[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] Possible cont4ibution to moving forward with RFC5321bis SMTP

2020-01-03 09:22:28

On Jan 2, 2020, at 5:33 PM, John Levine <johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com> wrote:

If a host doesn't get v4 connections, it doesn't need to recognize v4
address literals.  Similarly, if it doesn't get v6 connections it
doesn't need to recognize v6 literals.

Emphatically disagree, because of NATs.  It’s counterproductive to gratuitously 
impair smtp to prevent it from being used across ipv4/IPv6 boundaries, across 
boundaries between public and private ipv4 networks, and across boundaries 
between private ipv4 networks.  It’s also counterproductive to put something 
into a specification that implementors have to ignore for pragmatic reasons.


ietf-smtp mailing list