I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by
rfc2142,
adopting anything else would take some justifying.
Perhaps. However, when I am in the "reporting mood", I often find places
which do not use "abuse(_at_)somedomain(_dot_)com" and instead use anything
from
postmaster@, support@, spam@, or a whole host of other addresses.
No, but they should.
In either case, while most use abuse(_at_)somedomain(_dot_)com, there still
are
surprisingly many who do not.
Well, there's a topic for research - what proportion of operators don't
support 'abuse' for this purpose?
What proportion don't support 'abuse' at all?
How many have got themselves on rfc-ignorant :-)
A reporting standard would help operators route reports to whatever
internal units they wish. Provision of the abuse address is a community
requirement.
--
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg