North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Lazy network operators
Chris Boyd wrote:
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.
Robert Blayzor, BOFH
Key fingerprint = 1E02 DABE F989 BC03 3DF5 0E93 8D02 9D0B CB1A A7B0
YOUR PC's broken and I'VE got a problem?
-- The BOFH Slogan