nanog mailing list archives

Re: We have a firewall (was Re: Pakistan government orders ISPservice level agreement)


From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris () UU NET>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 19:55:19 +0000 (GMT)



On Wed, 7 May 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:

In a message written on Wed, May 07, 2003 at 05:37:18AM +0000, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
Calling the NOC, as I said before (which you most likely actually called
the customer service number which isn't the NOC), is not productive
because no one in the NOC (or customer service group) has anyway to

This is not a knock on UUNet specifically, but does get to the real
problem.  With many large providers it's not that the abuse/security
group is unresponsive, it's that you can't figure out how to contact
them, and the catch-all published numbers don't work.  This is doubly
true when the company has gone to an IVR system, almost none of which
have the "I'm not a customer but I want to alert you to something
that's real important" option.

There is the issue of what to do with this data also :( And filtering out
the 'kook' calls (as the abuse team calls them) from 'real' calls. :( This
is a significant nut to crack, in a smaller ISP where 1-5 (or some
'manageable number') does 'all that is important' things are quite
different than in a multinational multithousand person company. Also,
'important' takes on different meanings in this scale also.


I think all companies that have separated their customer/peer facing
support into multiple groups need more training on how to redirect the
call to the right group when the wrong group receives it in the first
place.  Most often the person answering the phone doesn't know the
right place to redirect the call, so it appears to just be an unhelpful
support system.


This is, at UUNET, a continuing education process, as people come/go/reorg
the messages get repeated up and down the pike... Sometimes we (me) forget
to get my important messages out :( So, for 'security' at UUNET I suppose
blame me, mostly.


Current thread: