Draft TOR of Independent Review 21/09/00

ISOCNZ Domainz Model Review Working Group

DRAFT TERM OF REFERENCE OF INDEPENDENT REVIEW

Report to Council September 2000

The review is to be comprehensive and focus not just on the technical issue of the implementation of the DRS but the entire project from conception to the present day. The reviewer should include sections on, but not feel limited to:

• system design
• system implementation
• risk management
• governance
• documentation
• communications
• technical issues including the choice of technology
• and most importantly recommendations

Specific aspects that should be covered (but not limited to) are

• final total cost (included associated expenditures) vs budgeted cost and reasons for any variations
• details of responsibilities between ISOCNZ, DOMAINZ Board, DOMAINZ taff and any contractors including who approved and who recommended key details
• A full listing of reported user problems with the new system, the reasons for them, have they been remedied and whether they were foreseeable. The lack of notification of zone changes to especiallybe covered
• Details of consultation and feedback over the entirety of the project and how, if at all, this was fed into the final system.
• whether adequate planning went into obtaining suppliers for the project,
• the adequacy of the design, testing and rollout of the project with reguard to how it would be used
• the prudency of the fact that implementation involved a flag day with no going back
• whether planning included how to minimise the considerable investment in time and resources on the part of agents.
• A clear summary of what the perceived benefits of the new system were to various stakeholders (ISOCNZ, ISPs, Agents and users) and what input the stakeholders had into the fundamental concepts behind the design
• How registrants were handled, including the preparation of FAQ information, documentation on the system, and the provision made for answering questions.
• What risk analysis was done and what assumptions this analysis was based on
• What documentation was prepared for users of the systems, including ISPs and Agents, and the adequacy of such documentation

The reviewer should at a minimum consult with (including traveling to interview if necessary) the following people and groups - DOMAINZ Board, DOMAINZ staff, ISOCNZ Councillors and Technical Committee, Contractors working on the project, major NZ based ISPs and Agents. Submissions from any interested party (including domain name holders) should also be called for.

The principles of natural justice should be adhered to and any allegations or opinions should be put to the other parties concerned for their comment.

The reviewer's report will be made public. If there is any evidence which can not legally be made public this should be referred to in the public report, but not detailed. A fuller report, if necessary, which includes confidential information shall go to the DOMAINZ Board only.

david at farrar dot com
NZ Usenet FAQs - http://www.dpf.ac.nz/usenet/nz
ICQ 29964527

© 2000 The Internet Society of New Zealand
Last updated 21 September 2000