"More better" approach?
Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET
ml at t-b-o-h.net
Fri Jun 27 20:22:22 UTC 2008
> > I've caught flack before from mailing lists and others that having
> >my 0 level MX as IPv6 only "Just isn't right". Some online "DNS Reporting"
> >services or other start to claim I can't be contacted, etc.
> You'll see something like "Could not resolve domain".
One of the things, yea.
> > Is there a "Best Practice" or "In MA's opinion" about this? I'm
> >looking to bring up our major mail server with an IPv6 address, and I
> >didn't know if continuing to make it the lowest MX is the best idea, or
> >just making the record contain a v4+v6 address. I'm not exactly sure what
> >my original reasoning was, or if its valid anymore.
> RFC 3974 discusses the issue. If you point the lowest MX to a
> IPv6-only host, your mail will not be accepted by a lot of sites,
> including a large email service provider. You can get around the
> problem with a host pointing to a v4 and a v6 address.
I appreciate the reply. Will read the RFC closer. Sorry if this
was more considered an MTA issue versus a DNS issues.
More information about the bind-users