[ipv6-wg] Real-world IPv6 SMTP experience
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Real-world IPv6 SMTP experience
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Real-world IPv6 SMTP experience
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tim Chown
tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Wed Dec 21 17:10:42 CET 2005
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 04:13:04PM +0100, Stig Venaas wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 04:08:16PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Gert Doering: > > > > > So if I understand this correctly, having a v4-only backup MX should > > > solve all problems commonly experienced? > > > > As far as I know, the primary MX needs an A record (to satisfy > > Sendmail), and there needs to be a MX which has an A record only (and > > no AAAA or A6 record; this is done to satisfy Exim installations). My > > initial question to this list was whether if you can do this with just > > a single IPv4 address, and still prefer IPv6 over IPv4 (assuming that > > IPv6-capable hosts prefer IPv6 hosts over IPv4 hosts if they have the > > same priority). > > At least at uninett.no this is done with only one IPv4 address. The > primary MX has both A and AAAA, and the secondary is only A, but with > same IPv4 address as primary. Well, you can check mx's for uninett.no > yourself. > > I know several sites that have both A and AAAA for all MXs. It doesn't > sound safe to me, but I assume it can't be that problematic then...? Like Gert and Jeroen, we do that, and have not had complaints of failed or problematic email (and have done it for a long time). That's on a domain handling maybe 100K mails a day. -- Tim/::1
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Real-world IPv6 SMTP experience
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Real-world IPv6 SMTP experience
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]