Re: [Asrg] VPNs vs consent

[Rich Kulawiec <rsk at gsp.org>]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 03:12:12PM +0200, Claudio Telmon wrote:
> consent-enabled anyway. Addresses like "abuse" or "postmaster" are meant
> to be contacted by anybody that needs it, right? The same for the
> official contact addresses of companies.

In some cases, yes: certainly "abuse" is a role address that should be
reachable by everyone.  But for a counterexample, the "-request" and
"-owner" addresses corresponding to various mailing lists don't need
to be.  (Neither do some mailing list addresses.)  It's turned out to
be rather complicated in practice to figure out what policies each
role address should use, doubly so when there are sharply differing
opinions among the people sharing those addresses.  I can't claim to
have any "good" answers to this, only "adequate" ones.

---Rsk