This discussion is now drifting back to the one we had several weeks ago about properly and adequately staffing the abuse desk (email, phone, and otherwise) in spite of the temptation to take advantage of the 'efficiencies' of scale. It's beyond me how an abuse@ can afford to drop emails via their spam filter, unless the required spamminess value is set *very* high. Again, auto-responding to spam email can just perpetuate the spam, though it is effective for those legitimate senders whose email was marked up as spam. Anyone want to start a pool to guess when Level3 will update the Wiltel contact records with the correct Level3 information? =) Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Lyall Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 3:35 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Wiltel has gone pink. On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Jo Rhett wrote:
Complete and utter incompetence (ie spam filtering their abuse mailbox)
Considering the amount of spam that abuse mailboxes get then spam filtering them is actually a good idea. You just have to be a little careful to not block the complaints. One way I did was to look for a "Received: " header in the body of the suspected spam and allow it though if it is rejected. A backup for that was to have the reject say "Please include the word 'xyzzy' in the subject to bypass the filters" and allow anything with that through (which happened less than once per month). -- Simon J. Lyall | Very Busy | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz/ "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.