https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6654
D. Stussy <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |software+spamassassin@kd6lv | |w.ampr.org --- Comment #1 from D. Stussy <[email protected]> 2011-08-25 20:14:59 UTC --- I agree - IPv6: All hosts in the infrastructure should be dual IPv4/IPv6 stacked. If one doesn't have a specific IPv6 native allocation, then use a 6to4 (2002::/16) address for now. That's why it exists - it gives every IPv4 holder an IPv6 subnet (of /48 size) per IPv4 address. There is no reason why any DNS server should be reachable over IPv4 only. (Same with DNSSEC support.) I've been using IPv6 for more than 8 years (although the first three was via 6to4 only). What I don't get is why more people aren't using it. How is using IPv6 today "early adoption?" For embedded equipment, as recently as 2007, I asked a manufacturer if their device supported IPv6. The rep. said, "No." I called it broken out of the box. He didn't get it. Why is there such a reluctance to support IPv6? Apache's httpd server 2.0 (and later) supports IPv6. I'm surprised that you're telling me that they don't have such enabled on their own servers. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
