High level design document is attached for all interested. The functionality is coming in 6.0, actually it is one of a few blockers of this release.

Thanks for this Alexei.

I have a question / comment.

The document suggests that the SLI's are going to be based on availability. Would the proposed solution also allow for performance items.

e.g.

SLI 1 : Server responds to ping is an availability metric.

SLI 2 : Ping response < 15ms is a performance metric.

I'm sure it would be very useful if customers - especially MSP's - can differentiate between availability and performance on an SLA report.

Would this be possible using the tag mechanism in the design ?

Other than that, it's a very welcome advance.

NobiusDave, it is absolutely possible. You may define two SLAs: one for performance and another for availability and link them to different sets of problems using tags, tag "Class:Performance" for the first SLA and "Class:Availability" for the second one.

So, in your example trigger "Server responds to ping is an availability metric." should be tagged with "Class:Availability", while trigger "Ping response < 15ms" with tag "Class:Performance".

I hope it makes sense.

Implemented in 6.0.0beta2 (master) 6d5917ba51b.

One suggestion a button to export to a csv file entire SLA. Other than this, it is looking very nice. 

API documentation updated for v6.0:

• Noted changes made by ZBXNEXT-6999 in Changes from 5.4 to 6.0 appendix.
• Updated Method reference page: Service monitoring description updated; Service Level Agreement entry added.
• Updated service.create, service.get and service.update method reference; Service object and Service class descriptions.
• SLA API entries created.
• Updated Role object page: new possible value (manage_sla) for Action object property name.

Updated user documentation:

• What's new 6.0
• Services (page moved from Monitoring -> Services)
• Service actions (new page)
• SLA (new page)
• SLA report (new page)
• SLA report widget (new page)
• User roles
• Supported macros (SERVICE.DESCRIPTION macro added)

Unfortunately, the current implementation of Services/SLA (in v6.0) is far from ideal

• One of limitation mentioned in the provided document was:

  very limited visualization: no graphical representation of services, no good reporting

  The most annoying fact is that we have even a regression in this area
  Some examples of the lost functionality were described in ZBXNEXT-7392 and ZBXNEXT-7600.

• An additional lack of functionality: (see ZBXNEXT-7565).

• Another pain point: implementing a tag-based link between services and triggers, it was forgotten about LLD-generated triggers. The ZBXNEXT-5467 becomes a very important; or, at least – ZBXNEXT-7593 as a workaround (if it's simpler to implement).

• Documentation about API is incomplete, sometimes – just wrong (see ZBX-20784).

I very hope that an attention will be payed to these problems. Some of them are blockers for us preventing an upgrade from v5.0 to the next LTS version.

alexei, we are discussed that on the Zabbix Summit-2022 recently, so this is just a reminder.
I understand that this ticket is closed already; however, it contains my previous message with the list of our pain points and a links to other tickets we are patiently waiting for.

All these issues (including regressed functionality and incomplete documentation) do still exist after a half of year, next version release (6.2) and once more next version (6.4) in the beta stage
We'll be grateful if these tickets should be implemented at least in the next LTS version (7.0).

constantin.oshmyan , thank you for the discussion at the Summit and all the reminders regarding BSM functionality. I'd like to see it implemented in 7.0 LTS.

alexei, just reminder, as we discussed on the Zabbix Summit 2023
As I wrote a year ago:

I understand that this ticket is closed already; however, it contains my previous message with the list of our pain points and a links to other tickets we are patiently waiting for.

All these issues are still actual for us. We've upgraded our Zabbix system to the current LTS version (5.0 -> 6.0), however, we still need each of these functionality lacks; especially when some functionality existed before but has been lost in the v6.0.
We are looking for having them being implemented in the next LTS version (i.e. 7.0).