Contacts wanted: OVH, DigitalOcean, and Microsoft (Deutschland)

Tue Mar 19 14:56:29 UTC 2019

On 3/19/19 10:49 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 09:23:34AM -0400, Jeff McAdams wrote:
>> We would prefer, but don't require, that you use the web form because that
>> is integrated into the workflow of the groups that respond to those
>> reports.
> 
> Why isn't abuse@ integrated into the workflow?  It darn well should be,
> (a) given that RFC 2142 has been "on the books" for 22 years and
> (b) given that methods for handling incoming abuse (or bug, or outage,
> or other) reports via email to role accounts are numerous and reliable.
> 
> To be clear: if you want to offer a web form in addition to an abuse@
> address (or a security@ address, or a postmaster@ address) that's fine.
> But web forms are a markedly inferior means of communication and are
> clearly not a substitute for well-known/standardized role addresses that
> route to the appropriate people/processes.
> 
> ---rsk
> 

+1


-- 
John
PGP Public Key: 412934AC