I wanted to attempt to clarify a couple points, although a more formal
timeline and history of the problem (kept up to date) is available at
http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/uunet.php.
1.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has NOT, as was claimed, always existed. It has
existed for approximately two months, since ARIN added the ability to
have multiple contact handles per network allocation. It was broken the
moment they listed it in the ARIN database, and was never intended to
receive mail at all. Only after we listed one of their netblocks did
they
"fix the problem" by redirecting the mail to /dev/null.
2.) The DNS issues mentioned at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00654.html
have nothing to do with our listings.
3.) UUNet is NOT correct in "how they are doing it", in that they
advertise an e-mail contact address in a public database as being a
means of contacting them and it does not work.
UUNet position appears to center around two basic tenets:
1.) We're big, you couldn't possibly list us for being broken!
2.) We think maybe the rules might change in the future, but we can't
say for sure that they will, and if they do change, we can't say when
those changes will be effective, but until then, we're going to leave
that non-working address in the public database.
UUNet has all but admitted that the problem is easily solved simply by
CC'ing mail from that [EMAIL PROTECTED] address to customer service, but
they have elected not to do so.
We went round and round with UUNet for over a month and a half, giving
them many opportunities to fix the problem, advising them what would
happen if they didn't, and they basically said "too bad, we're big,
deal".
Just wanted to set the record straight.
Cheers,
Derek Balling
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
