nanog mailing list archives
Re: Lazy network operators
From: "Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr." <LarrySheldon () cox net>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 11:40:00 -0500
Robert Blayzor wrote:
Chris Boyd wrote:NTL World no longer accepts abuse@ email. You have to go to a web form that requires javascript be enabled and enter all of the information for them. I guess that they got tired of processing the the abuse@ mail load and just bit bucketed it.I'm late on this thread and I don't want to open a can of worms here, but...I can understand the reasoning behind what they are doing, but perhaps they are taking things in the wrong direction. Our abuse@ email address is just that, abused. Our abuse@ mailbox gets probably 500+ spams a day with maybe 2-3 legit emails that we need to look at. Sure we could run anti-spam measures on the abuse@ address but that probably isn't the way to go since most complaints to abuse@ are forward spam messages which could be marked and then missed.I think making a reporting page that requires jscript and such is a little over the top, but I don't think a simple HTML standard web form is out of the question. We've not gone this route yet, but we may head that way since I think the actual legit concerns of our abuse@ address are getting lost in the fray. Having our techs/engineers go through the abuse@ box every day to play hide and seek is a bit of an agonizing task that nobody really wants, especially at the volume it is today. If there was a standard that worked for this, we would certainly follow it. As it is today, we have got to find something simple that works for the legit issues and something that doesn't burn up so many engineer/tech cycles.
I have a couple of thoughts that I'll try to keep brief enough not to be banned for mentioning them... Not everybody can use an HTML browser to compose messages. As soon as it seems like a good idea to those I am not allowed to mention here, they will hammer on the forms just like they do the abuse@ addresses. OK, three.... How about all of the Service Providers decide to find a way to treat the problem (instead of the symptoms that annoy them) and stop the hammering on ALL accounts, including abuse@ accounts? -- Requiescas in pace o email
Current thread:
- Re: TTY phone fraud and abuse, (continued)
- Re: TTY phone fraud and abuse Patrick W . Gilmore (Apr 14)
- Re: TTY phone fraud and abuse Patrick W . Gilmore (Apr 14)
- Re: TTY phone fraud and abuse Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. (Apr 15)
- Re: Lazy network operators Paul Vixie (Apr 11)
- abuse standards & consumer reports William Allen Simpson (Apr 11)
- Re: abuse standards & consumer reports Paul Vixie (Apr 11)
- Re: Lazy network operators Stephen J. Wilcox (Apr 11)
- Re: Lazy network operators Avleen Vig (Apr 10)
- Re: Lazy network operators Paul Vixie (Apr 10)
- Re: Lazy network operators Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. (Apr 12)
- Re: Lazy network operators Steven Champeon (Apr 12)
- Re: Lazy network operators Robert Blayzor (Apr 12)
- Re: Lazy network operators Steven Champeon (Apr 12)
- Re: Lazy network operators E.B. Dreger (Apr 13)
- Re: Abuse mail boxese (was Re: Lazy network operators) Stephen J. Wilcox (Apr 12)
- Re: Abuse mail boxese (was Re: Lazy network operators) Steve Atkins (Apr 12)
- Re: Abuse mail boxese (was Re: Lazy network operators) Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Apr 12)
- Re: Abuse mail boxese (was Re: Lazy network operators) Steve Atkins (Apr 12)