heh, i don't think 'don't ignore' is part of the RFC, but yeah. On May 6, 2013, at 9:08 AM, John Hardin <jhar...@impsec.org> wrote:
> If there is a working abuse@ address that *isn't being ignored*, they're > compliant.
heh, i don't think 'don't ignore' is part of the RFC, but yeah. On May 6, 2013, at 9:08 AM, John Hardin <jhar...@impsec.org> wrote:
> If there is a working abuse@ address that *isn't being ignored*, they're > compliant.