Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI
One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don
Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI -----Original Message----- From: "Don Hollander" <don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: "UA-discuss@icann.org" <UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don
I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>; UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI ________________________________ From: Don Hollander<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don
My first time speaking up here but global readiness validation is one of the areas I’m familiar with from a self-certification process. Below is what I’d expect a company to do for self-certification and I believe that could be done via a bot model. inline From: Mark Svancarek [mailto:marksv@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:23 AM To: Abdeslam NASRI <abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com>; Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>; UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes For typical productivity application testing, you need to cover a full a matrix along the lines of: Send Recieve Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as all ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as non-ASCII To a single ASCII format and from a simple ASCII format with Cc of a collection of email address with a mixture of formats At the very least, products could self-certify for these. The last one is, of course, the most tricky as the client may try to do a “simple” path logic if the To address is all ASCII. For full evaluation, you’d need to test across the various hosting services to confirm and end-to-end story. A bot could handle monitoring these. Then I’d see the following features for grouping: · Can group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Can alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name I actually would expect these to be at the server/service level so repeating below. Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client For testing servers providing productivity interaction, it would be great to identify these as a matrix along the lines of: Auto-generated alerts can send to Replies for approving system tasks can be processed from “Pass-along Messages” can be received from this format “Pass-along Messages” can be sent to format “Pass-along Messages” can be set to choose between alias format depending upon client Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII Admin can: · Group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name User can configure their account to: · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name · Alias various combinations of ASCII and non-ASSII email names (even at separate domains) Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI ________________________________ From: Don Hollander<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don
Stuart, this is great, thanks! Everyone, feedback? From: Stuart Stuple Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:06 AM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI My first time speaking up here but global readiness validation is one of the areas I’m familiar with from a self-certification process. Below is what I’d expect a company to do for self-certification and I believe that could be done via a bot model. inline From: Mark Svancarek [mailto:marksv@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:23 AM To: Abdeslam NASRI <abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com<mailto:abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com>>; Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes For typical productivity application testing, you need to cover a full a matrix along the lines of: Send Recieve Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as all ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as non-ASCII To a single ASCII format and from a simple ASCII format with Cc of a collection of email address with a mixture of formats At the very least, products could self-certify for these. The last one is, of course, the most tricky as the client may try to do a “simple” path logic if the To address is all ASCII. For full evaluation, you’d need to test across the various hosting services to confirm and end-to-end story. A bot could handle monitoring these. Then I’d see the following features for grouping: · Can group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Can alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name I actually would expect these to be at the server/service level so repeating below. Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client For testing servers providing productivity interaction, it would be great to identify these as a matrix along the lines of: Auto-generated alerts can send to Replies for approving system tasks can be processed from “Pass-along Messages” can be received from this format “Pass-along Messages” can be sent to format “Pass-along Messages” can be set to choose between alias format depending upon client Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII Admin can: · Group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name User can configure their account to: · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name · Alias various combinations of ASCII and non-ASSII email names (even at separate domains) Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI ________________________________ From: Don Hollander<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don
Mark/Stuart, I like the approach and appreciate the added input and perspective. Richard Merdinger VP, Domains - GoDaddy e: rmerdinger@godaddy.com<mailto:rmerdinger@godaddy.com> From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 11:41 AM To: Stuart Stuple <stuartst@exchange.microsoft.com> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Stuart, this is great, thanks! Everyone, feedback? From: Stuart Stuple Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:06 AM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com>> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI My first time speaking up here but global readiness validation is one of the areas I’m familiar with from a self-certification process. Below is what I’d expect a company to do for self-certification and I believe that could be done via a bot model. inline From: Mark Svancarek [mailto:marksv@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:23 AM To: Abdeslam NASRI <abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com<mailto:abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com>>; Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes For typical productivity application testing, you need to cover a full a matrix along the lines of: Send Recieve Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as all ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as non-ASCII To a single ASCII format and from a simple ASCII format with Cc of a collection of email address with a mixture of formats At the very least, products could self-certify for these. The last one is, of course, the most tricky as the client may try to do a “simple” path logic if the To address is all ASCII. For full evaluation, you’d need to test across the various hosting services to confirm and end-to-end story. A bot could handle monitoring these. Then I’d see the following features for grouping: · Can group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Can alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name I actually would expect these to be at the server/service level so repeating below. Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client For testing servers providing productivity interaction, it would be great to identify these as a matrix along the lines of: Auto-generated alerts can send to Replies for approving system tasks can be processed from “Pass-along Messages” can be received from this format “Pass-along Messages” can be sent to format “Pass-along Messages” can be set to choose between alias format depending upon client Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII Admin can: · Group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name User can configure their account to: · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name · Alias various combinations of ASCII and non-ASSII email names (even at separate domains) Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI ________________________________ From: Don Hollander<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don
I may suggest the addition of a column for validation criteria Optionally check localization of the answer in case of email rejection. IDN generation panels and taskforces can be asked to provide instantiations of the test cases. I am already member of a couple of ICANN GPs. Best regards, Abdeslam NASRI -----Original Message----- From: "Richard Merdinger" <rmerdinger@godaddy.com> Sent: 4/21/2016 6:15 PM To: "Mark Svancarek" <marksv@microsoft.com>; "Stuart Stuple" <stuartst@exchange.microsoft.com> Cc: "UA-discuss@icann.org" <UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Mark/Stuart, I like the approach and appreciate the added input and perspective. Richard Merdinger VP, Domains - GoDaddy e: rmerdinger@godaddy.com From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 11:41 AM To: Stuart Stuple <stuartst@exchange.microsoft.com> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Stuart, this is great, thanks! Everyone, feedback? From: Stuart Stuple Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:06 AM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI My first time speaking up here but global readiness validation is one of the areas I’m familiar with from a self-certification process. Below is what I’d expect a company to do for self-certification and I believe that could be done via a bot model. inline From: Mark Svancarek [mailto:marksv@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:23 AM To: Abdeslam NASRI <abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com>; Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>; UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes For typical productivity application testing, you need to cover a full a matrix along the lines of: SendRecieve Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as all ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as non-ASCII To a single ASCII format and from a simple ASCII format with Cc of a collection of email address with a mixture of formats At the very least, products could self-certify for these. The last one is, of course, the most tricky as the client may try to do a “simple” path logic if the To address is all ASCII. For full evaluation, you’d need to test across the various hosting services to confirm and end-to-end story. A bot could handle monitoring these. Then I’d see the following features for grouping: · Can group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Can alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name I actually would expect these to be at the server/service level so repeating below. Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client For testing servers providing productivity interaction, it would be great to identify these as a matrix along the lines of: Auto-generated alerts can send toReplies for approving system tasks can be processed from“Pass-along Messages” can be received from this format“Pass-along Messages” can be sent to format“Pass-along Messages” can be set to choose between alias format depending upon client Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII Admin can: · Group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name User can configure their account to: · Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name · Alias various combinations of ASCII and non-ASSII email names (even at separate domains) Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>; UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI From: Don Hollander Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don
Dear Mark, Can I add the following checks for an email server/client/app: - Can add EAI aliases - Can configure IDN hosts as SMTP, POP and IMAP servers. - Can add and handle EAI rule based filters - Can recognize an EAI/IDN-style email address in the body (i.e., can be used with "mail to:") - Can search messages (all fields) for an EAI/IDN-style email address - Can use an EAI/IDN-style email address in all configuration items - Can view RTL EAI correctly. - Can be used in address book With best regards, Raed I. Al-Fayez ------------------------------------------ Saudi Network Information Center (SaudiNIC) Communication and Information Technology Commission (CITC) Tel: + 966-11-4618216 - Fax: + 966-11-2639393 http://www.nic.net.sa<http://www.nic.net.sa/> From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:41 PM To: Stuart Stuple Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Stuart, this is great, thanks! Everyone, feedback? From: Stuart Stuple Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:06 AM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com>> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI My first time speaking up here but global readiness validation is one of the areas I’m familiar with from a self-certification process. Below is what I’d expect a company to do for self-certification and I believe that could be done via a bot model. inline From: Mark Svancarek [mailto:marksv@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:23 AM To: Abdeslam NASRI <abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com<mailto:abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com>>; Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes For typical productivity application testing, you need to cover a full a matrix along the lines of: Send Recieve Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as all ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as non-ASCII To a single ASCII format and from a simple ASCII format with Cc of a collection of email address with a mixture of formats At the very least, products could self-certify for these. The last one is, of course, the most tricky as the client may try to do a “simple” path logic if the To address is all ASCII. For full evaluation, you’d need to test across the various hosting services to confirm and end-to-end story. A bot could handle monitoring these. Then I’d see the following features for grouping: • Can group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names • Can alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name I actually would expect these to be at the server/service level so repeating below. Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client For testing servers providing productivity interaction, it would be great to identify these as a matrix along the lines of: Auto-generated alerts can send to Replies for approving system tasks can be processed from “Pass-along Messages” can be received from this format “Pass-along Messages” can be sent to format “Pass-along Messages” can be set to choose between alias format depending upon client Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII Admin can: • Group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names • Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name User can configure their account to: • Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name • Alias various combinations of ASCII and non-ASSII email names (even at separate domains) Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI ________________________________ From: Don Hollander<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: This message and its attachment, if any, are confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and delete this message and its attachment, if any, from your system. You should not copy this message or disclose its contents to any other person or use it for any purpose. Statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Communications and Information Technology Commission (CITC). CITC accepts no liability for damage caused by this email.
These are great additions. Comments on a few: - Can view RTL EAI correctly. Is there a standard being proposed? This is relatively high-risk for protocols that go to the file level and still is debated for IDNs. - Can configure IDN hosts as SMTP, POP and IMAP servers. This seems more like a server action than a mail client action. I read your first item as the mail client should be able to connect to an existing account on all such servers and agree. But I wouldn’t expect it to be able to be able to change (configure) the server settings. Can you explain further what you mean? - Can recognize an EAI/IDN-style email address in the body (i.e., can be used with "mail to:") Actually mailto:// support would be something we’d expect outside of mail clients as well. Folks might at the same time want to validate the IDN relative protocols as well (ftp:// and http:// coming to mind). - Can search messages (all fields) for an EAI/IDN-style email address Might be good to add details about how this differs from EAI rule-based filters. There’s also being able to sort and group by (which I put under filters in my mind). Hope this feedback / contribution is helpful. -Stuart From: Raed Al-Fayez [mailto:rfayez@citc.gov.sa] Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:55 PM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com>; Stuart Stuple <stuartst@exchange.microsoft.com> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Dear Mark, Can I add the following checks for an email server/client/app: - Can add EAI aliases - Can configure IDN hosts as SMTP, POP and IMAP servers. - Can add and handle EAI rule based filters - Can recognize an EAI/IDN-style email address in the body (i.e., can be used with "mail to:") - Can search messages (all fields) for an EAI/IDN-style email address - Can use an EAI/IDN-style email address in all configuration items - Can view RTL EAI correctly. - Can be used in address book With best regards, Raed I. Al-Fayez ------------------------------------------ Saudi Network Information Center (SaudiNIC) Communication and Information Technology Commission (CITC) Tel: + 966-11-4618216 - Fax: + 966-11-2639393 http://www.nic.net.sa<http://www.nic.net.sa/> From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:41 PM To: Stuart Stuple Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Stuart, this is great, thanks! Everyone, feedback? From: Stuart Stuple Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:06 AM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com>> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI My first time speaking up here but global readiness validation is one of the areas I’m familiar with from a self-certification process. Below is what I’d expect a company to do for self-certification and I believe that could be done via a bot model. inline From: Mark Svancarek [mailto:marksv@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:23 AM To: Abdeslam NASRI <abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com<mailto:abdeslam.nasri@gmail.com>>; Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes For typical productivity application testing, you need to cover a full a matrix along the lines of: Send Recieve Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as all ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as non-ASCII To a single ASCII format and from a simple ASCII format with Cc of a collection of email address with a mixture of formats At the very least, products could self-certify for these. The last one is, of course, the most tricky as the client may try to do a “simple” path logic if the To address is all ASCII. For full evaluation, you’d need to test across the various hosting services to confirm and end-to-end story. A bot could handle monitoring these. Then I’d see the following features for grouping: • Can group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names • Can alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name I actually would expect these to be at the server/service level so repeating below. Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client For testing servers providing productivity interaction, it would be great to identify these as a matrix along the lines of: Auto-generated alerts can send to Replies for approving system tasks can be processed from “Pass-along Messages” can be received from this format “Pass-along Messages” can be sent to format “Pass-along Messages” can be set to choose between alias format depending upon client Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII Admin can: • Group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names • Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name User can configure their account to: • Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name • Alias various combinations of ASCII and non-ASSII email names (even at separate domains) Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI ________________________________ From: Don Hollander<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: This message and its attachment, if any, are confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and delete this message and its attachment, if any, from your system. You should not copy this message or disclose its contents to any other person or use it for any purpose. Statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Communications and Information Technology Commission (CITC). CITC accepts no liability for damage caused by this email.
Dear Stuart, Sorry for my late response .. pleases find my answers highlighted in yellow below: ________________________________ From: Stuart Stuple [stuartst@exchange.microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 05:42 PM To: Raed Al-Fayez; Mark Svancarek Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI These are great additions. Comments on a few: - Can view RTL EAI correctly. Is there a standard being proposed? This is relatively high-risk for protocols that go to the file level and still is debated for IDNs. No there is no such standard for this, but there are some good potential solutions for it(for example the Arabic email address should be intact and stable regardless of the text direction). - Can configure IDN hosts as SMTP, POP and IMAP servers. This seems more like a server action than a mail client action. I read your first item as the mail client should be able to connect to an existing account on all such servers and agree. But I wouldn’t expect it to be able to be able to change (configure) the server settings. Can you explain further what you mean? Well both sides should understand IDN/EAI, client should be configured in way that can establish connection with server and to be able to handle the new EAI protocol. For example if you want to configure your client to fetch emails from the server then you need to identify the host and port address...etc - Can recognize an EAI/IDN-style email address in the body (i.e., can be used with "mail to:") Actually mailto:// support would be something we’d expect outside of mail clients as well. Folks might at the same time want to validate the IDN relative protocols as well (ftp:// and http:// coming to mind). Agree. but also the mail client should be able to identify email address (that contain the @ sign) in automatic way. - Can search messages (all fields) for an EAI/IDN-style email address Might be good to add details about how this differs from EAI rule-based filters. There’s also being able to sort and group by (which I put under filters in my mind). Well they should be the same but we need to make sure that we can use something like this when serching for messages sent by someone ("From:رائد@رسيل.السعودية") Hope this feedback / contribution is helpful. -Stuart From: Raed Al-Fayez [mailto:rfayez@citc.gov.sa] Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 10:55 PM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com>; Stuart Stuple <stuartst@exchange.microsoft.com> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Dear Mark, Can I add the following checks for an email server/client/app: - Can add EAI aliases - Can configure IDN hosts as SMTP, POP and IMAP servers. - Can add and handle EAI rule based filters - Can recognize an EAI/IDN-style email address in the body (i.e., can be used with "mail to:") - Can search messages (all fields) for an EAI/IDN-style email address - Can use an EAI/IDN-style email address in all configuration items - Can view RTL EAI correctly. - Can be used in address book With best regards, Raed I. Al-Fayez ------------------------------------------ Saudi Network Information Center (SaudiNIC) Communication and Information Technology Commission (CITC) Tel: + 966-11-4618216 - Fax: + 966-11-2639393 http://www.nic.net.sa<http://www.nic.net.sa/> From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mark Svancarek Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:41 PM To: Stuart Stuple Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Stuart, this is great, thanks! Everyone, feedback? From: Stuart Stuple Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:06 AM To: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com>> Cc: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: RE: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI My first time speaking up here but global readiness validation is one of the areas I’m familiar with from a self-certification process. Below is what I’d expect a company to do for self-certification and I believe that could be done via a bot model. inline From: Mark Svancarek [mailto:marksv@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:23 AM To: Abdeslam NASRI <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI I was thinking about the following levels of EAI support. We can assign each a different weighting dependent on importance of scenario (which is a judgment call we must make up front), and measure support levels by how many points a client, server or service gets. Technical Support (clients) Can send to an EAI address Can send to an IDN-style email address Can receive from an EAI address Can receive from an IDN-style email address Can associate EAI and IDN-style addresses as the same account for searching and sorting purposes For typical productivity application testing, you need to cover a full a matrix along the lines of: Send Recieve Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as all ASCII To/Cc a collection of email address with a mixture of formats – single From format as non-ASCII To a single ASCII format and from a simple ASCII format with Cc of a collection of email address with a mixture of formats At the very least, products could self-certify for these. The last one is, of course, the most tricky as the client may try to do a “simple” path logic if the To address is all ASCII. For full evaluation, you’d need to test across the various hosting services to confirm and end-to-end story. A bot could handle monitoring these. Then I’d see the following features for grouping: • Can group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names • Can alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name I actually would expect these to be at the server/service level so repeating below. Technical Support (servers and services) Can receive mail sent to an EAI address and send it to a compliant client Can receive mail sent to an IDN-style email address and send it to a compliant client For testing servers providing productivity interaction, it would be great to identify these as a matrix along the lines of: Auto-generated alerts can send to Replies for approving system tasks can be processed from “Pass-along Messages” can be received from this format “Pass-along Messages” can be sent to format “Pass-along Messages” can be set to choose between alias format depending upon client Email name is non- ASCII /domain is ASCII Email name is ASCII /domain is non- ASCII Email and domain are both non-ASCII Admin can: • Group by equivalent ASCII and non-ASCII domain names • Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name User can configure their account to: • Alias ASCII and non-ASCII email name when at same domain name • Alias various combinations of ASCII and non-ASSII email names (even at separate domains) Measuring and Monitoring Support Can track the number of EAI accounts supported by each provider (e.g.. Coremail has ~50K; SaudiNIC is “negligible”; 163 is still at 0, etc.) as they are offered and grow over time Can track the number of incoming EAI messages being received over time per provider Can track the number of incoming “IDN-style” messages being received over time per provider From: ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org> [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Abdeslam NASRI Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 11:51 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org>>; UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI Hello Don and All, In some earlier discussion with an EURid report présenter I suggested that UASG can issue a kind of UA IDN and EAI certification levels that can be acquired by software vendors and community developers. A certification level is gained by a software (client app, server App or API) when a standardized Test Suite -automated or not- is passed successfully. The Test Suite evolve over time as we keep discovering issues. Tests should go far beyond a few ping commands to protocol implementation level and optional functionalities. This way, either ICANN or any organization can initiate the EAI-IDN-compliance-validation process. Bests, Abdeslam NASRI ________________________________ From: Don Hollander<mailto:don.hollander@icann.org> Sent: 4/14/2016 1:08 AM To: UA-discuss@icann.org<mailto:UA-discuss@icann.org> Subject: [UA-discuss] Wanted: Some thoughts on measuring EAI One of the things I would like to do is measure the extent of EAI deployment today (which is included in this year’s business plan and budget) and for each of the next few years. I’d also like to get a measure of how different client and server applications are able to handle both EAI and IDNs, with ‘handle' being the ability to ACCEPT and DISPLAY the different permutations we’ve got in our UA Use Cases. I think that there should be some automatable way of testing servers – perhaps sending an SMTPUTF8 Request and measuring the response. But how do we identify the servers to query? Is there a list somewhere? Do we leverage the work of the Anti-Virus and Spam monitors? Could we automate the client software evaluation or will this require an install and manual exercise and evaluation? So, before we issue a Help Wanted request for email evaluation I would appreciate your thoughts on how we might do this evaluation. Thanks in advance. Don ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: This message and its attachment, if any, are confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and delete this message and its attachment, if any, from your system. You should not copy this message or disclose its contents to any other person or use it for any purpose. Statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Communications and Information Technology Commission (CITC). CITC accepts no liability for damage caused by this email.
participants (6)
-
Abdeslam NASRI -
Don Hollander -
Mark Svancarek -
Raed Al-Fayez -
Richard Merdinger -
Stuart Stuple