Mailbox Names for Common Services, Roles and Functions
The standard addresses, like postmaster and abuse, that every organization on the Internet should answer.
Crocker, D., "Mailbox Names for Common Services, Roles and Functions", RFC 2142, DOI 10.17487/RFC2142, May 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2142>.
@misc{rfc2142,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 2142,
howpublished = {RFC 2142},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC2142},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2142},
author = {D. Crocker},
title = {{Mailbox Names for Common Services, Roles and Functions}},
pagetotal = 6,
year = 1997,
month = may,
} RFC text
Contents
Network Working Group D. Crocker
Request for Comments: 2142 Internet Mail Consortium
Category: Standards Track May 1997
MAILBOX NAMES FOR
COMMON SERVICES, ROLES AND FUNCTIONS
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
ABSTRACT
This specification enumerates and describes Internet mail addresses
(mailbox name @ host reference) to be used when contacting personnel
at an organization. Mailbox names are provided for both operations
and business functions. Additional mailbox names and aliases are not
prohibited, but organizations which support email exchanges with the
Internet are encouraged to support AT LEAST each mailbox name for
which the associated function exists within the organization.
1. RATIONALE AND SCOPE
Various Internet documents have specified mailbox names to be used
when reaching the operators of the new service; for example, [RFC822
6.3, C.6] requires the presence of a <POSTMASTER@domain> mailbox name
on all hosts that have an SMTP server. Other protocols have defacto
standards for well known mailbox names, such as <USENET@domain> for
NNTP (see [RFC977]), and <WEBMASTER@domain> for HTTP (see [HTTP]).
Defacto standards also exist for well known mailbox names which have
nothing to do with a particular protocol, e.g., <ABUSE@domain> and
<TROUBLE@domain>.
The purpose of this memo is to aggregate and specify the basic set of
mailbox names which organizations need to support. Most
organizations do not need to support the full set of mailbox names
defined here, since not every organization will implement the all of
the associated services. However, if a given service is offerred,
then the associated mailbox name(es) must be supported, resulting in
delivery to a recipient appropriate for the referenced service or
role.
If a host is not configured to accept mail directly, but it
implements a service for which this specification defines a mailbox
name, that host must have an MX RR set (see [RFC974]) and the mail
exchangers specified by this RR set must recognize the referenced
host's domain name as "local" for the purpose of accepting mail bound
for the defined mailbox name. Note that this is true even if the
advertised domain name is not the same as the host's domain name; for
example, if an NNTP server's host name is DATA.RAMONA.VIX.COM yet it
advertises the domain name VIX.COM in its "Path:" headers, then mail
must be deliverable to both <USENET@VIX.COM> and
<USENET@DATA.RAMONA.VIX.COM>, even though these addresses might be
delivered to different final destinations.
The scope of a well known mailbox name is its domain name. Servers
accepting mail on behalf of a domain must accept and correctly
process mailbox names for that domain, even if the server, itself,
does not support the associated service. So, for example, if an NNTP
server advertises the organization's top level domain in "Path:"
headers (see [RFC977]) the mail exchangers for that top level domain
must accept mail to <USENET@domain> even if the mail exchanger hosts
do not, themselves, serve the NNTP protocol.
2. INVARIANTS
For well known names that are not related to specific protocols, only
the organization's top level domain name are required to be valid.
For example, if an Internet service provider's domain name is
COMPANY.COM, then the <ABUSE@COMPANY.COM> address must be valid and
supported, even though the customers whose activity generates
complaints use hosts with more specific domain names like
SHELL1.COMPANY.COM. Note, however, that it is valid and encouraged
to support mailbox names for sub-domains, as appropriate.
Mailbox names must be recognized independent of character case. For
example, POSTMASTER, postmaster, Postmaster, PostMaster, and even
PoStMaStEr are to be treated the same, with delivery to the same
mailbox.
Implementations of these well known names need to take account of the
expectations of the senders who will use them. Sending back an
automatic mail acknowledgement is usually helpful (though we suggest
caution against the possibility of "duelling mail robots" and the
resulting mail loops).
3. BUSINESS-RELATED MAILBOX NAMES
These names are related to an organization's line-of-business
activities. The INFO name is often tied to an autoresponder, with a
range of standard files available.
MAILBOX AREA USAGE
----------- ---------------- ---------------------------
INFO Marketing Packaged information about the
organization, products, and/or
services, as appropriate
MARKETING Marketing Product marketing and
marketing communications
SALES Sales Product purchase information
SUPPORT Customer Service Problems with product or
service
4. NETWORK OPERATIONS MAILBOX NAMES
Operations addresses are intended to provide recourse for customers,
providers and others who are experiencing difficulties with the
organization's Internet service.
MAILBOX AREA USAGE
----------- ---------------- ---------------------------
ABUSE Customer Relations Inappropriate public behaviour
NOC Network Operations Network infrastructure
SECURITY Network Security Security bulletins or queries
5. SUPPORT MAILBOX NAMES FOR SPECIFIC INTERNET SERVICES
For major Internet protocol services, there is a mailbox defined for
receiving queries and reports. (Synonyms are included, here, due to
their extensive installed base.)
MAILBOX SERVICE SPECIFICATIONS
----------- ---------------- ---------------------------
POSTMASTER SMTP [RFC821], [RFC822]
HOSTMASTER DNS [RFC1033-RFC1035]
USENET NNTP [RFC977]
NEWS NNTP Synonym for USENET
WEBMASTER HTTP [RFC 2068]
WWW HTTP Synonym for WEBMASTER
UUCP UUCP [RFC976]
FTP FTP [RFC959]
6. MAILING LIST ADMINISTRATION MAILBOX
Mailing lists have an administrative mailbox name to which add/drop
requests and other meta-queries can be sent.
For a mailing list whose submission mailbox name is:
<LIST@DOMAIN>
there MUST be the administrative mailbox name:
<LIST-REQUEST@DOMAIN>
Distribution List management software, such as MajorDomo and
Listserv, also have a single mailbox name associated with the
software on that system -- usually the name of the software -- rather
than a particular list on that system. Use of such mailbox names
requires participants to know the type of list software employed at
the site. This is problematic. Consequently:
LIST-SPECIFIC (-REQUEST) MAILBOX NAMES ARE REQUIRED,
INDEPENDENT OF THE AVAILABILITY OF GENERIC LIST SOFTWARE
MAILBOX NAMES.
7. DOMAIN NAME SERVICE ADMINISTRATION MAILBOX
In DNS (see [RFC1033], [RFC1034] and [RFC1035]), the Start Of
Authority record (SOA RR) has a field for specifying the mailbox name
of the zone's administrator.
This field must be a simple word without metacharacters (such as "%"
or "!" or "::"), and a mail alias should be used on the relevant mail
exchanger hosts to direct zone administration mail to the appropriate
mailbox.
For simplicity and regularity, it is strongly recommended that the
well known mailbox name HOSTMASTER always be used
<HOSTMASTER@domain>.
8. AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM MAILBOX
Several Internet registries implement mailing lists for Autonomous
System contacts. So, for example, mail sent to <AS3557@RA.NET> will
at the time of this writing reach the technical contact for
Autonomous System 3557 in the BGP4 (see [RFC1654], [RFC1655] and
[RFC1656]).
Not all Autonomous Systems are registered with all registries,
however, and so undeliverable mailbox names under this scheme should
be treated as an inconvenience rather than as an error or a standards
violation.
9. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS
Denial of service attacks (flooding a mailbox with junk) will be
easier after this document becomes a standard, since more systems
will support the same set of mailbox names.
10. REFERENCES
[RFC821] Postel, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10, RFC
821, Information Sciences Institute, August 1982.
[RFC822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the format of ARPA Internet text
messages", STD 11, RFC 822, University of Delaware, August 1982.
[RFC959] Postel, J., and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol (FTP)",
STD 9, RFC 959, Information Sciences Institute, October 1985.
[RFC974] Partridge, C., "Mail routing and the domain system", STD 14,
RFC 974, CSNET CIC BBN Laboratories Inc, January 1986.
[RFC976] Horton, M., "UUCP mail interchange format standard", RFC
976, Bell Laboratories, February 1986.
[RFC977] Kantor, B., et al, "Network News Transfer Protocol: A
Proposed Standard for the Stream-Based Transmission of News", RFC
977, University of California, February 1986.
[RFC1033] Lottor, M., "Domain administrators operations guide", RFC
1033, SRI International, November 1987.
[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
STD 13, RFC 1035, USC/Information Sciences Institute, November 1987.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and
Specification" STD 13, RFC 1035, USC/Information Sciences Institute,
November 1987.
[RFC1654] Rekhter, Y., et al, "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP- 4)",
RFC 1654, T.J. Watson Research Center, IBM Corp., July 1994.
[RFC1655] Rekhter, Y., et al, "Application of the Border Gateway
Protocol in the Internet", RFC 1655, T.J. Watson Research Center, IBM
Corp., July 1994.
[RFC1656] Traina, P., "BGP-4 Protocol Document Roadmap and
Implementation Experience", RFC 1656, cisco Systems, July 1994.
[HTTP] Berners-Lee, T., et al, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol --
HTTP/1.0", RFC 1945, May 1996.
11. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This specification derived from an earlier draft written by Paul
Vixie. Thanks to Stan Barber, Michael Dillon, James Aldridge, J. D.
Falk, Peter Kaminski, Brett Watson, Russ Wright, Neal McBurnett, and
Ed Morin for their comments on that draft.
12. AUTHOR'S ADDRESS
Dave Crocker
Internet Mail Consortium
127 Segre Ave.
Santa Cruz, CA
Phone: +1 408 246 8253
EMail: dcrocker@imc.org
AI ELI5
On this page
§1Rationale and Purpose
Several documents already require or assume mailbox names for reaching the operators of a service. RFC 822 requires a POSTMASTER@domain mailbox on all hosts that have an SMTP server. Other names were de facto standards: USENET@domain for NNTP, WEBMASTER@domain for HTTP, and protocol-independent ones such as ABUSE@domain and TROUBLE@domain.
This memo gathers and specifies the basic set that organizations need. Most organizations will not need all of them, because not every organization runs every associated service. But if a service is offered, its mailbox name must be supported, with delivery to a recipient appropriate for that service or role. Extra names and aliases are not prohibited.
Some mailbox names, like postmaster, were already used by habit. This document writes them all down in one list so everyone agrees.
§1Where the Names Apply
The scope of a well-known mailbox name is its domain name. Servers accepting mail for a domain must accept and correctly process these names for that domain, even if the server itself does not provide the related service. For example, if an NNTP server advertises the organization's top-level domain in its Path: headers, the mail exchangers for that domain must accept mail to USENET@domain even if they do not serve NNTP.
A host that does not accept mail directly but runs a service with a defined mailbox name must have an MX record set, and the listed mail exchangers must treat the host's domain name as local for that mailbox. This holds even if the advertised domain differs from the host's name, so both USENET@VIX.COM and USENET@DATA.RAMONA.VIX.COM must work in the RFC's example, though they may be delivered to different final places.
The rule works for the whole address, like a school's main office. Even if the person at the door does not run the lunchroom, they still have to pass your lunchroom question along.
§2Invariants
For well-known names that are not tied to a protocol, only the organization's top-level domain must be valid. If an Internet service provider is COMPANY.COM, then ABUSE@COMPANY.COM must work, even though the customers who cause complaints use hosts like SHELL1.COMPANY.COM. Supporting these names for sub-domains is valid and encouraged.
Mailbox names must be recognized regardless of character case, so POSTMASTER, postmaster and PoStMaStEr all go to the same mailbox. Implementations should consider what senders expect. Sending an automatic acknowledgement is usually helpful, but the RFC cautions against duelling mail robots and the mail loops they create.
Capital letters do not matter, like how a doorbell rings the same no matter how you press it. And a machine that answers back should be careful not to start an endless chat with another machine.
§3The Well-Known Mailbox Names
The names fall into three groups. Business names (INFO, MARKETING, SALES, SUPPORT) cover line-of-business activity. INFO is often tied to an autoresponder with standard files available. Network operations names (ABUSE, NOC, SECURITY) give customers, providers and others recourse when they have trouble with the organization's Internet service.
Service names are for major protocol services: POSTMASTER for SMTP, HOSTMASTER for DNS, USENET (with synonym NEWS) for NNTP, WEBMASTER (with synonym WWW) for HTTP, UUCP for UUCP and FTP for FTP. The synonyms are included because of their large installed base.
There are labels for the shop side (sales, support), the trouble side (abuse, security) and the technical side (postmaster, webmaster), so you pick the right door.
- POSTMASTERSMTP — Required by RFC 822 on hosts with an SMTP server.
- HOSTMASTERDNS — Strongly recommended as the SOA zone administrator mailbox.
- USENETNNTP — NEWS is a synonym.
- WEBMASTERHTTP — WWW is a synonym.
- UUCPUUCP — Mailbox for the UUCP service.
- FTPFTP — Mailbox for the FTP service.
§6Lists, DNS and Autonomous Systems
For a mailing list with submission address LIST@DOMAIN, the administrative address LIST-REQUEST@DOMAIN MUST exist, for add and drop requests and other meta-queries. List software such as MajorDomo and Listserv has its own generic mailbox, but that forces participants to know the software in use, which the RFC calls problematic. List-specific -REQUEST names are therefore required whether or not generic software names exist.
In DNS, the SOA record has a field for the zone administrator's mailbox. It must be a simple word without metacharacters such as %, ! or ::, and a mail alias should direct the mail to the right place. It is strongly recommended that HOSTMASTER@domain always be used.
Several Internet registries run mailing lists for Autonomous System contacts, for instance AS3557@RA.NET reached the technical contact for AS 3557 at the time of writing. Since not every AS is registered everywhere, an undeliverable name of this kind is an inconvenience, not an error or a standards violation.
Every club mailing list needs a helper address for joining and leaving. The DNS zone owner and network owners get their own shared mailboxes too.
§9Security Considerations
The only concern the RFC raises is denial of service. Flooding a mailbox with junk becomes easier once this document is a standard, because more systems will support the same set of mailbox names and attackers will know what to target.
When everyone knows where the front desk is, a troublemaker knows where to dump junk mail too.