[SLE Team] Names SLEs proposals - next steps

[Nathalie Vergnolle]

Dear Paul, dear all,

The table has been updated (see attached) to reflect the notes you provided below, and a call has been scheduled for Monday, August 8th at 20:00 UTC to continue discussions.

Looking forward to Monday's call, and wishing you all a good week-end. 
Thanks,
Nathalie.

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul M Kane - CWG [mailto:paul.kane-cwg at icb.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 1:21 PM
To: Nathalie Vergnolle <nathalie.vergnolle at icann.org>
Cc: Jay Daley <jay at nzrs.net.nz>; Naela Sarras <naela.sarras at icann.org>; dt1 at icann.org
Subject: RE: [SLE Team] Names SLEs proposals - next steps

Thanks Nathalie

A member of my staff has kindly highlighted in yellow (and numbered) the fields that need to be completed.

If you/IANA would kindly use the footnote number to complete the information needed - then we have a completed SLE.

My goal is to ensure that the full SLE (approved by CWG) is completed and has threshold

It would be great if this could be completed today/over the weekend so we can review on Monday before our call.

Have a good w/end.....

Paul

Quoting Nathalie Vergnolle <nathalie.vergnolle at icann.org>:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> "Time to return results for technical checks following submission of 
> request via automated submission interface" is listed as R3, line 16 
> of the excel table.
> 
> "Time to return results for subsequent performance of technical checks 
> during retesting due to earlier failed tests" is listed as R4, line 22 
> of the excel table.
> 
> Let us know if anything else is missing.
> Thanks,
> Nathalie
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dt1-bounces at icann.org [mailto:dt1-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf 
> Of Paul M Kane - CWG
> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:39 AM
> To: Jay Daley <jay at nzrs.net.nz>
> Cc: Naela Sarras <naela.sarras at icann.org>; dt1 at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [SLE Team] Names SLEs proposals - next steps
> 
> I am trying to check we have captured every transaction.
> 
> Looking at our original (approved) document.... I see we have not addressed:
> 
> "Time to return results for technical checks following submission of 
> request via automated submission interface"
> 
> Also
> 
> "Time to return results for subsequent performance of technical checks 
> during retesting due to earlier failed tests"
> 
> For completeness I attach the document the SLE and CWG group approved 
> and would like someone to check correctly recorded the agreed positions.
> 
> There are a small number of other areas yet to be addressed for our 
> work to be completed.
> 
> Best
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SLA proposals 05Aug16.xlsx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet
Size: 57219 bytes
Desc: SLA proposals 05Aug16.xlsx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/dt1/attachments/20160805/daf89bb6/SLAproposals05Aug16-0001.xlsx>