[anti-abuse-wg] Abuse contact information sense

James Davis wrote:

> On 15/07/2014 10:56, Angel Fernandez Pineda wrote:
[...]
> You're right, it doesn't oblige anyone to actually do anything -

Actually, this was one of my worries, when the abuse-c stuff was designed,
that having this (mandatory) attribute would send the (confusing) message to
the "user", that there's an obligation to react (and respond) to each and
every piece of incoming mail.

Even more worrying, that the NCC would be seen as "responsible" to manage
those things.

Alas, this is definitely outside the scope of the NCC's responsibilities, just
as it is outside the NCC's responsibility to assure, that every IP address that
is listed in the registry has to be accessible, with each type of packets, from
every other endpoint on the Internet.

Just as there are filters out there, for packets, there are lots of filters
and policies around, what to do with (different types, from different sources
of) incoming mail.

Just as an explanation and not as supporting (perceived) (C) violations.

Regards, hth,
Wilfried.