Monitor SLA Violation Clause Samples

Monitor SLA Violation. The monitoring of the service is vital to detect if the SP is meeting the defined performance level. If the service is not met, then the customer must be compensated accordingly. Therefore, both parties should actively monitor the service or rely on a TTP monitoring solution. In either case, the monitoring solution must provide reliable measurements, which is a challenge in itself. 5 - Terminate SLA – Depending on the terms defined in Phase #2, the termination of an SLA happens when the SLA validity has expired or when an SLA violation is detected. However, each SLA violation incident is accounted to calcu- late the payment of the compensation value to the customer.
View SourceView Similar (3)
Monitor SLA Violation. Monitoring infrastructures are used to measure the difference between the pre-agreed and actual service provision between parties (Rana et. al. 2008). There are three types of monitoring infrastructures, which are trusted third party (TTP), trusted module on the provider side, and trusted module on the client side. Nowadays, TTP provides most of the functionalities for monitoring in most typical situations to detect SLA violation.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Monitor SLA Violation. SLA violation monitoring begins once an agreement has been established. It plays a critical role in deter- mining whether SLOs are achieved or violated. There are three main concerns. Firstly, which party should be in charge of this process. Secondly, how fairness can be assured between parties. Thirdly, how the boundaries of SLA violation are defined. SLA violation means „un-fulfillment‟ of service agreement. According to the Principles of European Con- tract Law, the term „un-fulfillment‟ is defined as defective performance (parameter monitored at lower level than agreed), late performance (service delivered at the appropriate level but with unjustified de- lays), and no performance (service not provided at all). There are three broad provisioning categories based on the above definition (Rana et. al. 2008). „All-or-Nothing‟ provisioning, characterizes the case in which all SLOs must be satisfied or delivered by the provider. „Partial‟ provisioning identifies some SLOs as mandatory ones, and must be met for the successful service delivery by both parties. „Weighted Partial‟ provisioning, is the case in which the “provision of a service meets SLO if it has a weight greater than a threshold (defined by the client)” (▇▇▇▇ et. al. 2008). „All-or-Nothing‟ provisioning is used in most cases of SLA violation monitoring, because violation leads to complete failure and negotiation to create a new SLA. An SLA contains mandatory SLOs that must be delivered by the provider. Hence, in „Partial‟ provisioning, all parties assign these SLOs the highest priority to reduce violation risk. How much the SLO affects the „Business Value‟ a measure of the importance of a particular SLO term. The more important the violated SLO, the more difficult it is to renegotiate the SLA, because any party does not want to lose their competitive advantages in the market.
View SourceView Similar (2)

Related to Monitor SLA Violation

  • Policy Compliance Violations The Requester and Approved Users acknowledge that the NIH may terminate the DAR, including this Agreement and immediately revoke or suspend access to all controlled-access datasets subject to the NIH GDS Policy at any time if the Requester is found to be no longer in agreement with the principles outlined in the NIH GDS Policy, the terms described in this Agreement, or the Genomic Data User Code of Conduct. The Requester and PI agree to notify the NIH of any violations of the NIH GDS Policy, this Agreement, or the Genomic Data User Code of Conduct data within 24 hours of when the incident is identified. Repeated violations or unresponsiveness to NIH requests may result in further compliance measures affecting the Requester. The Requester and PI agree to notify the appropriate DAC(s) of any unauthorized data sharing, breaches of data security, or inadvertent data releases that may compromise data confidentiality within 24 hours of when the incident is identified. As permitted by law, notifications should include any known information regarding the incident and a general description of the activities or process in place to define and remediate the situation fully. Within 3 business days of the DAC notification(s), the Requester agrees to submit to the DAC(s) a detailed written report including the date and nature of the event, actions taken or to be taken to remediate the issue(s), and plans or processes developed to prevent further problems, including specific information on timelines anticipated for action. The Requester agrees to provide documentation verifying that the remediation plans have been implemented. Repeated violations or unresponsiveness to NIH requests may result in further compliance measures affecting the Requester. NIH, or another entity designated by NIH may, as permitted by law, also investigate any data security incident or policy violation. Approved Users and their associates agree to support such investigations and provide information, within the limits of applicable local, state, tribal, and federal laws and regulations. In addition, Requester and Approved Users agree to work with the NIH to assure that plans and procedures that are developed to address identified problems are mutually acceptable and consistent with applicable law.

  • Repeat Violations ▇▇▇▇▇▇ agrees to comply with all regulatory requirements and acknowledges that repeat violations could result in increased penalties in the future.

  • Non-Violation The execution and delivery of this Amendment and the performance and observance by it of the terms and provisions hereof (a) do not violate or contravene its Organization Documents or any applicable Laws or (b) conflict with or result in a breach or contravention of any provision of, or constitute a default under, any other agreement, instrument or document binding upon or enforceable against it.

  • Reporting Violations A. When the District receives a written report of unsafe condition which poses a serious and immediate threat to the health or safety of any unit member, the District shall investigate the allegations and take appropriate actions in a timely manner. B. The individual bargaining unit member forwarding a written report of an unsafe condition may request information relating to action(s) taken as a result of his or her report pursuant to the California Public Records Act.

  • WAGE VIOLATIONS Contractor represents and warrants as previously certified in Contractor’s Bidder’s Certification, that during the term of this Contract and the three (3) year period immediately preceding the award of the Contract, Contractor has not been determined, by a final and binding citation and notice of assessment issued by the Washington Department of Labor and Industries or through a civil judgment entered by a court of limited or general jurisdiction, to be in willful violation of any provision of Washington state wage laws set forth in RCW 49.46, 49.48, or 49.52.