Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06

John C Klensin writes:
> And, in addition and FWIW, the claim that a dual stack setup 
> "practically requires" an MX setup is false, as has been pointed out 
> before.
If that refers to me, then I think that wasn't what I claimed. I claimed 
(or meant to claim) that using an dual-stack _relay_ practically 
requires MX records. One way to do it:
example.com IN A 2006:0608:...
example.com IN MX 10 example.com.
            IN MX 20 relay.example-isp.net.

There are other ways to do it. People who don't mind pointing 
http://example.com at the relay can use an extra A record instead of 
the MX record(s).
Arnt