[Scrouting] Re: Even if it could handle multibyte characters, SC doesn't find reporting address

[Mike Easter]

Tim McGraw wrote:

> I don't know how long it took before sc would use the '-B' flag to
> disable email filters on ripe.net. The last time I pointed it out in
> .routing was 9/17/07 re: 77.77.0.249. Today, sc knows the stated abuse
> address for that IP# at ripe.net is ultranet at abv.bg but insists on
> sending reports to five other addresses that it gets from abuse.net for
> abv.bg.

That algo is by design.  SC gets the contact addy from ripe (successfully,
no filter) and ('intentionally') uses abuse.net on the domainname.

<SC tracking details>
 "whois 77.77.0.249 at whois.ripe.net" (Getting contact from whois.ripe.net)
   whois.ripe.net found abuse contacts for 77.77.0.249 = ultranet at abv.bg
   whois: 77.77.0.0 - 77.77.7.255 = ultranet at abv.bg
Routing details for 77.77.0.249
Using abuse net on ultranet at abv.bg
abuse net abv.bg = netinfo at mbox.infotel.bg, tcvetan_d at abv.bg,
feedback at netinfo.bg, postmaster at abv.bg, abuse at abv.bg
Using best contacts netinfo at mbox.infotel.bg tcvetan_d at abv.bg
feedback at netinfo.bg postmaster at abv.bg abuse at abv.bg
</SCtd>

In the case of

inetnum:        77.77.0.0 - 77.77.7.255
netname:        ULTRANET-NET

... 'you'/one can get the

abuse-mailbox:  ultranet at abv.bg
nic-hdl:        IT711-RIPE

... with or without the -B flag.

--
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin