RE: [registrars] SLA - Decision Time

[Desiree Miloshevic <desiree.miloshevic@vi.net>]

Virtual Internet supports option 1.

Bests,

Desiree Miloshevic
dir: +44 171 565 4076

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Lindsay [mailto:richard@interq.ad.jp]
Sent: 26 January 2000 01:17
To: mpalage@infonetworks.com
Cc: Registrars@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [registrars] SLA - Decision Time


interQ supports option 1.

While we as registrars will want to review the SLA, particularly
after the first 6 months, I believe we must have something as
a starting point.  I don't believe it will be difficult to raise the
standards later on, once we have data that can back up why
it makes sense to do so.

Basically I think the "best effort" approach for the SLA is
appropriate, and what we currently have achieved.

Best regards,
Richard

"Michael D. Palage" wrote:

> I would like feedback on the following issue. The SLA Task Force working
in
> conjunction with NSI "the registry" drafted a SLA which was circulated
among
> the list a few weeks back. After the initial circulation there was some
> concerns raised by a couple of registrars that this agreement was not
> adequate enough.  The crossroads which we are now at requires us to either
> accept this SLA with the current built in re-negotiation periods at the
> initial 6 month mark and then annually thereafter, or forego any SLA until
> such time that more accurate metrixs can be defined.
>
> Your choices:
> (1) Adopted the SLA in its current form with a re-evaluation at a 6 month
> mark;
> Pros: We have something to start with as opposed to nothing; the majority
of
> the Task Force thought it was an acceptable first try with the condition
> that it be revisited at the designated periods of time
> Cons: Once you establish a benchmark it will be difficult to raise the
bar;
> (2) Enter into no agreement until further comparative metrixs can be
> reviewed
> Pros: It will allow for a more accurate measurement of what the SLA should
> be. A significant amount of consumer complaints have involved
> SRS downtime and other performance issues
> Cons: There will be no SLA in place to hold NSI accountable.
> (3) Abstain
>
> If you could respond as quickly as possible I would greatly appreciate it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
> P.S. I will be circulating a draft agenda item for the Cairo meeting
> shortly. Any topics that people would like to see addressed please forward
> them to me.

--
_/_/_/interQ Incorporated
_/_/_/System Division
_/_/_/Director and General Manager
_/_/_/Richard A. S. Lindsay