[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP)

2008-04-07 16:32:56

Frank Ellermann wrote:
Robert A. Rosenberg wrote:

Hector argues that it's the job of IPv6 domains to be reachable,
for that they must either also offer A, or use an explicit MX
with an IPv4 SMTP at a third party in addition to their AAAA.
Assuming that 2821bis will be as long a standard as STD 10 (about 30 years) adding this pragmatical idea could backfire
when IPv4 is remote history.

30 years?  I'll take it. :-)

Hey, I would to be first to sign up for a brand new spec that addresses the future RIGHT now. You don't have to nudge me on that. :-)

But that is not what Tony and John and Lisa want for 2821bis. At least I don't think so. It has been rammed down our throats that we are not attempting to cause CHANGE in our software. Look at all the proposals which were shot down for that reason.

Well understood. I believe in that.  But its taken so darn LONG! :-)

No Frank. I'm all for maintaining compatibility with a pragmatic evolution. I believe this is Crocker's philosophy and I 100% agree with an incremental approach.

I personally think we can put a stop to 2821bis now. Let this guys get this doc finished and rubber stamped. There are a lot of questionable stuff in there already that we intentional pushed to the side. You can add only so much IPv6 to it now without it becoming a brand new spec.

And then, I hope, start a new SMTPv6 Draft proposal totally specific to SMTP operations for the IPv6 era and IPv4 playing 2nd fiddle this time around. I don't see much other than RFC 3974 that touches base with SMTP and IPv6 related issues.

We need more than whats in there.


Hector Santos, CTO

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>