nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP
From: Tony Finch <dot () dotat at>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 13:52:27 +0000
John Levine <johnl () iecc com> wrote:
There are also some odd things in the spec. For example, according to RFC 5321 this is not a syntactically valid e-mail address: mailbox@[IPv6:2001:12:34:56::78:ab:cd]
You aren't allowed to use :: to abbreviate one zero hexadectet according to RFC 5952. http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=2467 Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <dot () dotat at> http://dotat.at/ Malin: East 5 or 6. Moderate or rough, occasionally very rough in northwest. Showers. Good, occasionally moderate.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Blake Hudson (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Barry Shein (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Blake Hudson (Mar 28)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Clay Fiske (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Blake Hudson (Mar 28)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Dave Crocker (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Lamar Owen (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP James R Cutler (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP John Levine (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Tony Finch (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Enno Rey (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP John R. Levine (Mar 27)
- Re: IPv6 isn't SMTP Robert Drake (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 address literals probably aren't SMTP either John Levine (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 address literals probably aren't SMTP either Robert Drake (Mar 26)
- Re: IPv6 address literals probably aren't SMTP either John R. Levine (Mar 26)