Ross: It seems like you're saying that there's no law when it comes to internet best-practices, and that's true, there's very little legislated. But there's a lots of best practices out there that are definitely worth following. Unfortunately business decisions don't always align themselves with the BCPs. Yes, internet service providers and operators don't need to listen, but I can't see how Yahoo's e-mail and abuse handling history arises out of good business decisions. Tell my users and tell the members of this list that -- we won't agree. As posted elsewhere, delayed delivery queues are well-represented by Yahoo. If an single operator dominates my 99% of delivery delay that's pretty close to black and white for me. 72 hours to respond to e-mail sent to the abuse account? That's much too long -- it should be at least a 4 hour response time during business hours, and for service providers and operators large enough to staff their network 24x7 for other reasons, 4 hour response time all the time. Frank -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Ross Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 4:11 PM To: Rob Szarka Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Yahoo Mail Update <snip> You can tell Earthlink whatever you want but it doesn't mean they need to follow it. Please read my previous reply about business decisions. I would agree that it is good for business to try and follow industry standards but sometimes business decisions need to be made where standards cannot be implemented. I'm not saying that is the case here and it could just be utter incompetence but not everything is black and white. A working abuse account is not the minimum requirement, I can run a mail system without that abuse account but may get blocked from sending mail to certain systems. Read above for my thoughts on standards. With that being said I do believe all companies should have a working abuse email that is appropriately staffed that can respond to complaints within 72 hours.