Re: Abuse Contact Handling

[Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>]

I suppose if they did a better job of policing their own network, they wouldn't have as much hitting their e-mail 
boxes. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Matt Corallo" <nanog () as397444 net> 
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog () ics-il net>, "NANOG" <nanog () nanog org> 
Sent: Thursday, August 5, 2021 3:44:43 PM 
Subject: Re: Abuse Contact Handling 

There's a few old threads on this from last year or so, but while unmonitored abuse contacts are terrible, similarly, 
people have installed automated abuse contact spammer systems which is equally terrible. Thus, lots of the large 
hosting 
providers have deemed the cost of actually putting a human on an abuse contact is much too high. 

I'm not sure what the answer is here, but I totally get why large providers just say "we can better protect a web form 
with a captcha than an email box, go use that if there's real abuse". 

Matt 

On 8/5/21 09:14, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> What does the greater operator community think of RIR abuse contacts that are unmonitored autoresponders? 
>
>
>
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
>
> Midwest-IX 
> http://www.midwest-ix.com