[CWG-Stewardship] Service Level Expectations Design Team Template

[Alan Greenberg]

This worries me.

How do we define "needs"? It sounds perilously close to that 
community holding the transition hostage for something that they want.

Alan

At 01/03/2015 02:17 AM, Jordan Carter wrote:
>I've thought of a b/c mid point complication:
>
>It is: whether anything needs to be added to currently documented 
>SLA standards to allow the transition to be acceptable to any key 
>customer community.
>
>That's not a wholesale review but it's a little more than b), while 
>respecting the need for conservatism and efficiency....
>
>Jordan
>
>On Sunday, 1 March 2015, Seun Ojedeji 
><<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>+1 to Jordan's specific suggestion as well;  considering that 
>everything works just fine right now is an indication that repeating 
>the current SLA would at least maintain status quo.
>
>Will be good if that methodology is applied to other design teams as 
>much as possible.
>The goal is to build a stronger ICANN and so long as we have 
>a  multistakeholder means/process to do that, then our job is done.
>
>Cheers!
>
>sent from Google nexus 4
>kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>On 1 Mar 2015 01:46, "Chris Disspain" <ceo at auda.org.au> wrote:
>You read me right, man ;-)
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>
>Chris
>
>On 1 Mar 2015, at 11:35 , Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I think Chris's proposal makes sense too in logically separating:
>>
>>a) porting across existing service level obligations to the 
>>post-transition environment;
>>b) creating the possibility of reviewing and changing them in future; and
>>c) reviewing and updating the substantive content
>>
>>If I read him right a) and b) should be done, but c) should not.
>>
>>That might trim the work this design team needs to do and make 
>>finalising the names community proposal easier...
>>
>>cheers
>>Jordan
>>
>>
>>On 1 March 2015 at 08:56, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>Makes sense to me.
>>
>>avri
>>
>>On 28-Feb-15 18:43, Chris Disspain wrote:
>>>On that basis I wonder whether we would not be better served by 
>>>accepting the current status quo and building a mechanism for 
>>>review and negotiated changes to those service levels that could 
>>>be employed immediately after transition and on an ongoing basis.
>>>
>>>Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>----------
>>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>><http://www.avast.com/>www.avast.com
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>><https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Jordan Carter
>>
>>Chief Executive
>>InternetNZ
>>
>>04 495 2118 (office) | <tel:%2B64%2021%20442%20649>+64 21 442 649 (mob)
>>jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>>Skype: jordancarter
>>
>>A better world through a better Internet
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>>CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>><https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
><https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
>
>
>--
>Jordan Carter
>Chief Executive, InternetNZ
>
>+64-21-442-649 | <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>jordan at internetnz.net.nz
>
>Sent on the run, apologies for brevity
>_______________________________________________
>CWG-Stewardship mailing list
>CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150301/2ee2d2d7/attachment.html>