[lir-wg] rfc-ignorant.org

>Oh, yes, I have no illusions about whether this will actually be a
>universal solution to any problem other than as a means to get the
>rfc-ignorant.org folks off our collective backs.  People unwilling to
>provide a usable e-mail address will just fill in a non-usable
>(/dev/null'ed?) e-mail address.

  It's not going to get anybody anywhere, unless we go to the extreme of 
  a 3-way verification as a precondition to holdership of resources
  registered in the DB, and a recurring verification procedure.
  
  If you force a "usable address" you might as well end up with an anon
  mailer at yahoo, hotmail, gmx,... And if you block those, then nobody
  prevents me from simply picking an address which is contained in a
  different, randomly chosen, object. Pretty cheap DoS mechanism, in the
  end ;-)
  
  And last but not least, with the procedures in place for many (most?)
  ISPs these days, and the channnel-hopping behaviour of users/sites in
  the domain name space, there is no basis any longer for consistency *and
  actually getting a human being look at the message*.
  
  If rfc-ignorant.org folks don't understand that, then we should suggest
  a default entry being put in by the DB software (how about
  postmaster at rfc-ignorant.org ?).
  
  A maybe more heplful question would be: what do they want to achieve,
  and is there reasonable merit in those goals to have the community find
  a sound mechanism for implementation?
  
  Wilfried.