Abuse response [Was: RE: Yahoo Mail Update]

Joe Provo nanog-post at rsuc.gweep.net
Tue Apr 15 11:12:33 UTC 2008

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:31:33PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawg at netzero.net> wrote:
> >  It should be simple -- not require a freeking full-blown "standard".
> Its a standard. And it allows automated parsing of these complaints.
> And automation increases processing speeds by orders of magnitude..
> you dont have to wait for an abuse desker to get to your email and
> pick it out of a queue with hundreds of other report emails, and
> several thousand pieces of spam [funny how abuse at domain type addresses
> end up in so many spammer lists..]

It cannot be understated that even packet pushers and code grinders
who care get stranded in companies where abuse handling is deemed 
by management to be a cost center that only saps resources.  Paul, 
you are doing a serious disservice to those folks in specific, and
working around such suit-induced damage in general, by dismissing 
any steps involving automation.



             RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE

More information about the NANOG mailing list