PROPOSED METRIC SECTION ***STAFF USE ONLY: PLEASE DO NOT EDIT***
1Metric Description:Frequency of redundant or defensive domains (i.e., multiple domains pointing to the same destination).
2Notes/Comments:External sources (such as business intelligence publications) can supplement (and reduce the cost of) customized surveys.
3AoC Category:Consumer Trust (CT)
4SO/AC Originator:ALAC
STAFF INFORMATION/ANALYSIS SECTION
5Staff Team:CTCCC Team
6

Metric Currently Measured?

No

7

 

Computation:
(e.g., data elements, formula, numerator, denominator, ratio/percent, periodicity/frequency)
8Data Owner:
(i.e., party responsible for collecting and publishing metric)
9Data Reference Source:
(i.e., how/where is the data collected, tracked, managed, and published/produced?)
Script to query zone files
10Targets: 
SLA:
3-Year:
11Implementation Considerations:
(e.g., what new or additional resources, tasks, activities, systems, et al., whether internal or external, would be needed to develop, capture, and report this metric?) 
Can write script to scan zone files on name, check if there is http redirect.  This will not reflect different content (e.g., parking page vs. full content).  Requires human analysis of data.
12Degree of Difficulty/Impact:
(i.e., net impact on existing ICANN resources, systems, and capabilities) 
13Estimated Development Cost ($M):
InternalExternal
14Estimated Ongoing Production Costs:
(i.e., incremental to existing funded/budgeted expenditures) 
InternalExternal
15Estimated Net Incremental Staff (FTE):
(Express as a fraction and/or range, e.g., .25 - .50)
16

Itemization of Staff Work Effort:
(i.e., list of tasks/activities to support FTE calculation in Q15) 

17Rough Implementation Timeframe:
(e.g., indicate major steps and months/years to complete each one) 
InternalExternal

Baseline: Phase 1, Mar-Sept. 2014

Phase 4A: Measure again one year after new gTLDs delegated, Oct-Dec. 2014

18Critical Dependencies:
19Anticipated Challenges/Risks:
METRIC EFFECTIVENESS AND UTILITY SECTION
20Explanation of Metric Effectiveness:
(i.e., how will success/failure enable conclusions to be drawn concerning the relevant AoC definition?) 
21Metric Effectiveness Assessment:
(i.e., vis a vis AoC definition)
22

Overall Feasibility Assessment: 

LEGEND

Poor: Low Effectiveness - High Cost
Weak: Low Effectiveness - Low Cost
Potential: High Effectiveness - High Cost
Optimal: High Effectiveness - Low Cost

 ======================================= 

DETAILED ITEMIZATION & TRACKING OF ISSUES

Category A:

Metric Questions & Issues

No.Issue DescriptionOriginatorStatusComments

Category B:

Metric Effectiveness & Utility

No.Issue DescriptionOriginatorStatusComments

Category C:

Technical/Implementation

No.Issue DescriptionOriginatorStatusComments

Category D:

Financial/Cost/Budgetary

No.Issue DescriptionOriginatorStatusComments

Category E:

Other

No.Issue DescriptionOriginatorStatusComments