/dev/rob0 wrote on 9/8/2016 9:24 AM:
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 02:18:41PM +0100, Danny Horne wrote:
Thanks for the reply, I found the following site which showed me I
was seriously lacking in my IPv6 config. I think I've got it fixed
now (email from GMail came through on an IPv6 address)
http://www.postfix.org/IPV6_README.html
Good, glad to hear it.
The following is WRONG and BAD advice from multiple perspectives, but
it's my own little opinion and I am sticking with it. :)
I am not in any hurry to move my email into IPv6 land. For now I am
satisfied to have IPv4-only MX records for my domains. My server is
IPv4-only, for that matter.
Why? Well, in IPv4 the spam problem, while not solved, is well under
control. But when spammers move into IPv6, and they *will* when it
is in more widespread use, spam is going to be a huge mess. The
tools which work so well in IPv4, namely DNSBL services, won't cope
with IPv6.
I think the only thing which will work for IPv6 would be a new
paradigm of default-deny and whitelisting, rather than the IPv4 way
of default-allow and blacklisting.
Yes, I do acknowledge the necessity to move toward IPv6, but it's a
long way off before there are any significant IPv6-only email sites.
Right now if you're unable to do mail on IPv4, you're going to be cut
off from large parts of the Internet.
I don't want to be a pioneer before then. :)
Rob, I agree that there's no rush to IP6 for MX handling. But, looking
forward to an IP6 world, I have found that rbldnsd does support IP6. In
fact, I have setup several ip6trie zones in rbldnsd and use them
regularly for mapping IP addresses to ASN and country for internal
reporting and statistics. This is just one example that allows us to
maintain parity between IP4 and IP6 offerings. Given that the software
support is available, I believe the SPAM services are likely to follow
as demand grows. While certainly having unique challenges, I don't think
"huge mess" would be fair. That said, I, like you, plan on providing
services via IP4 until such time as IP6 performs more reliably or offers
other advantages over IP4. I expect some applications will benefit more
while others less; MX handling would be on the 'less' end of the spectrum.
--Blake
