[ICANN-CSC] Note on SLA change procedure from Samantha Eisner

James Gannon james at cyberinvasion.net
Mon Oct 16 19:38:51 UTC 2017

Thanks for this Bart and this is great news for us to be able to move ahead in a lightweight fashion for these.


On 16 Oct 2017, at 21:16, Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel at icann.org<mailto:bart.boswinkel at icann.org>> wrote:

Dear all,
Please find included a note from Samantha Eisner in preparation of the call today on the topic of the change of SLA process. Sam will speak to this as well

Kind regards,

Section 2.c of Annex A of the Naming Function Agreement, where the SLAs are housed, states:

“Either Party may initiate a change to the services performed by Contractor hereunder by delivering to the other a change request, in a form mutually acceptable to the Parties. Thereafter, the Parties will discuss the requested change in good faith and upon the Parties’ mutual written agreement that a change to the services performed by Contractor hereunder should be made, such change shall be evidenced in writing and deemed to be incorporated into this Contract, without any need to amend the terms of this Contract.”


With that, we see the work here is essentially to develop a subprocess for the CSC, ICANN and PTI to demonstrate that a proposed SLA change is supported by the customers and PTI, and that ICANN and PTI can then agree to modify the SLAs. The full contract modification process is not required in this instance.

Some highlights for that subprocess could include (including areas already considered by the CSC to be part of it):

  *   CSC and PTI agree that there is a need for a modification to the SLA (can be reflected in minutes, etc.)
  *   CSC helps consult among/socialize with naming functions customers (Note: this is reflected as a possible public comment period in the process, but ICANN org would not require a comment period for this type of operational change; the consultation process could be designed in another way to reach the appropriate/impacted customers).
  *   Once agreement is reached on the appropriate SLA, identify the proper threshold for documenting the customer support of change.  (Note: because this is not a full contract amendment, the CSC could consider if the threshold counts based on the ccSNO and GNSO Council are still appropriate or if it should be tailored more to  the customers)
  *   PTI and ICANN Board approval would typically not be required for a change to the SLA, unless it imposed material financial impact to implement, or possibly if modifications to other contracts were needed to accommodate the SLA modification.

Samantha Eisner
Deputy General Counsel, ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, California 90094

ICANN-CSC mailing list
ICANN-CSC at icann.org<mailto:ICANN-CSC at icann.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/icann-csc/attachments/20171016/2bcc4032/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ICANN-CSC mailing list