In
<f5833273385bb34f99288b3648c4f06f19c9a7d...@exch-c2.corp.cloudmark.com>,
on 01/23/2012
at 09:19 PM, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email protected]> said:
>What standard advocates parsing comments to extract actionable data?
No standard, I hope, just code. And, yes, it is a hack.
I was thinking of text like
Other uses for ARF involve reports sent between parties that
don't know each other, with the recipient address typically
being abuse@domain (see [RFC2142]), looked up via WHOIS, or
using other heuristics. The reports may be manual, or automated
due to hitting spam traps, scored high by spam filters, or
anything else that the sender of the report considers to merit
an abuse report. The abuse addresses in the whois records of
the source IP and its FCrDNS are likely reasonable candidates
for receiving fedback about the message, although automated
parsing may be difficult.
--
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
