abuse@ and postmaster@ in the modern world?

Paul Makepeace paulm at paulm.com
Thu Nov 16 01:01:54 GMT 2006

So I don't think I've ever got useful mail through postmaster@ and
only occasionally has abuse@ yielded anything, in the eight odd years
I've run mail for domains. RFC-ignorant reminds us they're both
required addresses, http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-abuse.php Those
RFCs were written in a time before significant spam however. Turning
off these addresses at SMTP time would be a solid win in cutting CPU &
network usage.

What's the prevailing attitude these days? I'm particularly curious to
hear from people who are serving old/many domains were spam is more
than just irritating, it's a resource issue.


More information about the london.pm mailing list