why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition

[mansaxel at besserwisser.org (Måns Nilsson)]

Subject: Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Date: Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:45:00PM -0400 Quoting John R. Levine (johnl at iecc.com):
> >None of this is REQUIRED.  It is forced on people by a cartel of
> >email providers.
> 
> It must be nice to live in world where there is so little spam and
> other mail abuse that you don't have to do any of the anti-abuse
> things that real providers in the real world have to do.

What is a real provider? And what in the email specifications tells us
that the email needs and solutions of any one individual, as long as they
are following protocol (which I'm quite convinced Mark is) are "unreal"?

There are scalability issues that single out the mega-class providers
as something special. But those are no reason to go around debating the
realness of other email handling organisations.

Also, the accept/reject policies of email recipients are subject to
individual evaluation and implementation at each MX host. Attempts at
describing the state of email as other than that are false and should
be discarded[0].

-- 
M?ns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
Content:  80% POLYESTER, 20% DACRONi ... The waitress's UNIFORM sheds
TARTAR SAUCE like an 8" by 10" GLOSSY ...

[0] I'm sorry for the wording here, I just had to recall a paraphrased 
    instruction from when Sweden had a psyops defence organisation. 
    "Varje meddelande om att motst?ndet skall uppges ?r falskt."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20140326/41bc77dd/attachment.bin>