Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:07:31 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Damon Anton Permezel <dap@damon.com> Cc: Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net>, freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Gripeing about the change to IPv6 Message-ID: <3CE95783.68373D22@mindspring.com> References: <20020520105154.E962@damon.com> <20020520191546.D349@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20020520122558.F962@damon.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Damon Anton Permezel wrote: > It is not a matter of a timeout. > The "A ?" come back fine. > `dig' and 'nslookup' both resolve the name -- there is no timeout. > `ping' works, for example. > > Because sendmail "correctly" (aka: anal-retentively) adheres to a > protocol, it flags this as an error, and doesn't attempt to try the > "A ?" query. This means that the outgoing mail sits in the queue forever. This is a DNS problem, not a sendmail problem. If you want to make allowances for broken nameservers reporting "SERVFAIL" for IPv6 requests because their operators have some political agenda against the deployment of IPv6, then I suggest you run a transcoding proxy DNS server. Such a server would attempt the IPv6 lookup as an IPv4 lookup, and, if the latter was successful, reinterpret the SERVFAIL, and respond to the client with the correct response to the IPv6 lookup, instead of the incorrect one, without forwarding the "SERVFAIL" for the IPv6 request from the client. Doing this works around the problem for *every* IPv6 aware program, not just "sendmail" (e.g. someone recently had a similar problem with "mozilla"). Hacking up every program to dike out proper IPv6 support is definitely *not* the answer. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3CE95783.68373D22>