> On Dec 9, 2017, at 2:37 PM, Robert Wolfe wrote:
>
> The issue is is we are having an issue with Postfix 2.1 (as shipped with REL
> 7.4) being apparently IPv6 compatible. Should we build this from source and
> use an updated release? And if so, how new of a release should we use for
> IPv
> Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 20:44:37 +
> From: Richard
>
>> Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 14:31:48 -0600
>> From: Robert Wolfe
>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Richard wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 13:37:17 -0600
>>> > From: Robert Wolfe
>>> >
> Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 14:31:48 -0600
> From: Robert Wolfe
>
>> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Richard wrote:
>>
>>
>> > Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 13:37:17 -0600
>> > From: Robert Wolfe
>> >
>> > Hi all!
>> >
>> > The organization I work for requires IPv6 compatibilit
Or rather, AREN'T. Sorry. :) My grammar teacher would have had a time
with this one :)
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Robert Wolfe
wrote:
> But isn't 2.10 and 2.1 the same?
>
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Richard innovate.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 13:37:1
But isn't 2.10 and 2.1 the same?
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Richard wrote:
>
>
> > Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 13:37:17 -0600
> > From: Robert Wolfe
> >
> > Hi all!
> >
> > The organization I work for requires IPv6 compatibility in all new
> > hardware and software we deploy.
> >
> >
> Date: Saturday, December 09, 2017 13:37:17 -0600
> From: Robert Wolfe
>
> Hi all!
>
> The organization I work for requires IPv6 compatibility in all new
> hardware and software we deploy.
>
> The issue is is we are having an issue with Postfix 2.1 (as shipped
> with REL 7.4) being apparently
