Hi, all, I have the following comments for this draft: 1) After the full names are given, their corresponding abbreviations can be used directly. Such as RSS and RSO in subsection 2.1. 2) These metrics are used to evaluate the DNS root servers and inevitably it will lead the readers to compare the root servers based on the performance statistics. Then is it necessary to anonymize the RSO when the data is published publicly somewhere in the future? 3) The performance of DNS root server depends tightly on BGP routing and the testing location, then we assume “each vantage has the same connectivity and latency characteristics”, at least I think “same” here is too strict. 4) In Page-18/19, “QNAME=.” can be written as “QNAME=”.”” to be consistent with the prior format. 5) In 5.4, a statements should be given, root server publication latency cannot directly reflect the performance of a specific root server: if a root server deploys its sites in many and poor-connected places, the average latency must be higher, however, it is meaningful for the improvement of the DNS root server performance in globe (this problem also exists in some other metrics). BR, Zhiwei Yan YAN Zhiwei From: Steve Sheng Date: 2019-10-23 21:48 To: rssac-caucus@icann.org Subject: [RSSAC Caucus] [RSS Metrics WP] Submit comments to the metrics document by 27 October Dear RSSAC Metrics WP members, As shared by Duane on the last call, the working group will try to finalize the document for RSSAC Caucus review at its next scheduled teleconference on 29 October 2019. Please submit any last comments you have by end of day Sunday 27 October. The working group chairs and staff will aim to consider all the comments on 28 October 2019 and produce a clean version for WP review. The link for the latest document is at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vC2OTSOdWKjmUQanYx4ZlUGnu-5npwvJzRRSFg1B... Best Steve