Re: problem dealing w/ ietf.org mail servers

--On Friday, 04 July, 2008 10:46 +0200 Kurt Erik Lindqvist
<kurtis@kurtis.pp.se> wrote:

> On 3 jul 2008, at 15.57, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 10:47:53PM -0700, 'kent' wrote:
>> [..]
>>> However, this last address,
>>> 2001:470:1:76:2c0:9fff:fe3e:4009, is not explicitly
>>> configured on the sending server; instead, it is being  
>>> implicitly
>>> configured through ip6 autoconf stuff:
>> 
>> Which (autoconfig) you should either not be using on servers,
>> or you   should be configuring your software properly to
>> select the correct   outbound address. (I prefer to use the
>> autoconfig one for   'management' and using a 'service
>> address' for the service).
> 
> 
> What a shame that's not what's in the RFCs..:-)

Despite the ":-)", I think there is an important question here.

Does it imply that this is a use case from which we should be
learning... and then fixing the RFCs?  Or that you believe that
the RFCs are correct and Jeroen's analysis is incorrect?   

I hope it doesn't mean "the RFCs ought to govern, even when
reality and experience seem to contradict them".

   john

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