Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns-03.txt

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Thu, 11 May 2017 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B61012EC96 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2017 10:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ENG6PkV4DWR6 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 May 2017 10:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3153812EBCE for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 May 2017 10:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.7.93] (104-7-65-172.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [104.7.65.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 088C761FA2; Thu, 11 May 2017 17:28:10 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <59149F29.6090908@redbarn.org>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 10:28:09 -0700
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.13 (Windows/20170501)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
CC: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <20170511165852.34338.qmail@ary.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20170511165852.34338.qmail@ary.lan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Af6Pj9qBUKMv7cxwb0hVLSPuT1c>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsop-isp-ip6rdns-03.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 17:33:01 -0000


John Levine wrote:
>>>> In my experience, without reverse DNS it is essentially impossible to have
>>>> mail delivered to the internet at large.
>>> Yes.
>> since this isn't an ideal or intended state of affairs, let's consider
>> the size and shape of the box, not just what's in there.
> 
> What would be the operational advantage of accepting mail from IPv6 hosts
> too lame to set up rDNS?

we will never know, because every v6 end system will have a ptr, either
naturally, or machine-generated for it, because v6 providers will not
want their rank-and-file v6 endsystems to be excluded from important
activities such as transmitting e-mail.

the operational advantage of not having ptr's for rank and file end
systems is much easier to explain, except to v6 endsystem providers.

-- 
P Vixie