On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 04:42:29PM -0800, Doug Otis wrote:
>
> When there is to be reverse namespace, it should be ensured to work. In
> reality, this is not always the case.
That is either an impossible goal, or else a meaningless requirement.
In some sense, the reverse tree always works: you
On Mar 5, 2009, at 10:40 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:32:28AM -0800, Doug Otis wrote:
Note that there has been work in DNSOP suggesting that rejecting
on the failure of reverse DNS lookup is not always a good idea.
Agreed.
Just to be clear: I am not sure I agree w
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:32:28AM -0800, Doug Otis wrote:
>>> Note that there has been work in DNSOP suggesting that rejecting on
>>> the failure of reverse DNS lookup is not always a good idea.
>> Agreed.
>
> Just to be clear: I am not sure I agree with those who t
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:32:28AM -0800, Doug Otis wrote:
>> Note that there has been work in DNSOP suggesting that rejecting on
>> the failure of reverse DNS lookup is not always a good idea.
>
> Agreed.
Just to be clear: I am not sure I agree with those who think reverse
DNS should not be
On Mar 5, 2009, at 6:30 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:00:55PM +, Tim Chown wrote:
Hi,
Just an observation, I don't know whether its been changed or
applied recently, but we had some mails to various IETF lists soft
rejected overnight due to failure of the recei
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:00:55PM +, Tim Chown wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just an observation, I don't know whether its been changed or applied
> recently, but we had some mails to various IETF lists soft rejected
> overnight due to failure of the receiving MX to perform a successful
> reverse DNS loo
On Thu Mar 5 13:00:55 2009, Tim Chown wrote:
Just an observation, I don't know whether its been changed or
applied
recently, but we had some mails to various IETF lists soft rejected
overnight due to failure of the receiving MX to perform a successful
reverse DNS lookup on the IPv6 sender addr
Tim Chown wrote:
[...]
> It's not uncommon for IPv6 servers to be multiaddressed, so mail admins
> will probably just need to be a wee bit more careful, and certainly try
> to avoid using autoconf globals on servers.
Nothing wrong with EUI-64 or autoconf, as long as you actually want them
there ;)
Hi,
Just an observation, I don't know whether its been changed or applied
recently, but we had some mails to various IETF lists soft rejected
overnight due to failure of the receiving MX to perform a successful
reverse DNS lookup on the IPv6 sender address.
- Transcript of session follows
