On Mar 26, 2014, at 11:26 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > On Mar 26, 2014, at 8:12 PM, Robert Drake <rdr...@direcpath.com> wrote: > >> >> On 3/26/2014 10:16 PM, Franck Martin wrote: >>> >>> and user@2001:db8::1.25 with user@192.0.2.1:25. Who had the good idea to >>> use : for IPv6 addresses while this is the separator for the port in IPv4? >>> A few MTA are confused by it. >> At the network level the IPv6 address is just a big number. No confusion >> there. At the plaintext level the naked IPv6 address should be wrapped in >> square brackets. >> >> From: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.2.2 >> > > Two errors, actually… As an RFC-821 address, it should be user@[IP]:port in > both cases (user@[192.0.2.1]:25 and user@[2001:db8::1]:25). > indeed, but MTAs are know to accept any kind of non RFC compliant emails and trying to make some sense out of it… :P see http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7103 which tries to address some of it in a more deterministic way.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
