[146564] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] IPv6 and IPSEC
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lucky Green)
Wed Sep 4 13:16:19 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 09:14:36 +0200
From: Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
To: Taral <taralx@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZkp18P_ZH3f5wwYS3m2vTDJmgU8iZA8f6R7XEYyXFPf1PLuw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>,
Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>,
Cryptography List <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 10:27:14PM -0700, Taral wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Lucky Green <shamrock@cypherpunks.to> wrote:
> > In its cryptic explanation of the bounces, Google makes one thing clear: whatever
> > reason they have to bounce the email, that reason only applies to IPv6. I believe
> > this is wrong.
>
> It only applies to IPv6 because applying it to IPv4 would break too
> many people. Not enough people use IPv6, so they are insisting on good
> hygiene there.
>
> Why do you not have PTR records for your IPv6 address? The problem is
> that, not Google's policy.
I *have* PTR records for my IPv6 addresses. What I don't know is which PTR records will make Gmail happy. SPF PTR records clearly do not do the trick.
--Lucky
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
