Abuse Contact Handling

Randy Bush randy at psg.com
Thu Aug 5 21:37:26 UTC 2021

> One thing I've been thinking for long time is to consider policy
> proposals to enforce the usage of the abuse mailbox together with
> X-ARF/RFC5965/RFC6650. That will automate probably a so big % of abuse
> handling that makes sense even if you need to make some programming,
> even if there are already today open source tools for that.

i try to minimize telling other operators how to run their networks, and
hope they treat me similarly.  educate, facilitate, don't legislate.

why is it that many ops feel the need to wrap/defend abuse reporting
mechanisms?  my guess, and it is just a guess, is volume, and the volume
of false positives, automated over-reaction (you pinged my server!!!),
or trivial whining.

my experience is that, once i got past the spam/whining defenses, ops
are quite cooperative.  perhaps my trying to be polite helps.  i do not
assume i know how to run your network better than you do.

perhaps if we figured out how to stop DoSsing abuse systems, they would
evolve back to being easier to use.  though it is hard to wind back
defenses.  so it goes.


randy at psg.com
`gpg --locate-external-keys --auto-key-locate wkd randy at psg.com`
signatures are back, thanks to dmarc header butchery

More information about the NANOG mailing list