Sorry I cannot help with the work - I am out of action until (hopefully) Monday morning! Martin Boyle Sent from my iPhone
On 18 Oct 2018, at 16:09, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Donna, Martin,
Sounds good to me too. Once those leftovers of comments are taken out, it should be an easy and quick read. Regards,
Philippe
-----Original Message----- From: Austin, Donna [mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 4:04 PM To: Martin Boyle Cc: FOUQUART Philippe TGI/OLN; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Sounds good Martin.
I may have some time to do this tomorrow.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 18, 2018, at 3:43 PM, Martin Boyle via CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote:
Hi All,
Given that we all seem to be in agreement on the template, would it be useful to tidy it up (remove colours and make sure the comments are coherent and worded as from the review team) and publish it as a draft report?
I realise that it's too late to be a formal document for Barcelona, but showing people our direction of travel could help inform our discussions (and it is short enough to be easily read by interested parties.
What do you think?
Martin Boyle Sent from my iPhone
On 16 Oct 2018, at 15:59, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I also support the additions.
Added a couple of elements or suggestions in the attached: - Probably minor but the nuance between "fully achieved" and "achieved" is subtle: I suppose that by "fully achieved" we mean that the result exceeded expectations ("achieved beyond expectations"?) If that is the case maybe we want to reflect that. - I suggested minor changes such as the fact that the task non only consists in reviewing SLAs but also considering creating SLAs. - On the "IANA customer complaint procedures", the procedure described at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.iana.org_help_escal..., although it's directed to IANA not to the CSC so I guess I _am_ missing something.
If I'm being picky whilst CSC reports are fairly robust, I noted that not all CSC meetings have consistent outputs in terms of notes/transcripts etc at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_csc&d=DwI.... Thought I'd pick that up, and maybe ask when we meet up, not sure that's crucial though.
Regards, Philippe
-----Original Message----- From: CSC-EffectivenessRT [mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Debbie Monahan Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 4:08 AM To: Martin Boyle Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi all
I support the comments from both Martin and Donna
Thanks Debbie
On 14/10/2018, at 05:00, Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Thanks Donna, I agree and support your additions.
Martin Boyle Sent from my iPhone
On 13 Oct 2018, at 14:55, Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote:
Thanks Martin
I've added some comments in blue to your document.
-----Original Message----- From: CSC-EffectivenessRT [mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Boyle via CSC-EffectivenessRT Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 9:02 AM To: 'Debbie Monahan' <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Thanks again to Debbie for doing this work.
As agreed on the call yesterday, I have done my first shot (attached) at completing the form: as we expected, lots of N/A, but I thought it worthwhile flagging the work on the RAP and SLAs in the answers as these are important preparatory pieces.
Being confronted by them, I was not sure how the first two metrics really differed (see footnote).
For metric 7 I am willing to recognise that I have missed something. If not, we need to ask about what has been done or envisaged. And for the first bit of metric 11, I guess that there will be an input there very soon and before we report.
You will see that I have tried to differentiate results between simply achieved (because it has gone as far as it needed to in the period) and fully achieved (where it has fully met the requirements. I am not sure how reasonable such a fine line actually is, but something tells me that, for successor reviews where there may have been some drama, the nuance might be helpful. Happy to go with the majority view. (And if we have a qualified success, we will also need a qualified failure!)
Thanks again to Debbie for getting this started,
Martin
-----Original Message----- From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Debbie Monahan Sent: 09 October 2018 21:25 To: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi all
Please find enclosed the document with the two items I said I hadn't included first time.
Cheers Debbie <CSC Effectiveness Review 2 MB responses_DA.docx>
_______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_li...
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
<CSC Effectiveness Review 2 MB responses_DA_PhF.docx>
_______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_li...
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.