ucb messaging initiative brad judy information technology services
Post on 19-Jan-2018
213 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
UCB Messaging Initiative
Brad JudyInformation Technology Services
What is the project?
• Broad electronic messaging initiative• Scope:
– All aspects of e-mail– Interfaces between core messaging services
and other services (WebCT, voicemail, web)– Exploration into other forms of messaging (IM,
mobile messaging, web based messaging)• An umbrella project that will launch several
sub-projects
Motivations
• Campus IT Strategic Plan– Several aspects of e-mail noted for
improvement• IT efficiencies study
– Numerous dept running own e-mail services• Exchange project for Vice Chancellors
– Centrally run Exch service for ~120 key staff• Laundry list of required and desired
improvements
Process
• Background research in technologies and trends
• Examination of own infrastructure• Input gathering – internal and external• Consolidation and prioritization of input• Establish a direction for messaging
services• Initiate sub-projects according to priority
Existing Infrastructure
• Sendmail, UWash IMAP, POP (limited)• IMP/Horde webmail interface• Spam Assassin for message tagging• Hesiod lookup system• Sun/Solaris based systems• Separate student and fac/staff e-mail
hosts (share common web interface)• E-mail is an official form of communication
for students
Mail Flow
• Fully documented central mail flow• Multipurpose exercise
– Better understand how to improve system– Force Brad to learn more about messaging
infrastructures– Actually document something that often is not
documented
Immediate Spam Issue
• The volume of spam and tagging rate was not meeting user expectations
• Refining SA and adding tests increased fac/staff system tagging rate to >95%
• Increased access list work greatly reduced the overall volume of spam
• Student system still using fewer tests due to lack of CPU resources (>70% tagging rate)
Weekly spam totals Jan 18th - Sept 18th (user: judy)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Num
ber o
f mes
sage
s
Weekly spam tracking (username judy)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Week of
Jan 1
8th
Week of
Jan 2
5th
Week of
Feb
1st
Week of
Feb
8th
Week of
Feb
15th
Week of
Feb
22n
d
Week of
Feb
29th
Week of
Mar
7th
Week of
Mar
14th
Week of
Mar
21st
Week of
Mar
28th
Week of
Apr
4th
Week of
Apr
11th
Week of
Apr
18th
Week of
Apr
25th
Week of
May
2nd
Week of
May
9th
Week of
May
16th
Week of
May
23rd
Week of
May
30th
Week of
Jun 6
th
Week of
Jun 1
3th
Week of
Jun 2
0th
Week of
Jun 2
7th
Week of
Jul 4
th
Week of
Jul 1
1th
Week of
Jul 1
8th
Week of
Jul 2
5th
Week of
Aug
1st
Week of
Aug
8th
Week of
Aug
15th
Week of
Aug
23rd
Week of
Aug
30th
Week of
Sep
t 5th
Week of
Sep
t 12th
Date
Num
ber o
f mes
sage
s
Total FPUnmarkedMarked
Rejection and Tagging of E-mail
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
9/3/2004 9/4/2004 9/5/2004 9/6/2004 9/7/2004 9/8/2004 9/9/2004 9/10/2004 9/11/2004 9/12/2004 9/13/2004
LegitimateRejectedTagged
Input Gathering
• Meetings with various internal groups• Meetings with external IT advisory groups
– IT infrastructure advisory group– Faculty IT advisory group
• Student portal survey
High Priority Core Service Input
• E-mail list processing system– Easier to manage lists and subscriptions– Better handling of multiple e-mail addresses– Course roster lists
• Web based threaded discussion– Better technology for some uses of lists– Currently in WebCT in a limited form
High Priority Core Service Input
• E-mail processing architecture– Where/how should spam/virus be done?– Ensure resources are sufficient to meet
performance expectations– Improve student processing to match fac/staff
• E-mail security– Signed official communication
Medium Priority Input
• Overall e-mail architecture review• Exchange project• Better integration of services• True e-mail development environment• Improvements to webmail interface• Policy review/improvements• Small device support (PDA, mobile
phones)
Exploratory Input: Voice
• Convergence of voice and electronic messaging
• Voicemail via web or e-mail• VoIP pilot in progress – tightly connected
to other forms of messaging• The line between IM and VoIP may be
impossible to draw (IP based, soft phones, voice and video in both technologies)
Exploratory Input: IM
• Is there a benefit to a campus level instant messaging service?
• Directory integration provides the potential for a benefit, but is the benefit just having self reported IM information in the directory?
• Some departments are using IM/chat tech internally or even with customers (libraries virtual reference desk)
Exploratory Input: Student E-mail
• Students enter and leave the school with external e-mail identities and accounts
• Is a campus e-mail account important or is it merely a temporary, extra account?
• Is the e-mail identity really the useful service?
• Should active student e-mail be merely a forwarder like alumni e-mail?
• Is this concept compatible with e-mail as an official form of communication?
Describe e-mail account use
Only CU
Mostly CU
Half
Mostly other
Only other
Student Survey Input
• Portal survey– One week– Digital camera give away
• Lower than normal response rate (only ~195 instead of 350-380)
• Good distribution of year and gender
top related