In
<f5833273385bb34f99288b3648c4f06f19c9a7d...@exch-c2.corp.cloudmark.com>,
on 01/23/2012
at 02:18 PM, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email protected]> said:
>I have some concerns about doing this, since the reply from a WHOIS
>query is non-standard.
There is a common de facto standard of labels conting the word abuse.
However, I was assuming that the usolicited ARF reports would be
mostly semi-manually generated.
>Do we really want to say "apply some unspecified heuristic to the
>WHOIS reply to get that address"?
Like parsing comments? BTDT,GTS.
>I don't think we want to start encouraging people to try to find any
>domain to which to prepend "abuse@" to start sending reports.
I wasn't suggesting prepending abuse@ to the rDNS, I was asking about
doing a whois on it or parent domains.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
