Re: dual-stack IP transition is not specific to SMTP
2008-03-31 20:29:10
Basically, the current task is one of supporting a dual-stack networking
environment. That's a challenge for all Internet use, not just email.
Solutions for it need to be universal, not specific to email.
Doesn't follow. Different applications use the network in different
ways, and IPv6 doesn't impact all applications in the same way. IPv6 is
not a drop-in replacement for IPv4, and there is no one-size-fits-all
solution to adapt applications to IPv6.
The SMTP specification should be modified in the smallest and most
localized fashion possible and particularly should not make any changes
to its registration model.
Again, it doesn't follow. Yes, small and localized changes are
generally to be preferred over elaborate changes that don't add any
functionality. But eliminating AAAA fallback is a small and localized
change - and it has the added benefit of making mail simpler and more
robust.
Keith
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John R Levine
- Message not available
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Dave Crocker
- dual-stack IP transition is not specific to SMTP, Dave Crocker
- Re: dual-stack IP transition is not specific to SMTP,
Keith Moore <=
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John C Klensin
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Carl S. Gutekunst
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John C Klensin
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Carl S. Gutekunst
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Mark Andrews
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Frank Ellermann
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, ned+ietf-smtp
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Hector Santos
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Alex van den Bogaerdt
- Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Robert A. Rosenberg
|
|
|