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

[Tanner Lovelace <lovelace AT wayfarer.org>]

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