Call summary: SSR2 Plenary - 19 August 2020]
Per Russ' homework assignment, my feedback on 20 and 24. Recommendation 20: DNS Testbed: The Rationale says "ongoing activities are sufficient" so why are there 2 recommendations? What problem is this recommendation trying to solve, how do we know it's a problem, and how will SSR3 know that it is solved? What is the measurable outcome? (SSAC asked for that in PC, iirc) Recommendation 24: We seem to be blending the IANA KPIs and CZDS, but there isn't even a clear problem identified on the KPIs that we're trying to solve. (which stakeholders are trying to get access to these KPIs but cannot?) We identify the CZDS problem, but we don't even include a recommendation to address it.. This seems backwards. Is that what the team agreed to on the 19 Aug call? confused, k On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 06:12:27PM +0000, Brenda Brewer wrote: Dear SSR2 RT members, Please find attached the plenary call report for SSR2 meeting #120, 19 August 2020 at 14:00 UTC. These high-level notes are designed to help SSR2 Review Team members navigate through the content of the call. They are not meant to be a substitute for the recording or transcript, which are posted on the wiki here: https://community.icann.org/x/aIBtC. The transcript usually becomes available 5 - 7 business days after the meeting. With kind regards, Brenda --- Brenda Brewer Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Skype: brenda.brewer.icann _______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ Ssr2-review mailing list Ssr2-review@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ssr2-review _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. ----- End forwarded message -----
KC: Repeating the URL for the Google Doc so no one needs to hunt for it: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FaGlYsLVSob_CflYkKBag4L27vMUNA0C0kVNtAI0...
Per Russ' homework assignment, my feedback on 20 and 24.
Recommendation 20: DNS Testbed: The Rationale says "ongoing activities are sufficient" so why are there 2 recommendations? What problem is this recommendation trying to solve, how do we know it's a problem, and how will SSR3 know that it is solved? What is the measurable outcome? (SSAC asked for that in PC, iirc)
Yes, this is saying that OCTO should continue the good work. The "problem" is that the testbed is still a work in progress. In 20.1, are you asking to a time frame to finish the testbed or something else? In 20.2, you are right it is not easy to measure the capability to "perform functional testing of different configurations and software versions." Are you suggesting that this be moved to the findings as a desirable feature?
Recommendation 24: We seem to be blending the IANA KPIs and CZDS, but there isn't even a clear problem identified on the KPIs that we're trying to solve. (which stakeholders are trying to get access to these KPIs but cannot?)
We identify the CZDS problem, but we don't even include a recommendation to address it.. This seems backwards.
Are you suggesting that Rec 24 only talk about the service measurements for the IANA registries, and leave the root zone measurements to Rec 25? Russ
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:06:01AM -0400, Russ Housley wrote: KC: Repeating the URL for the Google Doc so no one needs to hunt for it: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FaGlYsLVSob_CflYkKBag4L27vMUNA0C0kVNtAI0... thank you!
Recommendation 20: DNS Testbed: The Rationale says "ongoing activities are sufficient" so why are there 2 recommendations? What problem is this recommendation trying to solve, how do we know it's a problem, and how will SSR3 know that it is solved? What is the measurable outcome? (SSAC asked for that in PC, iirc)
Yes, this is saying that OCTO should continue the good work. The "problem" is that the testbed is still a work in progress. i think we should make it explicit if we think OCTO is doing the right thing here, we should say so explicitly. How do we know it's not complete? What's missing? How will they know it's complete? In 20.1, are you asking to a time frame to finish the testbed or something else? no, a measurable threshold for 'complete'. In 20.2, you are right it is not easy to measure the capability to "perform functional testing of different configurations and software versions." Are you suggesting that this be moved to the findings as a desirable feature? yes, good idea. looks like someone did that already in the doc.
Recommendation 24: We seem to be blending the IANA KPIs and CZDS, but there isn't even a clear problem identified on the KPIs that we're trying to solve. (which stakeholders are trying to get access to these KPIs but cannot?)
We identify the CZDS problem, but we don't even include a recommendation to address it.. This seems backwards.
Are you suggesting that Rec 24 only talk about the service measurements for the IANA registries, and leave the root zone measurements to Rec 25? CZDS is zone file *data* (in contrast with measureents of performance of root zone). it looks like the CZDS ref is gone now, which is fine, yes it belongs in Rec 25. k
Recommendation 20: DNS Testbed: The Rationale says "ongoing activities are sufficient" so why are there 2 recommendations? What problem is this recommendation trying to solve, how do we know it's a problem, and how will SSR3 know that it is solved? What is the measurable outcome? (SSAC asked for that in PC, iirc)
Perhaps "complete" would mean "with updates to QNAME minimization after the IETF has completed the revision to the RFC". Russ
participants (2)
-
k claffy -
Russ Housley