br>
Working Group.<br>
<br>
With regard to the substantive (now annulled by ICANN) on the 4th Feb a<br>
consultant gave a presentation to say that it was too complicated and the raw<br>
IANA transaction data would not be made available to us.<br>
<br>
I think the WG members would have preferred to have seen the raw data and come<br>
to that conclusion that the data was not fit for the intended purpose<br>
themselves. If your consultant is controllable because you have constrained him<br>
via NDA, I am sure many if not all of the volunteer WG members would have<br>
entered into an appropriate NDA which would have saved ICANN money by not having<br>
pay external consultants as well as build some good PR too.<br>
<br>
Kind regards<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Paul.<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Quoting Trang Nguyen <<a href="mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org">trang.nguyen@icann.org</a>>:<br>
<br>
> Dear members of the DT-A,<br>
><br>
> The below email and attached information were recently circulated to the<br>
> CWG mail list and we want to make sure that you have this information as<br>
> well.<br>
><br>
> This information provides background and results of the data parsing work<br>
> that was recently completed.<br>
><br>
> If you have any questions after reviewing this information, please let us<br>
> know and we¹d be happy to provide a response.<br>
><br>
> Please note that the next CWG call is scheduled for 1600 UTC on February<br>
> 25. ICANN staff will be providing an update on the next phase of work: SLE<br>
> metric collection and SLA setting. We encourage you to join the call and<br>
> participate in that discussion.<br>
><br>
> Thank you,<br>
><br>
> Trang Nguyen<br>
> ICANN<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org">cwg-stewardship-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of David Conrad<br>
> <<a href="mailto:david.conrad@icann.org">david.conrad@icann.org</a>><br>
> Date: Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 8:48 AM<br>
> To: CWG Mailing List <<a href="mailto:cwg-stewardship@icann.org">cwg-stewardship@icann.org</a>><br>
> Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Marc's presentation and report with<br>
> some background<br>
><br>
> >Hi,<br>
> ><br>
> >On the 76th CWG call on February 4th<br>
> >(<a href="https://community.icann.org/x/nJBlAw" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/x/nJBlAw</a>), Marc Blanchet of Viagenie gave a<br>
> >presentation on the work ICANN contracted them to perform that attempted<br>
> >to derive approximations of the SLEs using the current RZMS and RT logs<br>
> >and databases. Attached is the PowerPoint deck that Marc used for his<br>
> >presentation as well as the final report detailing his analyses. I am<br>
> >circulating these reports for your review.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >Based on the questions raised during the CWG call, it seems there might<br>
> >have been some confusion around why that work was undertaken and how it<br>
> >relates to the implementation of the SLEs. I am providing some background<br>
> >here to help remove any confusion. My apologies in advance for the length<br>
> >of this message, however I believe it important for there to be clarity<br>
> >on this issue.<br>
> ><br>
> >1. Before the SLEs were developed, ICANN staff informed the DT-A that the<br>
> >current RZMS and RT systems collect performance metrics as directed by<br>
> >NTIA and our own internal requirements. The DT-A felt these metrics were<br>
> >insufficient to ensure IANA performance met community requirements and<br>
> >that new metrics would be necessary. ICANN staff informed the DT-A that<br>
> >changes to performance metrics would require code changes to the RZMS.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >2. After the SLEs were developed, ICANN staff informed the CWG that due<br>
> >to the number of simultaneous demands placed upon ICANN to safely<br>
> >and securely modify systems and processes to meet transition<br>
> >requirements, ICANN staff estimated the code changes to RZMS would be<br>
> >completed by the end of March 2016. Some in the CWG suggested ICANN add<br>
> >additional staff to the RZMS development team in an attempt to deploy the<br>
> >code sooner. ICANN informed the CWG that doing so would more likely<br>
> >result in development taking longer since any new developers would need<br>
> >to become familiar with the existing code base and this familiarization<br>
> >would necessarily involve interruptions to the existing development team,<br>
> >delaying their efforts.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >3. During ICANN 54, ICANN staff were informed of a new requirement that<br>
> >SLE data must be collected for a period of 6 months before SLAs could be<br>
> >set. ICANN staff was further informed that the March 2016 timeframe was<br>
> >unacceptable since a 6-month data collection requirement would lead to<br>
> >insufficient time being available to incorporate the SLE-derived SLAs<br>
> >into the ICANN-PTI contract. A request was made to ICANN to make<br>
> >available RZMS and RT raw data so that SLEs could be extracted from data<br>
> >collected by the current RZMS/RT systems. Due to the confidential nature<br>
> >of the root zone change request data, which includes email discussions<br>
> >between ICANN staff and the requesters in which potentially business<br>
> >proprietary details of registry operation are disclosed, ICANN staff<br>
> >informed the CWG chairs and DT-A that releasing the raw RZMS/RT data<br>
> >would be a violation of existing IANA policy and thus, would not be<br>
> >possible, particularly to any organization that competes in the domain<br>
> >name space. ICANN staff also again explained that the RZMS/RT systems do<br>
> >not currently collect data the way the SLEs were defined and the primary<br>
> >task for ICANN was to modify RZMS in order to collect the new SLEs.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >4. As a compromise to try to address the new 6-month data collection<br>
> >requirement, ICANN staff contracted with Viagenie as an independent and<br>
> >neutral third-party to explore whether the data collected by the current<br>
> >RZMS/RT system could be used to "seed" some portion of the SLEs, thereby<br>
> >reducing the data collection time requirement.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >5. Viagenie completed their work and presented a summary on the Feb 4th<br>
> >CWG call, confirming that: (a) The current RZMS/RT systems do not collect<br>
> >data in accordance with the newly defined SLEs; (b) The heuristics<br>
> >developed provided approximations for most metrics, but some<br>
> >approximations were less conclusive; and (c) The RZMS/RT tool is a<br>
> >complex system that frequently relies on email interactions for<br>
> >progressing request state.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >6. In parallel to the work ICANN contracted Viagenie to perform, ICANN<br>
> >has continued to pursue modifying the RZMS system to collect data in the<br>
> >way that the SLEs were defined. ICANN now expects that the RZMS<br>
> >modifications will be completed at the end of February, a month ahead of<br>
> >schedule. Data collection for the new SLEs can thus begin in March.<br>
> >Assuming everything goes well, this would allow for sufficient time for<br>
> >SLE data collection without delay of the transition in order to meet the<br>
> >6-month SLE data collection requirement.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >The main approach to implementing the SLEs had always been to make code<br>
> >changes to the RZMS so that it can capture processing time data that the<br>
> >DT-A defined for all future change request processing. ICANN is on-track<br>
> >to have this work completed by the end of this month, February.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >If the CWG would like any additional clarification around the work<br>
> >performed by Viagenie, the RZMS development work, or other aspects of the<br>
> >technical implementation of the transition, please let ICANN staff know<br>
> >and we will be happy to provide clarification.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >Regards,<br>
> >-drc<br>
> >ICANN CTO<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<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>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><br style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Times;font-size:medium"><br style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Times;font-size:medium"><div style="min-width:960px;min-height:82px;line-height:18px;margin:6px 0px;padding:8px;border-top-width:1px;border-top-color:rgb(153,153,153);border-top-style:dotted;border-bottom-width:1px;border-bottom-color:rgb(153,153,153);border-bottom-style:dotted;font-family:'Lucida Grande',Verdana,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;color:rgb(153,153,153)"><a href="http://www.donuts.domains" title="donuts.domains" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.donuts.domains/images/D-99x124.png" alt="Donuts Inc." width="37" height="54" style="float:left;padding:2px 6px 0px 0px;border:none"></a><div style="padding:6px 0px 0px"><span style="font-size:14px"><strong style="color:rgb(51,51,51)">Elaine Pruis</strong>, Vice President, Operations</span><br><strong><a href="http://www.donuts.domains" title="donuts.domains" style="color:rgb(102,102,102);text-decoration:none;border-bottom-width:1px;border-bottom-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-bottom-style:dotted" target="_blank">Donuts Inc.</a></strong><br>10500 NE 8th Street, Suite 350, Bellevue Washington, 98004, U.S.A. | Telephone: 509.899.3161<br><a href="https://twitter.com/DonutsInc" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.donuts.domains/images/social_twitter_box_white_512.png" alt="Twitter" width="30" height="30" style="float:left;margin:2px 4px 0px 0px;border:none"></a><a href="https://www.facebook.com/donutstlds" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.donuts.domains/images/social_facebook_box_white_512.png" alt="Facebook" width="30" height="30" style="float:left;margin:2px 4px 0px 0px;border:none"></a><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/donuts-inc-" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.donuts.domains/images/social_linkedin_box_white_512.png" alt="Linked In" width="30" height="30" style="float:left;margin:2px 4px 0px 0px;border:none"></a></div><div style="clear:both"></div></div><br style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Times;font-size:medium"><br style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Times;font-size:medium"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Times;font-size:medium"> </span><br></div></div>
</div>