Steve, thanks for providing this update.

The information provided is not as ‘complete’ as that provided to the group in 2017. I’ve attached a document from an RySG Discussion Group that I believe was provided to this group early last year that summarises the level of detail that was available at that time—I think more detail would be helpful for the purposes of this group. Generalisations are not helpful either—

It’s also disappointing that only ‘anecdotal’ information is available about PDT, which I personally don’t find particularly helpful to our discussion because the source doesn’t include any insight from those that were subject to PDT. For this information to be meaningful, more detailed statistics and analysis is necessary.

Donna

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Steve Chan
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2019 2:26 PM
To: gnso-newgtld-wg@icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-newgtld-wg] SLA Monitoring (SLAM) Statistics

Dear WG Members,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Best,

Steve

Steven Chan 

Policy Director, GNSO Support

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 

Email: steve.chan@icann.org

Skype: steve.chan55

Mobile: +1.310.339.4410

Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/

Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO

Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar

See All SO and AC events on the ICANN Global calendar [features.icann.org]