[148250] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: incoming smtp from v6 addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bernhard Schmidt)
Fri Jan 6 14:18:16 2012
To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Bernhard Schmidt <berni@birkenwald.de>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 19:16:50 +0000 (UTC)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> for incoming mail that is *accepted*, i.e. not stuff like
> 2012-01-04 00:37:28 REJECT because 118.39.80.118 listed in rbl-plus.mail-abuse.org
> 2012-01-04 00:37:28 H=(nexo.es) [118.39.80.118] F=<pedrom@nexo.es> rejected RCPT <owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org>: blocked because 118.39.80.118 is in blacklist at rbl-plus.mail-abuse.org: Mail from 118.39.80.118 blocked using Trend Micro Email Reputation database. Please see <http://www.mail-abuse.com/cgi-bin/lookup?118.39.80.118>
> 2012-01-04 00:37:28 no host name found for IP address 118.39.80.118
> 2012-01-04 00:37:29 REJECT 118.39.80.118 too many bad recip
> 2012-01-04 00:37:29 REJECT because 118.39.80.118 listed in rbl-plus.mail-abuse.org
>
> 7.8% is over ipv6 transport
>
> but only 2% of outgoing deliveries are over ipv6.
>
> what do other folk see?
Main inbound MX for a large educational institution sees around 5% of
mails coming in via IPv6. Might be a bit biased due to holiday season.
Outbound is mostly running on legacy servers without IPv6, yet :-(
Bernhard
