> Evan Hunt <mailto:e...@isc.org> > Thursday, November 06, 2014 9:46 AM > > I see. Too bad. Is it any more feasible to adjust expectations for v6 in > this respect than it was when we were talking about not providing PTR for > v6 in the first place?
sadly, ipv6 isn't deployed enough that a v6-only end host can get real work done, but ipv6 is however deployed just well enough that we can't change what PTR means at this point. see also: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20110607_two_stage_filtering_for_ipv6_electronic_mail/ noting that in 2011 it was already too late for foundational recommendations on ipv6. -- Paul Vixie
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
