Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 03:56:14PM +0100, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Bill Manning wrote:
> 
> >> 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?
> 
> I'm not sure if we are talking about the same issue.  For SMTP
> as it used to be since RFC 821 clients trying to find a server
> accepting mail for x@y.example look for y.example MX records,
> and if they got something they locate corresponding servers
> "by name" (A or AAAA), all details as explained in 2821bis.  
> 
> If they got nothing with their MX query RFC (2)821 and 2821bis
> said that the client should try y.example directly "by name",
> it could be an ordinary host with an SMTP server at port 25.

	right.

example.com.  soa (
	stuff
	)

	ns foo.
	ns bar.
;
mailhost   aaaa  fe80::21a:92ff:fe99:2ab1

	is what i am using today.

the RFC's have the right idea.

> For various reasons mentioned in this thread this "fallback"
> or "implicit MX rule" isn't a good idea today, and some folks
> like to get rid of it for AAAA.   RFC 2821 didn't say that
> this is also supposed to work for IPv6, and therefore 2821bis
> isn't forced to stick to it.

	its not a bad idea either, just that some folks
	are feeling grumpy. 
	RFC 2821 didn't say - and the presumption should be
	that since IPv6 is just like IPv4... then the IPv4
	methods shoudl work.

> For the domain with only one SMTP host also almost nothing is
> new, it is only encouraged (by the proposed note) to publish
> this name in an MX record.

	what is being proposed is -FORCING- people to use
	an RR type they may not want to use.

> You are not supposed to remove any A records from your zones.
> You are not supposed to do anything at all, because you have
> MX records as it should be... :-)

	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)

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

-- 
--bill

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
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf