[Scspamcop] Re: Faux addresses:

[Twayne]

> "Twayne" wrote:
>
>>> Twayne wrote:
>>
>> Don't take offense at any of this; I'm simply a more direct person
>> than most are.  I mean no disrespect to  any dummies, err, I mean,
>> you [:^).
>
> Talking to yourself? Your attributions are shot.

lol, maybe; you never know anymore.

>
>> BTW, It's no longer nobody at spamcop.net last I
>> knew, but I'll recheck on that one later.  I think devnull is still
>> in the latest suggestion.
>
> Quote from Ellen earlier in the thread:
> "Feel free to use  nobody at spamcop.net ... it delivers directly to
> devnull".

I saw that from Ellen but the most recent recommendation uses devnull. 
NBD. Actually I doubt it matters which one gets used anyway. Especially 
in view of your citation below, for which I sincerely thank you.  I knew 
about 'test' and of course 'localhost' but not the other two.  Thanks 
much for that input; I haven't been able to find it.  I'm pretty sure 
there are others who will appreciate the link too.

Best Regards,

Twayne



>
>>> ster.invalid
>>>
>>> That is no resource usage.
>>
>> By your own reasoning, that's today; how about tomorrow?
>
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2606.txt
> RFC 2606  Reserved Top Level DNS Names
>
> <quote>
> There is a need for top level domain (TLD) names that can be used for
> creating names which, without fear of conflicts with current or
> future actual TLD names in the global DNS...
>
> ".invalid" is intended for use in online construction of domain names
> that are sure to be invalid and which it is obvious at a glance are
> invalid.
> </quote>