Paul,
The A in SLA stands for AGREEMENT. Most SLA's (about 99%) are put in place for the protection of the people PAYING for the server, software or service. The only protection for the server/software/service people is against UNREASONABLE expectations. Unreasonable being things such as unobtainable, unreasonable, or requiring an additional(unexpected) capital outlay.
The other point you seem to miss about SLAs, are that they are NEGOTIABLE and can be changed(with agreement of both parties) and can be unique to each companies needs and expectations. Before agreeing to an SLA, people need to have a set SLA review in place(yearly is appropriate)
SLA's are about accountability, expectations and needs.... nothing more nothing less.
That being said... it pays for a company to have the metrics in place that are important to THEIR company or THEIR department, after all they are the ones usually PAYING for the servers/software/service. This way both sides can see the starting point and where they may need to go... and where they need work on.
People who argue against SLA's fall into one of several categories and shouldn't be trusted to provide a server/software or service to you, because they are basically trying to avoid any accountability of the things they may be promising that they can deliver. Those who don't want to be accountable, tend to be those who have cut corners... or don't have the skills, or are overstating their(or their hardware/software/processes/peoples) ability. AKA... they have an agenda...
What's your agenda Paul?
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
