IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Wed, 26 March 2008 21:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B974D28C639; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.576
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.576 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GiynPDOP1+UA; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4BA528C2F2; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6B028C352 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x9UUJpkiatKy for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from m1.imap-partners.net (m1.imap-partners.net [64.13.152.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8293628C2F2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:01:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lust.indecency.org (user-119b1dm.biz.mindspring.com [66.149.133.182]) by m1.imap-partners.net (MOS 3.8.4-GA) with ESMTP id APD39289 (AUTH admin@network-heretics.com) for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:59:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <47EAB91F.4020504@network-heretics.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:59:11 -0400
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Crocker <dhc2@dcrocker.net>
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis
References: <20080326150139.86203.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <47EA8CD8.3010500@network-heretics.com> <alpine.BSF.1.00.0803261436260.36932@simone.iecc.com> <11a101c88f75$96b63bd0$c422b370$@net> <47EAB7E3.4060308@dcrocker.net>
In-Reply-To: <47EAB7E3.4060308@dcrocker.net>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> I keep trying to understand why the SMTP use of AAAA records should be any 
> different than its use of A records.  Haven't heard a solid explanation, 
> nevermind seen consensus forming around it.

because conditions are different now than it was when RFC 974 was 
written, and the case that compelled fallback to A in RFC 974 does not 
significantly exist for AAAA.

I keep trying to understand why people keep expecting IPv4 to operate 
exactly the same as IPv6 without bothering to consider the differences 
between them.  (Or maybe I just answered my own question?)

Keith
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email