Re: Open, anonymous services and dealing with abuse

[Mark Turpin <mturpin () unix sprint net>]

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Daniel Reed wrote:

> paid regularly, or their budgets are kept low, etc.  Many will have RFC 2142
> contacts, but appear to discard incoming mail. Some, such as Charter
> Communications, do not even have these mandatory addresses (mail is not
> accepted for <abuse () charter com>).

while they do not conform to the RFC, they receive accept mail at/for
abuse () chartercom com

[This would be the domain w/o outsourced MX...]

> And on the other hand, it is the CDC that would perform an outbreak
> isolation, not the restaurant staff.

You're talking about a concerted effort.  So far, I haven't seen the
levels of cooperation between providers that is required.  I'm all for
everyone holding hands and squashing out issues.  But until you get
past the isolationist mindset (you must be sick of me saying that by
now) good luck...

I think we're both in agreement that until * starts saying "If I
don't stop this today, it will hurt me tomorrow", that the
cooperation required to address and stop these issues will be nil.

-mark