[153345] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Our first inbound email via IPv6 (was spam!)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Raymond Dijkxhoorn)
Tue Jun 5 11:23:24 2012
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 16:46:08 +0200 (CEST)
From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn <raymond@prolocation.net>
To: Seth Mos <seth.mos@dds.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4FCE1AE3.5030605@dds.nl>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
--391200998-104227122-1338907568=:13070
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
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 well.
> I always wondered why (ISPs) never started with rolling out IPv6 email
> servers first, the fallback from 6 to 4 is transparent and invisible to the
> end user at a delay of a maximum of 30 seconds.
>
> 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 we
> can do better then 0.21.
>
> IMHO Asking users if they want IPv6 is the wrong way round, you enable IPv6
> and then allow for opt-out in the service portal.
>
> That's basically what the Romanian ISP did. They have not gone bankrupt
> either, so maybe it's not all as bad as we think.
I think its pretty simple. Many do this, but protection is little. Abuse
also but that may change. To get to the point. There are no widely
available IPv6 blacklists. Like you are used to have on IPv4. Might be a
legitimate reason ...
Lets see how Comcast does.
Bye,
Raymond.
--391200998-104227122-1338907568=:13070--
