IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Feedback on draft-moonesamy-smtp-ipv6-00

"John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Tue, 15 November 2011 09:44 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 710CA21F8F21 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 01:44:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.577
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.577 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YD8waesTNG9A for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 01:44:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC2EF21F8F10 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 01:44:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 75173 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2011 09:44:04 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:vbr-info:user-agent:cleverness; s=125a4.4ec23464.k1111; bh=ZdnkTKh5/E6cKbfmeU4lG9GW4DbfF3Pkoa40leRA7ao=; b=f1kEbYl1WwPgOdKImQfRyDXdFAG6KO9EZsexKf133q7Rr9WdCRoAawCkOSy30fWhreAlnfyK2XdpFo2OV+bhroPyf43tmk2zYbRcYv2gQ7LS/oSOtd9kvhaoFpOr/TrymuaBoEVAauYJk0bBCelGfVHtSNttpnBQQObN0NyDecM=
VBR-Info: md=iecc.com; mc=all; mv=dwl.spamhaus.org
Received: (ofmipd 127.0.0.1) with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 15 Nov 2011 09:43:42 -0000
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 17:44:01 +0800
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1111151741170.38874@joyce.lan>
From: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20111114202257.08a2c6b0@elandnews.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20111114142451.09b74390@elandnews.com> <20111115025746.26808.qmail@joyce.lan> <6.2.5.6.2.20111114202257.08a2c6b0@elandnews.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
Cleverness: None detected
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:23:45 -0800
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Feedback on draft-moonesamy-smtp-ipv6-00
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 09:44:06 -0000

> (9)  Attempt to deliver the email over the connection established, as
>     specified in RFC 5321.  If a transient failure condition is
>     reported, try again as defined in RFC 5321 Section 4.5.4.1.

That seems reasonably aligned with reality.  Different MTAs have rather 
different retry strategies, both different timeouts, and different rules 
for how they retry, e.g., retry the same target host, retry starting at 
the same MX distance, retry from scratch.  Whether some or all of the 
hosts are on IPv6 doesn't change any of that.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

v2.19.0 | Report a Bug | By Email