Connectivity to an IPv6-only site

Joe Abley jabley at
Wed Apr 28 09:49:37 CDT 2010

On 2010-04-26, at 11:07, Christopher Morrow wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen at> wrote:
>> Don't forget the hotspot vendor that returns an address of for
>> every A query if you have previously done an AAAA query for the same
>> name (and timed out).  That's a fun one.
> so... aside from the every 3 months bitching on this list (and some on
> v6ops maybe) about these sorts of things, what's happening to
> tell/educate/warn/notice the hotspot-vendors that this sort of
> practice (along with 'everything is at!') is just a bad plan?
> How can users, even more advanced users, tell a hotspot vendor in a
> meaningful way that their 'solution' is broken?

It seems like a good step in the right direction would be to determine an approach that makes sense and to document it.

Such an approach which made minimal exotic demands of client or hotspot (or back-end) systems might seem attractive to hotspot operators if it seemed likely to minimise support costs, or reduce development costs through re-use of free software components, or something.

Does such an approach exist? Is it documented?


More information about the NANOG mailing list