In message <823d435a-eff7-48eb-b99f-b0e36c232...@googlegroups.com>, addie write s: > So we can assume that this is working as designed?! > However, it would be very interesting to know why this policy does not filter > AAAA Records when there is no A record. From my point of view this policy is > useless. > If we want to prevent clients from receiving any AAAA Records for every case, > there should not be any exception. Are there any critical side effects that > I disregard?
In reality this shouldn't be needed at all. This is a workaround for a broken IPv6 stack (network/OS/application). Your network layer should be telling the applications that IPv6 destinations are unreachable and they should be moving onto the next address. If there is no A record then there is no fallback possible so there is no need for the workaround. What harm is there in returning the AAAA? All you get is a reminder to fix your network / application / OS if a failure takes a long time to be reported. Mark > _______________________________________________ > Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe > from this list > > bind-users mailing list > bind-users@lists.isc.org > https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
