On Wed, 15 Apr 1998, Richard Welty wrote:
> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 10:28:46 -0400
> From: Richard Welty <rwelty@???>
> To: Philip Hazel <ph10@???>, Tony Earnshaw <tony@???>
> Cc: "EXIM Users (E-mail)" <exim-users@???>
> Subject: Re: [EXIM] question about verification of email addresses
>
> At 10:42 AM 4/15/98 +0100, Philip Hazel wrote:
> >On Wed, 15 Apr 1998, Tony Earnshaw wrote:
>
> >> I test by trying a user I'm almost certain cannot exist, then a user who
> >> generally always exists (hostmaster or postmaster or someone I know),
> >> then if positive, the user I want.
>
> >I believe the only user that "should" exist at any domain accepting
> >email is "postmaster".
>
> RFC 2142 addresses this; it isn't soup yet, but when it is, there will be a
> prescribed list of addresses that "should" exist.
A document (including a standards document such as an RFC) can say that
any number of addresses "should" exist in an Internet email domain.
Such a document might also say that certain addresses _must_ exist in a
domain. There is a signifigant difference between the two statements.
Currently, the only address for which there is a statement to the
effect that it _must_ exist, is "postmaster", and that specification
also goes on to indicate that it must be recognized in a
case-insensitive manner (such that POSTMASTER, Postmaster, postmaster,
and even PoStMaStEr would all be considered the same address), and that
messages addressed thusly must be delivered to the individual(s) that
have primary responsibility for the day-to-day administration of
message handling for that domain. The specification which requires this
is RFC 822. I note however that there are many domains for which the
email handling systems do NOT comply with this requirement, and that
most of these are systems that I have seen operate on computer
platforms running operating systems or email software that was produced
by Microsoft Corporation, and that are being administered by
individuals that apparently are not qualified to operate Internet email
servers. (Knowledge of the existance of relevant RFCs, and a general
idea of their contents, being one qualification that I would suggest)
As far as I know there are no currently authoritiative documents which
require the existance of any other addresses for an Internet email
domain. There are probably any number of documents which indicate that
one or more addresses _should_ exist. Documentation for webservers
probably recommends that the operator cause to exist an "www@" address
- many documents related to measures that one can take to prevent the
reception of undesired email recommend that an "abuse@" address exist,
and so on.
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
