Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document
No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e=
Thanks Trang. Team, are we okay with going forward with this as the final version? -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:38 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e=
Donna, Trang, thanks, that's good for me. Philippe -------- Message d'origine -------- De : "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date : 20/10/2018 13:05 (GMT+01:00) À : Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org>, Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>, FOUQUART Philippe TGI/OLN <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc : csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Objet : RE: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Thanks Trang. Team, are we okay with going forward with this as the final version? -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:38 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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.
Hi all I’m happy with the document to move forward with. Just need to check with CSC re their complaint handling procedures so we can remove the “needs to be checked” for the final report. I presume we will discuss how to present this at our meeting tomorrow morning. Cheers Debbie
On 21/10/2018, at 00:11, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Donna, Trang, thanks, that's good for me.
Philippe
-------- Message d'origine -------- De : "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date : 20/10/2018 13:05 (GMT+01:00) À : Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org>, Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>, FOUQUART Philippe TGI/OLN <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc : csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Objet : RE: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Thanks Trang.
Team, are we okay with going forward with this as the final version?
-----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:38 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version.
Best,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote:
Thanks Trang
So sorry I missed them.
-----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi Donna,
Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines.
Thank you,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Everyone
Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier.
Is this what we had in mind?
Donna
-----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi all
I agree that that is a good approach from here
Cheers Debbie
> On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e=
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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.
Debbie, all, Please find included the consolidated version of the document with Trang’s suggested changes anf dindigns to date, Kind regards, Bart From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz> Date: Sunday 21 October 2018 at 07:22 To: "philippe.fouquart@orange.com" <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org" <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Hi all I’m happy with the document to move forward with. Just need to check with CSC re their complaint handling procedures so we can remove the “needs to be checked” for the final report. I presume we will discuss how to present this at our meeting tomorrow morning. Cheers Debbie On 21/10/2018, at 00:11, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote: Donna, Trang, thanks, that's good for me. Philippe -------- Message d'origine -------- De : "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date : 20/10/2018 13:05 (GMT+01:00) À : Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org>, Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>, FOUQUART Philippe TGI/OLN <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc : csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Objet : RE: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Thanks Trang. Team, are we okay with going forward with this as the final version? -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:38 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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.
Are you still looking for information on the complaint handling procedure? Here is text from our charter: *The CSC may receive complaints from individual registry operators regarding the performance of the IANA Naming Function; however, the CSC will not become involved in a direct dispute between any registry operator and the IANA Functions Operator. The CSC will review individual complaints with a view to identifying whether there are any patterns of poor performance by the IANA Functions Operator in responding to complaints of a similar nature.* To date we have not identified any patterns of poor performance by IANA. Elaine On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 7:22 AM Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz> wrote:
Hi all
I’m happy with the document to move forward with. Just need to check with CSC re their complaint handling procedures so we can remove the “needs to be checked” for the final report.
I presume we will discuss how to present this at our meeting tomorrow morning.
Cheers Debbie
On 21/10/2018, at 00:11, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> < philippe.fouquart@orange.com> wrote:
Donna, Trang,
thanks, that's good for me.
Philippe
-------- Message d'origine -------- De : "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date : 20/10/2018 13:05 (GMT+01:00) À : Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org>, Debbie Monahan < debbie@internetnz.net.nz>, FOUQUART Philippe TGI/OLN < philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc : csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Objet : RE: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Thanks Trang.
Team, are we okay with going forward with this as the final version?
-----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org <trang.nguyen@icann.org>]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:38 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan < debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version.
Best,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote:
Thanks Trang
So sorry I missed them.
-----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org <trang.nguyen@icann.org>] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan < debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi Donna,
Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines.
Thank you,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Everyone
Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier.
Is this what we had in mind?
Donna
-----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle < martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi all
I agree that that is a good approach from here
Cheers Debbie
> On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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 <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 <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 <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e=
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt
Thanks Elaine We’ve discussed the language, but we want to understand from the CSC if they have discussed how they would deal with such complaints. Donna Sent from my iPhone On Oct 22, 2018, at 9:05 AM, Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com<mailto:elainepruis@gmail.com>> wrote: Are you still looking for information on the complaint handling procedure? Here is text from our charter: The CSC may receive complaints from individual registry operators regarding the performance of the IANA Naming Function; however, the CSC will not become involved in a direct dispute between any registry operator and the IANA Functions Operator. The CSC will review individual complaints with a view to identifying whether there are any patterns of poor performance by the IANA Functions Operator in responding to complaints of a similar nature. To date we have not identified any patterns of poor performance by IANA. Elaine On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 7:22 AM Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz<mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz>> wrote: Hi all I’m happy with the document to move forward with. Just need to check with CSC re their complaint handling procedures so we can remove the “needs to be checked” for the final report. I presume we will discuss how to present this at our meeting tomorrow morning. Cheers Debbie On 21/10/2018, at 00:11, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com>> <philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com>> wrote: Donna, Trang, thanks, that's good for me. Philippe -------- Message d'origine -------- De : "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar<mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar>> Date : 20/10/2018 13:05 (GMT+01:00) À : Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org<mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org>>, Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz<mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz>>, FOUQUART Philippe TGI/OLN <philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com>> Cc : csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org<mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Objet : RE: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Thanks Trang. Team, are we okay with going forward with this as the final version? -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:38 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar<mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar>>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz<mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz>>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org<mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar<mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar>> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar<mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar>>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz<mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz>>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org<mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org<mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org<mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org>> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar<mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar>>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com<mailto:martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org<mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com>> <philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com>> <philippe.fouquart@orange.com<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz>>; >>>>> csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org>> >>>>> On Behalf Of Debbie Monahan >>>>> Sent: 09 October 2018 21:25 >>>>> To: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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<mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org<mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org<mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwMFaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=cEv1J5RgfLNYpAsn1r1eh5bH4BJ3AOqmnliG_5cAf-k&s=zBpJsv_3ZfBGt7ZXfVYBU82_W_PZWsauyE5ZjWfD7Qw&e=> _______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org<mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_li...
Dear all, Following the latest email exchanges, please find included the latest version of the slide deck to be sued for presentations at: Effectiveness meeting tomorrow morning ccNSO meeting session, if any with RySG Informing GNSO Council, if so required Kind regards, Bart From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "philippe.fouquart@orange.com" <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Date: Saturday 20 October 2018 at 13:11 To: "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>, Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org>, Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz> Cc: "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org" <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Donna, Trang, thanks, that's good for me. Philippe -------- Message d'origine -------- De : "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> Date : 20/10/2018 13:05 (GMT+01:00) À : Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org>, Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>, FOUQUART Philippe TGI/OLN <philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc : csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Objet : RE: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Thanks Trang. Team, are we okay with going forward with this as the final version? -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:38 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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.
Allan and I are working on edits to the metric text so that it is more in line with the way we work. We'd like you to try to include our edits before you present it if possible. We'll send you the updated text by Tuesday am. Elaine On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 9:38 AM Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> wrote:
No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version.
Best,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote:
Thanks Trang
So sorry I missed them.
-----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan < debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi Donna,
Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines.
Thank you,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Everyone
Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier.
Is this what we had in mind?
Donna
-----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle < martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi all
I agree that that is a good approach from here
Cheers Debbie
> On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e=
_______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt
Please find attached CSC edits (using track changes, file name updated to today's date) to the metric and assessment text. This suggested text more accurately reflects the work we perform and the way we perform it. Thanks Elaine On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:07 AM Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com> wrote:
Allan and I are working on edits to the metric text so that it is more in line with the way we work. We'd like you to try to include our edits before you present it if possible. We'll send you the updated text by Tuesday am. Elaine
On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 9:38 AM Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> wrote:
No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version.
Best,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote:
Thanks Trang
So sorry I missed them.
-----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan < debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi Donna,
Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines.
Thank you,
Trang
On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote:
Hi Everyone
Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier.
Is this what we had in mind?
Donna
-----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle < martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document
Hi all
I agree that that is a good approach from here
Cheers Debbie
> On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e=
_______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt
All, Please find included the cleaned-up latest version to be used at ccNSO and RySG meeting Kind regards, Bart From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com> Date: Monday 22 October 2018 at 14:12 To: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> Cc: "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org" <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Please find attached CSC edits (using track changes, file name updated to today's date) to the metric and assessment text. This suggested text more accurately reflects the work we perform and the way we perform it. Thanks Elaine On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:07 AM Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com> wrote: Allan and I are working on edits to the metric text so that it is more in line with the way we work. We'd like you to try to include our edits before you present it if possible. We'll send you the updated text by Tuesday am. Elaine On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 9:38 AM Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> wrote: No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt
Hi All, Are you planning a “next steps” meeting to plan the way forward in the review? Given the comments about liaisons at the meeting with PTI & ICANN.org, it would seem to me to be useful to consider how to solicit feedback from liaisons or their communities about whether they feel informed and whether they feel confident about responding to incidents should the service quality fail. Again, I think that this should be light-touch: we should want to see that the liaisons at least are monitoring the list traffic (and so are informed and confident that they will be aware if things go wrong) and that they keep their communities informed (even if in a very basic way). Best Martin From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Bart Boswinkel Sent: 23 October 2018 09:06 To: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org>; Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document All, Please find included the cleaned-up latest version to be used at ccNSO and RySG meeting Kind regards, Bart From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com <mailto:elainepruis@gmail.com> > Date: Monday 22 October 2018 at 14:12 To: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org <mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org> > Cc: "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> " <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Please find attached CSC edits (using track changes, file name updated to today's date) to the metric and assessment text. This suggested text more accurately reflects the work we perform and the way we perform it. Thanks Elaine On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:07 AM Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com <mailto:elainepruis@gmail.com> > wrote: Allan and I are working on edits to the metric text so that it is more in line with the way we work. We'd like you to try to include our edits before you present it if possible. We'll send you the updated text by Tuesday am. Elaine On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 9:38 AM Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org <mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org> > wrote: No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar <mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar> > wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org <mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org> ] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar <mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar> >; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz <mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz> >; philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> > wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz <mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz> ] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar <mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar> >; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com <mailto:martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com> >; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> > <philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto: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 <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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> > <philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto: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... <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.iana.org_help_escal...> &d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=9O3DMNLEBzwXfpZITP2GSkH0f-rS4e6cYc4YMiC94-I&e=, 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 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_csc&d=DwI...> &d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=6T4JscU8UIsx3nljWruOibt7q8j0ZlzUO1EkOy5q0O0&e=. 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 <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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <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 <mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz> >; >>>>> csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> > >>>>> On Behalf Of Debbie Monahan >>>>> Sent: 09 October 2018 21:25 >>>>> To: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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 <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt
Hi Martin, May I suggest we touch base again, next week to check-in on feed-back, and whether the last iteration is the final one or needs to be updated based on what you have heard. If agreed we will send out a Doodle poll for the end of next week (Thursday, 1 November – Friday,2 November). Kind regards, Bart From: Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com> Date: Wednesday 24 October 2018 at 10:19 To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org>, "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org" <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org>, Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson@icann.org> Subject: RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Hi All, Are you planning a “next steps” meeting to plan the way forward in the review? Given the comments about liaisons at the meeting with PTI & ICANN.org, it would seem to me to be useful to consider how to solicit feedback from liaisons or their communities about whether they feel informed and whether they feel confident about responding to incidents should the service quality fail. Again, I think that this should be light-touch: we should want to see that the liaisons at least are monitoring the list traffic (and so are informed and confident that they will be aware if things go wrong) and that they keep their communities informed (even if in a very basic way). Best Martin From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Bart Boswinkel Sent: 23 October 2018 09:06 To: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org>; Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document All, Please find included the cleaned-up latest version to be used at ccNSO and RySG meeting Kind regards, Bart From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com> Date: Monday 22 October 2018 at 14:12 To: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> Cc: "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org" <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Please find attached CSC edits (using track changes, file name updated to today's date) to the metric and assessment text. This suggested text more accurately reflects the work we perform and the way we perform it. Thanks Elaine On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:07 AM Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com> wrote: Allan and I are working on edits to the metric text so that it is more in line with the way we work. We'd like you to try to include our edits before you present it if possible. We'll send you the updated text by Tuesday am. Elaine On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 9:38 AM Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org> wrote: No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar> wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz>; philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar>; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <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_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt
Whatever works best, I think, Bart. I’m happy (as always) to take your advice. From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org> Sent: 24 October 2018 09:29 To: Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com>; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org>; Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Hi Martin, May I suggest we touch base again, next week to check-in on feed-back, and whether the last iteration is the final one or needs to be updated based on what you have heard. If agreed we will send out a Doodle poll for the end of next week (Thursday, 1 November – Friday,2 November). Kind regards, Bart From: Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com <mailto:martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com> > Date: Wednesday 24 October 2018 at 10:19 To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org <mailto:bart.boswinkel@icann.org> >, "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> " <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> > Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> >, Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson@icann.org <mailto:kimberly.carlson@icann.org> > Subject: RE: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Hi All, Are you planning a “next steps” meeting to plan the way forward in the review? Given the comments about liaisons at the meeting with PTI & ICANN.org, it would seem to me to be useful to consider how to solicit feedback from liaisons or their communities about whether they feel informed and whether they feel confident about responding to incidents should the service quality fail. Again, I think that this should be light-touch: we should want to see that the liaisons at least are monitoring the list traffic (and so are informed and confident that they will be aware if things go wrong) and that they keep their communities informed (even if in a very basic way). Best Martin From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Bart Boswinkel Sent: 23 October 2018 09:06 To: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> >; Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson@icann.org <mailto:kimberly.carlson@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document All, Please find included the cleaned-up latest version to be used at ccNSO and RySG meeting Kind regards, Bart From: CSC-EffectivenessRT <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com <mailto:elainepruis@gmail.com> > Date: Monday 22 October 2018 at 14:12 To: Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org <mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org> > Cc: "csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> " <csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] [Ext] RE: updated document Please find attached CSC edits (using track changes, file name updated to today's date) to the metric and assessment text. This suggested text more accurately reflects the work we perform and the way we perform it. Thanks Elaine On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 3:07 AM Elaine Pruis <elainepruis@gmail.com <mailto:elainepruis@gmail.com> > wrote: Allan and I are working on edits to the metric text so that it is more in line with the way we work. We'd like you to try to include our edits before you present it if possible. We'll send you the updated text by Tuesday am. Elaine On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 9:38 AM Trang Nguyen <trang.nguyen@icann.org <mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org> > wrote: No worries, Donna! Happy to help. Attached are both the redline I just sent and the clean version. Best, Trang On 10/19/18, 6:28 PM, "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin@team.neustar <mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar> > wrote: Thanks Trang So sorry I missed them. -----Original Message----- From: Trang Nguyen [mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org <mailto:trang.nguyen@icann.org> ] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:23 PM To: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar <mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar> >; Debbie Monahan <debbie@internetnz.net.nz <mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz> >; philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi Donna, Thank you for this. For consistency with the Straw Man Presentation document that Bart put together and the suggestions that Kim and I proposed there, which got support from Phillippe, I've carried over those suggested edits to this document. The edits were proposed for clarify and for consistency with other CSC procedures. For ease of viewing, I worked off the clean version that you sent and left the suggested edits in redlines. Thank you, Trang On 10/19/18, 5:26 PM, "CSC-EffectivenessRT on behalf of Austin, Donna via CSC-EffectivenessRT" <csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> > wrote: Hi Everyone Attached is a cleaned-up version of the one that was in circulation earlier. Is this what we had in mind? Donna -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Monahan [mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz <mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz> ] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 1:11 PM To: philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> Cc: Austin, Donna <Donna.Austin@team.neustar <mailto:Donna.Austin@team.neustar> >; Martin Boyle <martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com <mailto:martin.boyle.hertford@ntlworld.com> >; csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CSC-EffectivenessRT] updated document Hi all I agree that that is a good approach from here Cheers Debbie > On 19/10/2018, at 03:09, <philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> > <philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto: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 <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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:philippe.fouquart@orange.com> > <philippe.fouquart@orange.com <mailto: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... <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.iana.org_help_escal...> &d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=9O3DMNLEBzwXfpZITP2GSkH0f-rS4e6cYc4YMiC94-I&e=, 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 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_csc&d=DwI...> &d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=6T4JscU8UIsx3nljWruOibt7q8j0ZlzUO1EkOy5q0O0&e=. 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 <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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <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 <mailto:debbie@internetnz.net.nz> >; >>>>> csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:csc-effectivenessrt-bounces@icann.org> > >>>>> On Behalf Of Debbie Monahan >>>>> Sent: 09 October 2018 21:25 >>>>> To: csc-effectivenessrt@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_ma >>> ilman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lUL >>> rw&r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkA >>> YeqBB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQ >>> cEd8&e= >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________________ >>> _____________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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 <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mai >> lman_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIGaQ&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw >> &r=CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=Q7Ux9N16AmoyF5AkAYeq >> BB-ICZJqGlW-u7dIA6w4pqo&s=LP4S61bXbfSeRNwSw6UDGKgRSZ278r85-AIO9TQcEd8 >> &e= > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ___________________________________________________ > > 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-EffectivenessRT mailing list > CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mail > man_listinfo_csc-2Deffectivenessrt&d=DwIFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r > =CwipU91YB6EkpFXK9ynnT_QUef4yC5p7jpsDm8cU97g&m=4FA4Hhqu4XBpD6ReBjV2UKt > TH1b8plwUOeKXvOzRMWc&s=55jntfb4VJ3ioxId91s3PCpF47-JiabVfqJH0TcCXoA&e= _______________________________________________ CSC-EffectivenessRT mailing list CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org <mailto:CSC-EffectivenessRT@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/csc-effectivenessrt
participants (7)
-
Austin, Donna -
Bart Boswinkel -
Debbie Monahan -
Elaine Pruis -
Martin Boyle -
philippe.fouquart＠orange.com -
Trang Nguyen