Re: use of abuse@........

[Piet Beertema <]

    > Derek Balling, who set up the rfc-ignorant.org site, concluded
    > that RFC2142 requires every domain with an active mail service
    > to have an abuse address pointing to the proper place handling
    > abuse issues for that domain.
    > It seems excessive to me in a world where anybody and his cat
    > get a domain, but I report his view for completeness
Very recently I had a lengthy discussion with Derek about this.
Or to be more specific: about the requirement that the address
postmaster@localhostdomain> must always be valid. I absolutely didn't
and don't agree with him that this would be limited to domains
with an "active mail service". But before we start repeating
this discussion here: it doesn't really matter whether or not
anybody and her cat can get a domain. The problem is that the
vast majority of users with a domain don't have the slightest
idea about RFC's, what to do when their domain is abused for
spam, and so on. The knowledgeable people in general are their
ISP's, so in general "postmaster", "abuse" etc. can be directed
to their ISP. Of course ISP's may not really be waiting for this...


	Piet