|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Postmaster 'best practices' query
In message <[email protected]>, David Lesher writes: > >A query to help educate me. Feel free to flame away; >the week is young. > >Every site should accept/respond to "postmaster" -- T/F? > >Or is it "Every site running mail".... >Or every box running mail? > >IOW: Which of the following are required vice recommended vice >best practives, etc. > >a) [email protected] >b) [email protected] >c) [email protected] >d) [email protected] >e) [email protected] > >and most important to me: where to I go to justify the >decisions on same? RFC 2142 standardize the name 'postmaster' (which is originally from RFC 822). 2142 says For well known names that are not related to specific protocols, only the organization's top level domain name are required to be valid. For example, if an Internet service provider's domain name is COMPANY.COM, then the <[email protected]> address must be valid and supported, even though the customers whose activity generates complaints use hosts with more specific domain names like SHELL1.COMPANY.COM. Note, however, that it is valid and encouraged to support mailbox names for sub-domains, as appropriate. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb Full text of "Firewalls" book now at http://www.wilyhacker.com
|