ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] ARF traffic, was Spam button scenarios

2010-02-09 13:08:33
On 09/Feb/10 19:15, Steve Atkins wrote:
On Feb 9, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
 The abuse-mailbox is an attribute in some whois db (e.g. RIPE). The form 
abuse(_at_)domain is standardized by rfc 2142. Some people (e.g. Abusix) may 
plan to send machine generated complaints at such addresses.

None of that has anything to do with TiS buttons, though, which this thread is 
about. (Nor is it anything to do with feedback loops, which this thread is 
tangentially about).

Correct. They are just worth being considered when one thinks about where on an MTA should the ARF parsing software be installed.

 Besides that, I don't feel my model is much different than yours.

It is quite different (and I think wrong :)) which is why I'm stressing it.

We're not talking about abuse complaints in this thread, nor anything that 
would be sent to an existing role account.

We are: an ARF report is an automated form of an abuse complaint.

That doesn't mean that a particular user might decide that sending either TiS 
notifications or FBL reports to a role address like sales@, postmaster@ or 
abuse@ is a good idea, but it's certainly not a requirement or even an expected 
behaviour[1].

I agree that specific agreements or standardization may let an ARF consumer specify a different address. Using role addresses is not eccentric, though.

 Again, splitting the traffic may be convenient for heavy loads. However, I 
just whitelisted my abuse@ address from spam filtering. The moment I'll get a 
lot of ARF reports, it will be easy to add a recipient-filter that processes 
incoming messages only if they are in ARF format and leaves them in the current 
folder otherwise.

Yup, and that all works mostly OK (though you'll find some problems if you go 
the recipient-filter route). It's not the way I'd advise anyone to set things 
up as it won't scale well, but is quite workable for a small domain.

Hm... scaling can be achieved by splitting traffic. One may give different TiS addresses to different users, but using several or multihomed MXes may make for similar results.

[1] Sending FBL reports to sales@ does have a certain charm, though.

:-)
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg