IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spfbis] RFC6147 and RFC7208 interoperability issues

Ángel <angel@16bits.net> Mon, 07 February 2022 22:41 UTC

Return-Path: <angel@16bits.net>
X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 207833A0E1A for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 14:41:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 GUtwTsvE92PO for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 14:41:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.direccionemail.com (mail.direccionemail.com [199.195.249.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CE3C3A0E19 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Feb 2022 14:40:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <b7fe33e0f8982bb5f4560ed546ac35bdff25e03b.camel@16bits.net>
From: Ángel <angel@16bits.net>
To: spfbis@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2022 23:40:56 +0100
In-Reply-To: <e0f53dcc-a909-9476-691b-84184ba8761c@posteo.de>
References: <45e423cc-4095-cca2-bf8c-aa15e977b19c@posteo.de> <DF73F58F-D33E-495A-B18C-58BC994ADE8B@viagenie.ca> <5b5f5a2a-8250-4ee5-3560-80e67b540204@posteo.de> <e061ff19f8bf10bef43399d82a29bee48fbcee5d.camel@16bits.net> <e0f53dcc-a909-9476-691b-84184ba8761c@posteo.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spfbis/hAdFT4P8dKFJ6W49MgMOyiWTRdg>
Subject: Re: [spfbis] RFC6147 and RFC7208 interoperability issues
X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: SPFbis discussion list <spfbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spfbis/>
List-Post: <mailto:spfbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2022 22:41:03 -0000

On 2022-02-07 at 02:30 +0000, Klaus Frank wrote:
> Why? Such a query would resolve in the mailserver would make the DNS 
> lookup. The DNS64 server than would synthetically add an AAAA-RR to
> the response.

The issue is not that the response contains an A record but that the
queried domain embeds the remote IP.

The A result is usually a 127.0.0.x address, with some "magic" meaning
(perhaps lost if translated into IPv6) but the main problem is querying
the right label.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email