Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: [internetworkers] contacts or suggestions for dealing with SPEWS

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Tanner Lovelace <lovelace AT wayfarer.org>
  • To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [internetworkers] contacts or suggestions for dealing with SPEWS
  • Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:45:11 -0500

Steven Champeon said the following on 3/24/04 12:18 AM:

postmaster@ should exist if you get mail at that domain, and it should
be monitored, along with abuse@. It's an RFC compliance issue, and many
folks refuse to accept mail from any server that doesn't support those
addresses. So you may want to reconsider. (webmaster@ and the others, eh,
use your best judgement - but mail admins need a way to contact role
accounts if only to report abuse.)

Steve,

Can you please tell us which RFC requires the abuse@ e-mail address
to exist? I can find the specification for postmaster@ (originall in
RFC 822, section 6.3, later moved to RFC 2821, section 4.5.1), but
I cannot find anything about the abuse address. Seeing as how RFC's
2821 and 2822 are the standard for internet e-mail, I'd like to know
what people are referring to when they say it is required.

Thanks,
Tanner Lovelace
--
Tanner Lovelace | Don't move! Or I'll fill ya full of... little
lovelace AT wayfarer.org | yellow bolts of light! - Commander John Crichton




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page