[lac-discuss-en] Fwd: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] SLA Monitoring (SLAM) Statistics

[Carlton Samuels]

Without prejudice to "collective recollection", my only question is why
should information on PDT and via a contractor be 'anecdotal'?

CAS


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019, 4:26 pm
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] SLA Monitoring (SLAM) Statistics
To: gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org <gnso-newgtld-wg at icann.org>


Dear WG Members,



During the course of discussions, particularly as it relates to RSP
pre-approval and most recently, registrant protections, WG members have
asked for updated statistics on the Service Level Agreement (SLA)
Monitoring program within ICANN. Attached, please find the latest report. A
few contextual notes that may help your digestion of this information:

   - The statistics are on a per TLD basis for each month.
   - In some months, there are spikes in the number of DNS and RDDS
   failures. Usually, these spikes are a caused by a failure in an RSP that
   serves a large number of TLDs.
   - On the 4ht slide, you will see several failures that reached EBERO
   thresholds but in the vast majority of cases, the failures did not trigger
   an EBERO event. As has been shared previously, this is likely because ICANN
   Org worked with the registry to resolve the event and/or there were minimal
   domains under management.



In addition, members asked for information around Pre-Delegation Testing
(PDT), which I believe is now an element of the broader Registry System
Testing (RST). Please see the below response from GDD:



“Additionally, on the PDT/RST side - ICANN org has neither compiled nor
published summary data regarding Pre-Delegation Test results from the
2012 round.  Testing data was tracked and managed by IIS, the
pre-delegation testing vendor.   Such testing data, was not provided to
ICANN org as part of the service delivery efforts.  However, based on ICANN
org management of the Pre-Delegation testing processing since 2012, we can
share anecdotal information based on the collective recollection of org and
vendor staff.  These anecdotal results includes:



1.       Most TLDs received follow-up questions regarding their PDT testing
submission (similar to initial evaluation Clarifying Questions)

2.       Approximately one quarter of TLDs tested required extended testing
beyond the standard 2 to 3 week testing cycle.  Some of these tests
extended up to 12 weeks.

3.       Based on the flexibility of extended testing and the assistance
provided by the PDT vendor to TLD operators, fewer than 10 TLDs required a
second full PDT testing cycle.“



Hopefully you all find this information helpful. If you have questions or
concerns, especially for GDD, please let us know.



Best,

Steve



*Steven Chan*

Policy Director, GNSO Support

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536

Email: steve.chan at icann.org

Skype: steve.chan55

Mobile: +1.310.339.4410
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20190826/14747619/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SLAM Statistics Aug 23 2019.pptx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation
Size: 50883 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20190826/14747619/SLAMStatisticsAug232019-0001.pptx>