[192398] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Should abuse mailboxes have quotas?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dan Hollis)
Thu Oct 27 14:36:02 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:35:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Hollis <goemon@sasami.anime.net>
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLabKqygH5yDu01LLZUfx_T5-y_u+d2kWVD08imsThAA-ug@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Stephen Satchell <list@satchell.net>
> wrote:
>> I'm tired of blatantly uncaring administrations.
> it's also totally possible that in some cases the mailbox for abuse@ 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 abuse@ mailbox, really? that is, for those
which actually have an abuse mailbox that doesn't bounce outright.
-Dan
