[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

2008-03-25 06:41:06
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:00:23AM +0100, Frank Ellermann wrote:
Ned Freed wrote:

If the consensus is that better interoperability can be had
by banning bare AAAA records that's perfectly fine with me.

FWIW, I'd like that...

Clarity can be established and interoperability _improved_ 
by limiting discovery to just A and MX records.  Perhaps a
note might be included that at some point in the future MX
records may become required.
Again, I have no problem with this approach if that's what
the consensus is.

...and that, too.  

        so what is supposed to happen when I remove all
        "A" RR's from my zones?

Another point in favor of not allowing bare AAAA records
for mail routing.
The only valid solution would be to indicate that AAAA 
records as a discovery mechanism may not be supported and
should not be used for this purpose.  Use MX records instead.
Which is perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. The question
is whether there's a consensus to resolve the ambiguity in
this fashion.

Checking about 63 articles on the SMTP list mentioning "AAAA",
some from the early '90s, they're about TLDs, CNAME, MX, SPF,
and what else.  I found no message clearly saying "but I want
no MX for my AAAA".  I vaguely recall that somebody mentioned
an implementation doing this, but that is not the same as "I
insist on an AAAA fallback", and IIRC it was only one poster.


IETF mailing list


Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).

IETF mailing list