ayourtch> The choice for having a NAT64 was to provide a more gentle ayourtch> headstart, since a NAT64 has a strictly bigger set of ayourtch> apps/sites that do work. And, we felt that we should tread ayourtch> lightly - maximize the potential of actually using the v6only ayourtch> as a "business as usual" SSID. ayourtch> The "true IPv6-only" was a DNS server address away: e.g. you ayourtch> could temporarily hardcode the 2001:4860:4860::8888 for the ayourtch> tests, instead of the DNS64 local resolver address. I think that going for the most usable user experience (even if we have to do transition technologies for now) is best. However, I like the idea of having an IPv6 DNS server that isn't doing DNS64 that you can hard code if you want the true v6-only, no NAT experience.