Monitor SLA Violation Sample Clauses

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.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
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)” (Xxxx 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.
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.

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. All notifications and written reports of data management incidents should be sent to the DAC(s) indicated in the Addendum to this Agreement. 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 Xxxxxxx agrees to comply with all regulatory requirements and acknowledges that repeat violations could result in increased penalties in the future.

  • Reporting Violations a) When appropriate, faculty members will submit timely written communication to their immediate supervisor any condition that comes to their attention that may, in their judgment, pose a threat to the health or safety of any person associated with the District.

  • WAGE VIOLATIONS Contractor represents and warrants that, during the term of this Master Contract and the three (3) year period immediately preceding the award of the Master Contract, it is not 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 chapters 49.46, 49.48, or 49.52.

  • ALLEGED VIOLATIONS ‌ At its discretion, NRMP will investigate alleged violations of this Agreement, including but not limited to:

  • AIR OR WATER POLLUTION VIOLATION Under the State laws, the Contractor shall not be: (1) in violation of any order or resolution not subject to review promulgated by the State Air Resources Board or an air pollution control district; (2) subject to cease and desist order not subject to review issued pursuant to Section 13301 of the Water Code for violation of waste discharge requirements or discharge prohibitions; or (3) finally determined to be in violation of provisions of federal law relating to air or water pollution.

  • Convicted, Discriminatory, Antitrust Violator, and Suspended Vendor Lists In accordance with sections 287.133, 287.134, and 287.137, F.S., the Contractor is hereby informed of the provisions of sections 287.133(2)(a), 287.134(2)(a), and 287.137(2)(a), F.S. For purposes of this Contract, a person or affiliate who is on the Convicted Vendor List, the Discriminatory Vendor List, or the Antitrust Violator Vendor List may not perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under the Contract. The Contractor must notify the Department if it or any of its suppliers, subcontractors, or consultants have been placed on the Convicted Vendor List, the Discriminatory Vendor List, or the Antitrust Violator Vendor List during the term of the Contract. In accordance with section 287.1351, F.S., a vendor placed on the Suspended Vendor List may not enter into or renew a contract to provide any goods or services to an agency after its placement on the Suspended Vendor List. A firm or individual placed on the Suspended Vendor List pursuant to section 287.1351, F.S., the Convicted Vendor List pursuant to section 287.133, F.S., the Antitrust Violator Vendor List pursuant to section 287.137, F.S., or the Discriminatory Vendor List pursuant to section 287.134, F.S., is immediately disqualified from Contract eligibility.

  • Third Party Antitrust Violations The Subrecipient hereby assigns to the State of Arizona any claim for overcharges resulting from antitrust violations to the extent that such violations concern materials or services supplied by third parties to Subrecipient toward fulfillment of this Agreement.

  • Permit Compliance Such Party fails to obtain and maintain in full force and effect any Permit (other than the Regulatory Approval) necessary for such Party to perform its obligations under this Agreement.

  • Responsibility for Environmental Contamination 5.20.1 Neither Party shall be liable to the other for any costs whatsoever resulting from the presence or release of any Environmental Hazard that either Party did not introduce to the affected Work Location. Both Parties shall defend and hold harmless the other, its officers, directors and employees from and against any losses, damages, claims, demands, suits, liabilities, fines, penalties and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) that arise out of or result from (i) any Environmental Hazard that the Indemnifying Party, its contractors or agents introduce to the Work Locations or (ii) the presence or release of any Environmental Hazard for which the Indemnifying Party is responsible under Applicable Law.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.