why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition
bruns at 2mbit.com
Tue Mar 25 17:43:48 UTC 2014
On 3/25/14, 11:23 AM, John Levine wrote:
> Large mail providers all agree that v6 senders need to follow good
> mail discipline, but are far from agreeing what that means. It
> certainly means proper rDNS, but does it mean SPF? DKIM on all the
> mail? TLS on the connections? At this point, I don't know and
> neither does anyone else. Fortunately we have at least another decade
> of full IPv4 mail connectivity to figure it out.
So, what's everyone's feelings about a rather large provider who blocks
IPv6 e-mail that has no RDNS, even though the sending domain has SPF
records allowing the block, and proper DKIM set up?
*looks directly at Google*
Nothing like poorly thought out policy to break a rather successful IPv6
roll-out for multiple customers.
The Summit Open Source Development Group
http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
More information about the NANOG