[NANOG] Re: unwise filtering policy on abuse mailboxes
jimpop at domainmail.org
Wed Aug 1 15:56:02 UTC 2018
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 2018-08-01 at 11:19 -0400, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> 1. They needed to stop doing so a few decades ago. Anybody still
> doing it today is doing it on purpose, which of course leads directly
> to the question: why?
One reason as to "why" is that there is no good way to specify an
alternate [email protected] address, where said alternate abuse address is on a
completely different (sub)?domain, ala ruf/rua=. So then it becomes an
issue of not filtering the base domain, which would be a massive
headache for those who follow the 2 age-old smtp golden rules:
-- "never accept email you can't deliver"
-- "reject at connect, never bounce"
49% of folks would've said whois could have been a great place for an
Abuse contact... and another 49% would say security.txt is the place.
The end result is there is zero standard nor recommended way, imho.
- -Jim P.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the NANOG