[ICANN-CSC] [EXTERNAL] PTI report October 2017 and related draft CSC report/findings

[Feher, Kal]

I would like to suggest a minor change to the Technical Check (first) explanation paragraph. In particular the words in the  last sentence after the comma ",which would re-categorize this month’s performance for this metric as ‘met’." is incorrect in my opinion. Parallelising the checks is likely to result in better performance and thus we are hopeful that these checks will meet the SLA in the future, even when there are several checks in the same time period. However the October performance of these tests will not be recategorised as met as a result of the system change.

I think we could either remove that part of the sentence or replace it with some text about how the incidence of queued tests should drastically be reduced or even removed entirely.

Other than that amendment, I'm fine with the report.

Kal Feher
Neustar Inc.
Melbourne, Australia


From: ICANN-CSC <icann-csc-bounces at icann.org<mailto:icann-csc-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel at icann.org<mailto:bart.boswinkel at icann.org>>
Date: Wednesday, 15 November 2017 at 04:43
To: "ICANN-CSC at icann.org<mailto:ICANN-CSC at icann.org>" <icann-csc at icann.org<mailto:icann-csc at icann.org>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ICANN-CSC] PTI report October 2017 and related draft CSC report/findings

Dear all,
As you know there will be NO call tomorrow 15 November. Last week Naella Send you the PTI report and Amy the CSC draft findings (both are included again)
If you have any comments, questions or suggestions please send them to the list by Wednesday 15 November 23.59 UTC.
As indicated the secretariat would like to be able to send out the CSC findings by 17 November 10, 2017.
Thank you and regards,
Bart


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/icann-csc/attachments/20171115/ad9b0504/attachment-0001.html>