[CRISP-TEAM] [Feedback before UTC4:30am 12/26] Re: Common Understanding & Clarifications

[Izumi Okutani]

Andrei,


> I think what we want to say is that a failure of the IANA operator to
> implement a global policy without good reasons may result in the
> termination of the contract/SLA.

Sure. It is my understanding there is no objection about this point and
it will be covered in SLA. (If anyone feels differently, please share)

In addition,
>>     - You can explain about inclusion of compliance with ASO MoU as
>>       termination clause, as an approach we are suggesting when
>>       developing SLA, if asked by the community.

This was refering to a point raised at the 4th call, that the above
could (non-compliance with ASO MoU) also be included as a reason to
terminated the contract/SLA.

Having said that, I agree it may be better to stick to your suggested
explanation at this stage without sharing too much details.

If anyone wishes to clarify ambiguity on this part, please feel free to
raise it, while noting there currently is no plan to include this level
of details about SLA in CRISP Team proposal to be submitted to ICG.


Izumi

(2014/12/24 16:18), Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
> Izumi,
> 
> Izumi Okutani wrote on 24/12/14 05:30:
>> * I have *not* explicitly described that compliance to ASO MoU to be
>>    included in SLA as one of the conditions to terminate the agreement.
>>     - Seems too detailed at this stage
>>     - You can explain about inclusion of compliance with ASO MoU as
>>       termination clause, as an approach we are suggesting when
>>       developing SLA, if asked by the community.
> 
> I think what we want to say is that a failure of the IANA operator to
> implement a global policy without good reasons may result in the
> termination of the contract/SLA.
> 
> I agree that it is maybe too detailed at this stage.
> 
> Andrei
>