[UA-Measurement] Independent evaluation work in LAC starting

Sun Jul 14 16:38:27 UTC 2019

Thanks Mark, I know Sylvia and will contact her.
R.

On 14.07.2019, at 18:27, Mark W. Datysgeld <mark at governanceprimer.com<mailto:mark at governanceprimer.com>> wrote:

Thank you for the interest, everyone.

Matogoro, let's make sure to stay in contact as this project unfolds.

Nico, we'll have a preliminary meeting next week and I will see what the situation for UY is. I can put you in contact with them right after.

Roberto, this is being pushed forward by Sylvia Leite - sylvia at internautabrasil.org<mailto:sylvia at internautabrasil.org>. She is actually very interested in this sort of information, so please reach out to her.

Michael, I intend to move forward with the creation of different schemas to standardize our work, and in this sense I find it essential that in the upcoming meetings we define the scope of what are our testing subjects.

As for MongoDB, I retrieved the minutes from the meeting in which the team decided on using it, and we felt that a nosql approach was interesting due to how scalable and approchable it is, in such a way that this can be worked on by different developers over time with no friction, something that seems ideal for UA. It is also pretty good at managing a cluster with N copies in a way that keeps data highly available.

In relation to some of your concerns, I believe there were issues with earlier implementations of this technology, but now it feels quite mature considering the projects we've been following. Nosql is being deployed by IBM, UDacity, Sony and others at a large scale.

Even so, we have been considering taking the database to MongoDB Atlas, which is a great solution for consistency and minimizing issues. This is something we definitely could discuss as this moves forward.

Best,
--
Mark W. Datysgeld from Governance Primer [www.markwd.website<http://www.markwd.website>]
Representing businesses in IG together with AR-TARC and ABES

On July 11, 2019 10:59:11 PM GMT-03:00, Michael Casadevall <michael at casadevall.pro<mailto:michael at casadevall.pro>> wrote:

I like the concept of having a centralized database with the state of
tested sites and their current "pass/fail/other" status.

It may be worth extending this concept to also include incorporation of
a schema for testing of tools, standardized libraries and off-the-shelf
products for EAI/IDN status and where possible, provide an integrated
API where tests can be submitted as these type of evaluations can
generated be automated through a test harness.

As a further note, I have some (IMHO) minor concerns with MongoDB being
used as a back-end as it can make searching the database somewhat more
difficult than a standard relational database plus historic issues
relating to Mongo in regards to replication causing data corruption.

On 7/10/19 7:17 PM, Mark W. Datysgeld wrote:
Hello everyone,

an independent IDNs study group was assembled within ALAC-LACRALO. They
showed excitement for multilingualism when I first presented it at LAC
DNS Forum last year, and are now moving into working on the subject.

Their initial aim is to perform regional evaluations for e-mail
acceptance in top local websites of different LAC countries, like the
one my team did in Brazil last year (attached).

My key concern is that, as we galvanize UA, interest in these smaller
studies will grow, and there is a need to keep all that information
useful and accessible.

There are two priorities I am currently working on:

1) Creating a 1-page document describing which websites are supposed to
be tested and how people should do it. We have followed some guidelines
excluding malware domains but not discriminating websites due to their
content, for example.

2) In anticipation of the global e-mail tests report that I hope will be
released this week, I think any measurement report moving forward should
follow an appropriate metadata schema that allows us to aggregate data
over the years and across all regions. I am including a copy of the one
we developed attached to this e-mail (it is an excerpt from the full
report).

I would appreciate any information on how this collides with any
preexisting UA documents, as well as people or teams that are
potentially working in parallel in similar matters, and so on. I think
it's vital to be proactive at this early stage.

Regards,
________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/private/ua-measurement/attachments/20190714/54c13a88/attachment-0001.html>