And which of the two of you did I hear volunteer to start
writing a coherent and unified "best practices" I-D? Please
take this off the list and start writing.
john
--On Wednesday, 16 April, 2008 22:30 +0100 Sabahattin Gucukoglu
<mail(_at_)sabahattin-gucukoglu(_dot_)com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Frank,
On 16 Apr 2008 at 20:46, Frank Ellermann
<hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> said:
"Tony Finch" wrote:
I doubt that it makes sense to accept email from
test(_at_)ipv6(_dot_)l(_dot_)google(_dot_)com on a system that can only
communicate with IPv4 addresses.
In stark contrast to Ned's view I think that you
MUST reject such mails - unless you can guarantee
delivery without auto-response (no NDR, no DSN,
no MDN, no vacation, no forward, in essence an
empty reverse-path, near to rewrite MAIL FROM:<>)
No, I don't agree. Your only real obligation is to ensure
that your output relay doesn't attempt a delivery and so
waste resources when it can't do it by simply guaranteeing
that IPv6 hosts aren't considered in email routing at time of
delivery (EG worst case is a double-bounce listing "No data"
as reason because the resolver routines have ignored the IPv6
addresses, if double-bounces were enabled - and they should
be!). That doesn't mean not accepting mail from IPv6-only
hosts, any more than it means not accepting mail from an
invalid mailbox. IMHO, it's your responsibility to ensure
that mail can and will be accepted and to make sure that it
will be delivered so that the minimal number of DSNs/whatever
have to be generated to accomodate your configuration problems
under whatever circumstance. It is less wise to depend on a
sender check that doesn't make sense semantically (there
never has been and never will be a requirement in a spec
enforcing it, and for good reason, even if it makes sense for
policy) and which is only really useful as a feeble antispam
check nowadays anyway in these days of deliberate DSN disposal.
Same idea as in EAI, after a reject "the sender
can make another plan". After accepting it the
IPv6-only mail vanished in a black hole for all
non-trivial cases.
Cheers,
Sabahattin
- --
Sabahattin Gucukoglu
<mail<at>sabahattin<dash>gucukoglu<dot>com> Address
harvesters, snag this: feedme(_at_)yamta(_dot_)org
Phone: +44 20 88008915
Mobile: +44 7986 053399
http://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8
Comment: QDPGP - http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBSAZv2iNEOmEWtR2TEQLidgCgk0IXZEEBqCfv9cXv1S652LVYTiUAn1
bT wv9u+hrPwyAmpqq1p98Rkph6
=75hu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----