[Chapter-delegates] Important Reminder: Systems Downtime (15-30 June) related to the transition to the new AMS

[Andre Copelin]

Dear Klaus,

We understand that, as chapter officers, you rely on our AMS to manage your activities, and the success of this rollout is critical to you.

Please know that I am as eager as you are to see the new system up and running and supporting the needs of all stakeholders. I, and several others, are deeply entrenched in making this happen.

To help our members understand what to expect, we developed a set of FAQs<https://isoc.box.com/s/d4zt053guc8dmsmbj0rq6sr5a2ure4mh>. Our responses to your earlier questions were included in the 2 June update.

We are also working on the answers to additional questions we have received, including yours. Please check back on the FAQ by the end of this week; we'll have another update by then.

If there is anything else you’d like to know, please let us know via AMShelp at isoc.org<mailto:AMShelp at isoc.org>.

Thank you for your thoughts and concerns. We all have a vested interest in making this transition a success so we can spend more of our time and resources supporting our shared vision of an Internet for everyone.

Best,

Andre
From: Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Klaus Birkenbihl via Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Date: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 11:06 AM
To: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>, AMS Support <amshelp at isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Important Reminder: Systems Downtime (15-30 June) related to the transition to the new AMS

Andre,

Just to stay fair: I checked the FAQ - and none of my questions was answered. Maybe you referred to the Question: What happened to the requirements gathered in 2021? Admitted there is some text pretending to be an answer. But neither did we ever get an info about the outcome and which requirements were accepted - nor did we see any requirements specification for the vendors. So saying "The requirements gathering in which the chapters participated was critical to selecting the right AMS." isn't far from "shut up - father knows best".

So here some further questions:

  *   For the sake of a minimum of transparency: can you please make the RFI sent to vendors available?
  *   Was the RFI kind of an requirements specification (RS) or more a generic "can you provide something cool?"?

  *   Some of the Chapters admins urgently demand since many years a simple API to exchange data between local Chapter Admin Systems and AMS - crucial to keep HQ and Chapters DBs in sync. (An option to transfer bulk data might be a modest start.) Is this covered by FONTERA? (I'd hate to repeat the rational for a decentralized networked administration between HQ and Chapters).

Best regards

Klaus

Andre Copelin via Chapter-delegates wrote on 02.06.23 21:20:
We have responded to questions received so far, including those from Klaus

--

Klaus Birkenbihl

Internet Society German Chapter (ISOC.DE) e.V.

c/o ict-Media GmbH

https://www.isoc.de
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20230608/9ff1bb80/attachment.htm>