<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt">On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Brian E Carpenter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com" target="_blank">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div>Even without that, DNS64/NAT64 in the host was always considered a possibility, especially if you want DNSSEC to work. But as RFC 6147 says "The main drawback of this mode is its deployability, since it requires changes in the end hosts."</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Turns out it's easier to change the end hosts than to accept application breakage.</div></div></div>
</div>