Hi Allan, Thanks for your feedback on the document. I will refrain from making any changes until we have our discussion on Wednesday given that the meeting is in two days. I agree we need to decide what documents we want to be consistent with and let’s see how the discussion goes on Wednesday. For your question about the designation of ‘Validation of Reviews after each submission’, what we are talking about here is changing the definition of what is measured. The original SLA measured the full time staff spent on validation and reviews. In this proposed change, we are suggesting that we focus on time spent on this activity after each submission. I think that you are right though, that is more accurately characterized as metrics to focus on under this SLA category. Best regards, Naela From: Allan MacGillivray <allan.macgillivray@cira.ca> Date: Friday, June 7, 2019 at 12:24 PM To: Kim Davies <kim.davies@iana.org> Cc: Naela Sarras <naela.sarras@iana.org>, Maria Otanes <maria.otanes@icann.org>, "ICANN-CSC@icann.org" <ICANN-CSC@icann.org> Subject: RE: [ICANN-CSC] [EXT] Re: CSC Meeting 30: Recording, Notes, & Chat Kim - it’s just a question of which documents one wants to be consistent with. Allan Sent with BlackBerry Work (www.blackberry.com) From: Kim Davies <kim.davies@iana.org> Date: Friday, Jun 07, 2019, 1:43 PM To: Allan MacGillivray <allan.macgillivray@cira.ca> Cc: Naela Sarras <naela.sarras@iana.org>, Maria Otanes <maria.otanes@icann.org>, ICANN-CSC@icann.org <ICANN-CSC@icann.org> Subject: Re: [ICANN-CSC] [EXT] Re: CSC Meeting 30: Recording, Notes, & Chat Hi Allan, Quoting Allan MacGillivray on Friday June 07, 2019:
But one very general one is that the ccTLD community is very, very particular about terminology and for them, the reference document is the Final Report of the Framework of Interpretation Working Group’. I recommend that you stick to the terminology therein which refers to ccTLD ‘delegations and transfers’, rather than ‘creations/transfers’. I think that we can avoid some comments if Bart were to closely review the first paragraph in the background section to ensure that PTI is not seen to be deviating from establish orthodoxy.
I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I would note that terminology is not something new that is being introduced with this document - the lineage dates at least to the community's transition proposal that informed the SLAs. The "SLE Working Group Report on Service Level Expectation for IANA Root Zone Management (Post-Transition)", from what was known as Design Team A, reads: Category III (Creating or Transferring a gTLD)—Requests to create (“delegate”) or transfer (“redelegate” or “assign”) a generic top-level domain. These changes require additional processing by IANA to ensure policy and contractual requirements are met associated with a change of control for the TLD. While the key processing is performed elsewhere within ICANN, the IANA processing is significant and therefore distinguishes this type of request from a routine change request. Category IV (Creating or Transferring a ccTLD)—Requests to create or transfer a country-code top-level domain. These changes require additional processing by IANA to ensure policy requirements are met. This processing is performed by IANA staff, and includes performing additional analysis on the change request, producing a report, and having that report reviewed externally(including verification that all existing registration data has been successfully transferred from the old to new Registry operator). This processing is significant, and is normally substantially longer than a routine change request, and therefore should be distinguished. kim