[ppml] Policy Proposal 2003-1: Human Point of Contact

[McBurnett, Jim]

Email snipped to limit length..

>Are you proposing a policy that the Abuse POC email address must be
>abuse at domainname?  While I recognize the usefulness of certain 
>well-known
>email address, such as postmaster, hostmaster, webmaster, and root, I
>don't know that "abuse" has been established and accepted by the 
>community.  Is this in a Best Current Practices RFC?
Take a look at: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2142.txt?number=2142
Also take a look at: http://www.rfc-ignorant.com/
>
>If this is your proposal, how do you propose to assign domain names to 
>network assignments?  If 172.16.0.0/16 is allocated to Acme Holdings,
>who operates under the domain name acme.com, acme.net, acme.com.ca,
>acmeholdings.com, and explodinganvil.mil, which domain will you require
>to be on the Abuse POC?

According to the RFC. Each Organization...
If I recieve spam from any of those domains how am I to know they are linked?

As I see it and as I implement it, I have 28 domain names tied to 
different business entities owned by our parent company- therefore IT has
28 * 8 mailboxes-- acutally they are just aliases...
We own newspapers, and the average person, and even the above average person
may not make the connections.....

>As for the specific example you give below:
>I believe you will find that abuse at uu.net does work.  Abuse-mail at uu.net
>was created so users could separate Usenet abuse (abuse-news at uu.net),
>ongoing intrusion attempts (security at uu.net), and spam 
>(abuse-mail at uu.net).
>Having separate aliases allows us to direct the reported incident to
>the right people faster.  I agree that users would only know 
>@uu.net aliases to @wcom.com aliases.
Alias are fine as long as they still reach an action point....
I filter and redistribute all my stuff easily, and we are immensely smaller
than the WCom's and the rest of the ISP backbone world.....

Later,
Jim