On 8.3.2010, at 2.22, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Of course I fixed the problem immediately as I found out about
>> it, but I'm just wondering how many other such setups there are
>> that break once IPv6 becomes more common. Should this setting
>> default to "any"? Is there really even a reason for it
Timo Sirainen:
> On 8.3.2010, at 1.26, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > smtp_address_preference (default: ipv6)
>
> Probably the whole reason for this thread was because of me. I
> used to have a working IPv6 setup, and then switched to a different
> ISP and just copied all my configs. Everything worke
On 8.3.2010, at 1.26, Wietse Venema wrote:
> smtp_address_preference (default: ipv6)
Probably the whole reason for this thread was because of me. I used to have a
working IPv6 setup, and then switched to a different ISP and just copied all my
configs. Everything worked fine for a few days so I
mouss:
> RFC 5321 (the same sentence is in 2821) says
> "In any case, the SMTP client SHOULD try at least two addresses."
>
> so a client that only tries two addresses is compliant. If you use
> twenty IPs, be prepared to see clients ignore most of them (and no
> tuning of _your_ postfix will help
Erik Logtenberg a écrit :
>> People who configure MX records should read the SMTP RFC, in
>> particular section 5. "Address Resolution and Mail Handling.
>>
>> By design, Postfix enforces sane limits on ALL information. In the
>> case of SMTP server IP addresses. Such limits protect Postfix
>> agai
Stan Hoeppner a écrit :
> mouss put forth on 3/6/2010 6:03 PM:
>> Stan Hoeppner a écrit :
>>> [snip]
>>> A web server with a single IP address hosting 378 vitural domains. Should
>>> it have 379 PTRs? One for the host itself and one for each virtual domain?
>>> Of course not.
>>>
>>> A mail serv
