[RFCI-Discuss] abuse: fr.colt.net

[Abuse Desk]

Derek J. Balling wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2006, at 5:17 AM, Abuse Desk wrote:
>> Although we agree with the reasoning behind the rejection of the
>> above submission, the question is now moot, as our newer submission
>> http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/tools/detail.php?domain=colt.net&submitted=1165624328&table=abuse 
>> has now been
>> Listed for a different reason.  The full effect of the combination
>> can now be seen at http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/tools/lookup.php?
>> full=1&domain=fr.colt.net .
>
> This listing was in error and has been removed.
>
> RFC2142 says *nothing* about "being read" it says it has to "be
> delivered". The message clearly was delivered, and was "Deleted
> without being read."
>
> The RFCs don't mandate that you *act* on abuse issues, only that you
> *receive* them, and in this case they did. And they ignored it.

This action appears to be contrary to RFCI's longstanding practice.  How is 
a recipient that deletes email unread "appropriate for the referenced 
service or role"?  We consider any "Not read" "disposition-notification" for 
any message sent to any abuse@ address at any domain registered in any 
registry to be "evidence of the messages being bitbucketed" within the 
meaning of http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-abuse.php with the current 
bottom line "$Id: policy-abuse.php,v 1.11 2004/08/22 13:06:48 dredd Exp $".

-- 
Thanks and Best Regards,

Abuse Desk
DeSpam.Us