Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A

(I dropped all the CCs - the list grew long.)

Dave Crocker writes:
> ned+ietf-smtp <at> mrochek.com wrote:
>> Not exactly. The issue isn't what to do in general, it's what to do 
>> in this document. I have no problem with someone starting an MX . 
>> effort or a require
>>  MX effort and seeing if they can get consensus on it. (If the former 
>>  gets started I plan to support it, the latter I'll oppose.) It just 
>>  doesn't belong
>>  in 2821bis.
>
> +1

I would +1 if I thought 2821bis could ignore this, but unfortunately I 
think that 2821 has to choose: Consciously extend the A rule to cover 
AAAA, or consciously not extend it.

> As with Ned, I suspect we are going to be long-retired, and possibly 
> long-dead, before v4 use reduces sufficiently to be ignored.

I suspect none of us will be retired by the time IPv6-only hosts/devices 
appear.

Arnt