Should abuse mailboxes have quotas?

Christopher Morrow morrowc.lists at
Thu Oct 27 20:17:14 UTC 2016

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Dan Hollis <goemon at> wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Stephen Satchell <list at>
>> wrote:
>>> I'm tired of blatantly uncaring administrations.
>> it's also totally possible that in some cases the mailbox for [email protected] got
>> moved behind some orgs other mail systems... This happened numerous times
>> at $PREVIOUS_EMPLOYER. When moving around ~200k mailboxes 1 special
>> unicorn
>> often gets mishandled :(
>> we wouldn't find out until someone called in all complainy about how 'you
>> never care about email... blah...' "Sure we care, but our mail-admin team
>> sometimes breaks us, whoops!"
>> ascribing malice is often unhelpful... Also, of course it's your network
>> you can balkanize from the rest of the internet as much as you please.
> not so much malice as gross incompetence.
> running spamfilters on your [email protected] mailbox, really? that is, for those
> which actually have an abuse mailbox that doesn't bounce outright.
> again, ascribing malice where it doesn't necessarily exist isn't helpful.

More information about the NANOG mailing list