<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr" style="">
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
If the way x is managing their network or (not) managing their customers means my network and my customers are affected .. </div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
route leaks? packet kiddies? phish sites? spammers? whatever. If what you’re doing or not doing affects someone else, expect complaints, possibly to your upstreams if you aren’t receptive to these. </div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
Not everybody mailing your abuse address is reporting random alerts their $50 home router’s firewall throws up, or is trying to spam you. </div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
OK. All that stuff happens but is easy enough to filter out, and well, spammers who add an abuse address to their lists deserve all the blocking they get.</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
If you’re complaining about having to maintain an abuse desk or putting a dummy address into your whois records, sturgeons law says most of the time you’re the sort of provider who doesn’t want to staff an abuse desk.</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature">
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">--srs</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> NANOG <nanog-bounces+ops.lists=gmail.com@nanog.org> on behalf of Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, August 6, 2021 7:51:04 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Matt Corallo <nanog@as397444.net><br>
<b>Cc:</b> NANOG <nanog@nanog.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Abuse Contact Handling</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<style type="text/css">
<!--
p
{margin:0}
-->
</style>
<div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:10pt; color:#000000">
"we don’t get to tell someone they’re managing their network wrong"<br>
<br>
Sure we do. They don't have to listen, but we get to tell them. RFCs are full of things that one shall not do, must do, etc. We shame network operators all of the time for things they do that affect the global community.<br>
<br>
<div><span name="x_x"></span><br>
<br>
-----<br>
Mike Hammett<br>
Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>
http://www.ics-il.com<br>
<br>
Midwest-IX<br>
http://www.midwest-ix.com<span name="x_x"></span><br>
</div>
<br>
<hr id="x_zwchr">
<div style="color:#000; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; text-decoration:none; font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
<b>From: </b>"Matt Corallo" <nanog@as397444.net><br>
<b>To: </b>"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org><br>
<b>Sent: </b>Friday, August 6, 2021 8:50:00 AM<br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: Abuse Contact Handling<br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Costs real money to figure out, for each customer scanning parts of the internet, if they’re doing it legitimately or maliciously. Costs real money to look into whether someone is spamming or just sending bulk email that customers signed up for.
And what do you do if it is legitimate? Lots of abuse reports don’t follow X-ARF, so now you have to have a human process than and chose which ones to ignore. Or you just tell everyone to fill out a common web form and then the data is all nice and structured
and you can process it sanely.</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Like Randy said, we don’t get to tell someone they’re managing their network wrong. If you don’t want to talk to AWS, don’t talk to AWS. If you want them to manage their network differently, reach out, understand their business concerns, help
alleviate them. Maybe propose a second Abuse Contact type that only accepts X-ARF that they can use? There’s lots of things that could be done that are productive here.</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Matt</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<blockquote>On Aug 6, 2021, at 08:08, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote>
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:10pt; color:#000000">
I suppose if they did a better job of policing their own network, they wouldn't have as much hitting their e-mail boxes.<br>
<br>
<div><span></span><br>
<br>
-----<br>
Mike Hammett<br>
Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>
http://www.ics-il.com<br>
<br>
Midwest-IX<br>
http://www.midwest-ix.com<span></span><br>
</div>
<br>
<hr id="x_zwchr">
<div style="color:#000; font-weight:normal; font-style:normal; text-decoration:none; font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; font-size:12pt">
<b>From: </b>"Matt Corallo" <nanog@as397444.net><br>
<b>To: </b>"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org><br>
<b>Sent: </b>Thursday, August 5, 2021 3:44:43 PM<br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: Abuse Contact Handling<br>
<br>
There's a few old threads on this from last year or so, but while unmonitored abuse contacts are terrible, similarly,
<br>
people have installed automated abuse contact spammer systems which is equally terrible. Thus, lots of the large hosting
<br>
providers have deemed the cost of actually putting a human on an abuse contact is much too high.<br>
<br>
I'm not sure what the answer is here, but I totally get why large providers just say "we can better protect a web form
<br>
with a captcha than an email box, go use that if there's real abuse".<br>
<br>
Matt<br>
<br>
On 8/5/21 09:14, Mike Hammett wrote:<br>
> What does the greater operator community think of RIR abuse contacts that are unmonitored autoresponders?<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> -----<br>
> Mike Hammett<br>
> Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>
> http://www.ics-il.com<br>
> <br>
> Midwest-IX<br>
> http://www.midwest-ix.com<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>