to answer the actual question: all abuse mailboxes have quotas, either implicitly or explicitly. the amount of storage available to any given mailsystem is finite.
technically correct. it's the best kind of correct. :-) t On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Stephen Satchell <[email protected]> wrote: > For the last couple of weeks, every single abuse mail I've tried to send > to networks in a very short list of countries has bounced back with > "mailbox exceeds quota". I take this to mean that there isn't someone > actively reading, acting on, and deleting e-mail from abuse@<whomever>. > > So my new rule is this: bounce an abuse e-mail message, sent to an > abuse address announced for the netrange, and the ENTIRE NETRANGE gets > put in my "reject forever" firewall. I've ask all my customers about > this action, and all agree that it's reasonable, because an > administration with an active abuse desk shouldn't ever have their abuse > mailbox overflow. (Especially in this day of terabyte disks.) > > Or they need more people on their abuse desk. > > Or they need to eliminate the problem that generates so many abuse > e-mails that it fills up their should-be-enormous mail queue. > > I'm tired of blatantly uncaring administrations. >
