pretty sure we require one of dkim/spf/ptr, but not having dkim/spf, we'll just look at it pretty harshly for spam.
Brandon On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Bernhard Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Frank, > > > > Thanks for sharing your experience. You may have been able to send > > email to Google for some days from your IPv6 host without a PTR, but > > I think that would only go on for a short time. Have you tried > > sending to Comcast? > > Note that I specifically do not suggest sending without PTR. We reject > on missing FCrDNS even in IPv4 and are pretty happy with that (with an > easy process to whitelist though). But I tried it to O365 and the mail > went through nevertheless. > > According to > > https://www.m3aawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/M3AAWG_Inbound_IPv6_Policy_Issues-2014-09.pdf > which Google, Microsoft and LinkedIn claim to follow you need a "PTR and > (SPF or DKIM)". And we've been preferring IPv6 outbound for 5+ years > now, without any issues. 99% of our mail does neither have DKIM nor SPF. > > > From an ISP perspective, adding in an SPF (or equivalent TXT) record > > for the IPv6 space of your ISP mail server would not be a hard thing > > to do. While not all email servers support DKIM, all DNS servers > > support TXT records. > > Both SPF and DKIM are controlled by the sender domain, not by the > operator of the sending mailserver. Think the classic Permit-by-IP > smarthost run by ISPs, you just cannot make any assumptions there about > the sender. > > Bernhard > > > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > [email protected] > http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop > >
