I'm getting ready to request a new batch of administrative e-mail addresses to replace an outdated hierarchy within my organization. I have the opportunity of choosing new aliases for 24/7 alert recipients, monitoring recipients, all team members, etc.

What does your org use for these purposes?

Groups in my org use things like: org-dept@, org-dept-all@, org-dept-alert@, org-dept-monitoring@, org-dept-status@.

  • 3
    You really need to work out a scheme that works for your particular situation, which is different to anyone else's situation. As we know absolutely nothing about your organisation or its structure any answer would be wildly speculative at best. – John Gardeniers Apr 6 '10 at 22:03
  • (my 2c) I dont think this is too localised; I've dealt with several similar issues in a variety of different scales of organisation, areas, and situations, and I'm small-fry on SF so I'm sure many others have come up against this brain-drain. – Andrew Bolster Apr 8 '10 at 22:02
  • 1
    Of course, I have to agree with Andrew. :-) This is an extremely common issue for admins to face and the only reason it might be considered to be "narrow" is that most seem not to care about best practices or making a thoughtful choice. Instead of being able to benefit from the experience of the illustrious members of these forums, someone with similar questions must look elsewhere, in less professional circles. That seems arbitrary and unfortunate, and lessens the value these communities can offer. – hourback Apr 9 '10 at 12:51
  • 1
    I completely disagree with answers to questions such as mine being "wildly speculative". For uninterested experts to determine what information would be useful to me is bizarre. The fact that the answer I chose referred not to some wacky, actually localized convention, but rather to what could be considered to be a canonical list of e-mail message categories (syslog), is further evidence that there is nothing wildly speculative going on here. If it were so speculative then I would not have found Andrew's advice to be so suitable for my (very common) situation. – hourback Apr 9 '10 at 13:00

It depends on the conditions; I worked at a large multinational company and we had to go a stage further than that, because we had org-dept-project@location.company.net, and that had to go to a subset of org-dept-project@company.net, and all mail had to go the other direction.

(Somehow it all worked great; we actually dropped the org names, and when we were talking about a specific project, it went to projectname@company.net, and if it had to go to a whole department, it was dept@company.net)

To actually answer your question, for alerts we went for the syslog standard; our mail system supported *-emerg|alert|crit|err|warn|notice|info|debug@company.net

(actually, dunno who added it in but it was great; full names were expanded, so that *-emergency would redirect to emerg, etc)

  • Thanks a lot, Andrew! That is very helpful. I never thought about using syslog's convention. Your "org versus project" issue is something I'm grappling with -- sounds very dramatic! -- now. I think I favor your solution for this also. – hourback Apr 8 '10 at 14:57
  • When i started at $COMPANY they had an almost reversed system of what your talking about; project-dept-org-location@company.net, but then switched to a more 'free' convention of project names and departments @company.net. To my knowledge once it was set up and the allocation of names standardised, it actually reduced the mailadmin's workload (only spoke to him at xmas party so his speech and my hearing may have been impaired) Glad to help! – Andrew Bolster Apr 8 '10 at 22:05

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.