Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Mar 27, 2014, at 3:24 AM, Franck Martin <fmartin () linkedin com> wrote:

> On Mar 26, 2014, at 11:26 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 26, 2014, at 8:12 PM, Robert Drake <rdrake () direcpath com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 3/26/2014 10:16 PM, Franck Martin wrote:
> > > > and user@2001:db8::1.25 with user@192.0.2.1:25. Who had the good idea to use : for IPv6 addresses while this is 
> > > > the separator for the port in IPv4? A few MTA are confused by it.
> > > At the network level the IPv6 address is just a big number.  No confusion there.  At the plaintext level the naked 
> > > IPv6 address should be wrapped in square brackets.
> > >
> > > From:
> > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.2.2
> >
> > Two errors, actually… As an RFC-821 address, it should be user@[IP]:port in both cases (user@[192.0.2.1]:25 and 
> > user@[2001:db8::1]:25).
> indeed, but MTAs are know to accept any kind of non RFC compliant emails and trying to make some sense out of it… :P 
> see http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7103 which tries to address some of it in a more deterministic way.

Sure, but that doesn’t mean we should be sending random garbage deliberately.

Owen