Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-07-13 Thread Jack Bates
On 6/5/2012 9:29 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote: Looking more closely... Is this still work in progress? ;; ANSWER SECTION: comcast.net.358 IN MX 5 mx3.comcast.net. comcast.net.358 IN MX 10 mx1.comcast.net. comcast.net.358 IN

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-18 Thread Livingood, Jason
On 6/17/12 1:18 PM, "Jason Roysdon" wrote: >Jason, > >Will all MX get RRs, or at least all of your MX priority levels >have at least one RR? Without a failure of mx2 & mx3, Sendmail and >well-behaving mail servers are never going to try mx1. Yes, in the relatively near future. - Jaso

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Matthew Kaufman
On 6/5/2012 7:42 AM, Seth Mos wrote: Op 5-6-2012 16:10, Livingood, Jason schreef: In preparation for the World IPv6 Launch, inbound (SMTP) email to the comcast.net domain was IPv6-enabled today, June 5, 2012, at 9:34 UTC. Roughly one minute later, at 9:35:30 UTC we received our first inbound e

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Vlad Galu
On Tuesday, June 5, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Seth Mos wrote: > Op 5-6-2012 16:10, Livingood, Jason schreef: > > I enabled v6 for my email before my website since the impact if it > didn't work on the 1st try was almost nil. > > Still waiting for the 1st Country to top Romania' 6% deployment. I'm > sure

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Livingood, Jason
On 6/5/12 10:33 AM, "Jeroen Massar" wrote: >Though it can work, it used to be a really bad idea as there where a >couple of SMTP systems (Communigate Pro being one of them I recall) >which just failed when not seeing an "A" on an MX, this as they did not >understand IPv6... > >There is bound to

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Raymond Dijkxhoorn
Hi! Seth, In the past several hours we have of course seen other messages from a range of hosts, many of which were legitimate email ­ so it wasn't just spam! ;-) Since the Internet is of course more than just the web, we encourage others to start making non-HTTP services available via IPv6 as

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Livingood, Jason
On 6/5/12 10:22 AM, "Raymond Dijkxhoorn" wrote: >You specificly tell 'inbound' ... by that you mean the MX record was >added. But just to be sure. Comcast is also sending out over IPv6 now >right? And if so, what protocol is preferred by default? Outgoing mail >over IPv4 or over IPv6? Outbound S

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Seth Mos
Op 5-6-2012 16:10, Livingood, Jason schreef: In preparation for the World IPv6 Launch, inbound (SMTP) email to the comcast.net domain was IPv6-enabled today, June 5, 2012, at 9:34 UTC. Roughly one minute later, at 9:35:30 UTC we received our first inbound email over IPv6 from 2001:4ba0:fff4:1c:

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Jeroen Massar
On 2012-06-05 07:29, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote: [..] > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > comcast.net.358 IN MX 5 mx3.comcast.net. > comcast.net.358 IN MX 10 mx1.comcast.net. > comcast.net.358 IN MX 5 mx2.comcast.net. > > ;; ADDITIONAL

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Raymond Dijkxhoorn
Hi! In preparation for the World IPv6 Launch, inbound (SMTP) email to the comcast.net domain was IPv6-enabled today, June 5, 2012, at 9:34 UTC. Roughly one minute later, at 9:35:30 UTC we received our first inbound email over IPv6 from 2001:4ba0:fff4:1c::2. That first bit of mail was spam, and w

Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)

2012-06-05 Thread Raymond Dijkxhoorn
Jason, In preparation for the World IPv6 Launch, inbound (SMTP) email to the comcast.net domain was IPv6-enabled today, June 5, 2012, at 9:34 UTC. Roughly one minute later, at 9:35:30 UTC we received our first inbound email over IPv6 from 2001:4ba0:fff4:1c::2. That first bit of mail was spam, an