Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

[Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>]

> > 	er, NO.  SMTP has no dependence on what may or may
> > 	not exist in the DNS.  Forcing SMTP to depend on DNS
> > 	is a huge mistake.  And yes Virginia, I plan on removing
> > 	A rr's from my zones (eventually)
> 
> You know, that's a very interesting point. One of more common configuration
> variations we see is to disable MX lookups and just use address records. (Thi
> s

	You just overrode RFC 2821 by *disabling* the MX lookup.

	There is no reason why you can't also override RFC 2821bis
	by disabling the MX lookups and connecting directly.

	I don't see this as changing anything.

	Mark

> is done for a variety of reasons, most often having to do with administrative
> control issues.) In an IPv6-only future world I see no reason why the need fo
> r
> this sort of configuration will vanish and I don't think having the RFCs
> say it shouldn't work is a good idea.
> 
> I'm therefore changing my position from "no opinion" to "keep 2821bis the way
> it is".
> 
> 				Ned
> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: [phone]                 INTERNET: [e-mail]
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf