(I dropped all the CCs - the list grew long.)
Dave Crocker writes:
ned+ietf-smtp(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:
Not exactly. The issue isn't what to do in general, it's what to do
in this document. I have no problem with someone starting an MX .
effort or a require
MX effort and seeing if they can get consensus on it. (If the former
gets started I plan to support it, the latter I'll oppose.) It just
doesn't belong
in 2821bis.
+1
I would +1 if I thought 2821bis could ignore this, but unfortunately I
think that 2821 has to choose: Consciously extend the A rule to cover
AAAA, or consciously not extend it.
As with Ned, I suspect we are going to be long-retired, and possibly
long-dead, before v4 use reduces sufficiently to be ignored.
I suspect none of us will be retired by the time IPv6-only hosts/devices
appear.
Arnt