The usefulness of reverse DNS in IPv6 is dubious. Maybe the idea is to cause enough pain that eventually you fold and get them to host your email too.
-Laszlo On Mar 25, 2014, at 8:57 PM, Brielle Bruns <br...@2mbit.com> wrote: > On 3/25/14, 11:56 AM, John Levine wrote: >> I think this would be a good time to fix your mail server setup. >> You're never going to get much v6 mail delivered without rDNS, because >> receivers won't even look at your mail to see if it's authenticated. >> >> CenturyLink is reasonably technically clued so it shouldn't be >> impossible to get them to fix it. > > > Nothing wrong with my mail server setup, except the lack of RDNS. Lacking > reverse should be one of many things to consider with rejecting e-mails, but > should not be the only condition. > > That would be like outright refusing mail unless it had both SPF and DKIM on > every single message. > > Sure, great in theory, does not work in reality and will result in lost mail > from legit sources. > > Already spoken to CenturyLink about RDNS for ipv6 - won't have rdns until > native IPv6. Currently, IPv6 seems to be delivered for those who want it, > via 6rd. > > And, frankly, I'm not going to get in a fight with CenturyLink over IPv6 > RDNS, considering that I am thankful that they are even offering IPv6 when > other large providers aren't even trying to do so to their residential and > small business customers. > > It is very easy for some to forget that not everyone has a gigabit fiber > connection to their homes with ARIN assigned IPv4/IPv6 blocks announced over > BGP. Some of us actually have to make do with (sometimes very) limited > budgets and what the market is offering us and has made available. > > > -- > Brielle Bruns > The Summit Open Source Development Group > http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org >
