From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon May 20 11:54:35 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from damon.com (damon.com [199.98.84.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1561337B404 for ; Mon, 20 May 2002 11:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from damon.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by damon.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g4KIsTH4003611; Mon, 20 May 2002 13:54:29 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dap@damon.com) Received: (from dap@localhost) by damon.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g4KIsSLX003610; Mon, 20 May 2002 13:54:28 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dap) Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:54:28 -0500 From: Damon Anton Permezel To: Bernd Walter Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 4.6-* sendmail misfeatures Message-ID: <20020520135428.H962@damon.com> References: <20020520105154.E962@damon.com> <20020520184010.GD70468@cicely5.cicely.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20020520184010.GD70468@cicely5.cicely.de>; from ticso@cicely5.cicely.de on Mon, May 20, 2002 at 08:40:11PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 08:40:11PM +0200, Bernd Walter wrote: > On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 10:51:54AM -0500, Damon Anton Permezel wrote: > > So, in violation of the networking "be liberal in what you accept and > > conservative in what you produce", sendmail in it's new form will have many > > perplexed sysadmins spending lots of time tracking down these mysterious > > failures. > > > > I suggest that the version of sendmail configs shipped with FreeBSD > > should default to having WorkAroundBrokenAAAA set by default. > > That would break v6 support and only works for sendmail just to handle > broken nameservers. > If someone has running a broken nameserver - that's their problem. > If you don't want programms to ask for v6 records then build a kernel > without v6 support at all. Ok. Explain to me how this breaks v6 support? Also, as far as I know, I *have* built a system with no v6 support. I have been running systems for years now with ipv6 interfaces, and I do not believe I have ever exchanged an IPv6 packet with anyone, so I nolonger include v6. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message