Home
Vendor
Project
  Phase I
Press
  Phase I
About
You Are Using IPv4 To Access This Site
Your IP Address is: 38.103.63.16

URGENT NAv6TF Chair Request : RE: [moonv6] RE: Vista DNS behavior - Re: [nav6tf] IPv6 news - we ekly summary

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Attachment view

From: Bound, Jim (Jim.Bound@hp.com)
Date: 09/18/06


moonv6 post from "Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com> All Members,

I want the rhetoric regarding Vista to stop NOW and refences to any testing of any specific vendor too. All vendors are affected by this technology discussion. I encourage continuing this discussion but I must now ask as Chair to stop now referencing Microsoft Vista it is totally of out line at this point. It was fine initially and Chris did a nice thing responding. I could do this with every vendors implementation on this list, and it is unfair for such NAv6TF discussion for Vista. Please keep the discussion going but reference technology and architecture and needs of IPv6 and get off of identifying vendors.

I assume my mail here is crystal clear? If you don't get it send me private mail but I am traveling so cannot respond as usual but I will.

We do NOT DISCUSS VENDORS or any specific IMPLEMENTATION in the NAv6TF other a minimal discussion for support and understanding the market implementation of IPv6. Unless of course the implementation is public domain code base.

Thank You for your support and understanding, /jim
Chair NAv6TF www.nav6tf.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
> [mailto:owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com] On Behalf Of Bill Cerveny
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 12:21 AM
> To: Christopher L. Morrow; McGuerty, Jay S.
> Cc: Chris Mitchell; Durand, Alain; Dave Green; Joya Subudhi;
> nav6tf@ipv6forum.com; moonv6@iol.unh.edu
> Subject: RE: [moonv6] RE: Vista DNS behavior - Re: [nav6tf]
> IPv6 news - we ekly summary
>
> I'm personally less concerned about the additional DNS
> request as I am about what assumptions Vista is making about
> its connectivity (although it is a good thing to clarify that
> DNS servers won't melt down ;-) ). In my opinion, Vista
> shouldn't be asking for AAAA records when it has no
> expectation it will reach the host via IPv6 or ask for an A
> record when it has no expectation it will reach the host via
> IPv4. From what Chris Mitchell at Microsoft has said and Dave
> Green has verified (thanks Chris and Dave!), this appears to
> be the case, except perhaps for some behavior associated with Teredo.
>
> To take this a step further, what happens when a Vista box is
> connected to an isolated IPv6 network, although it is
> connected to the global IPv4 Internet, and can retrieve AAAA
> records on DNS for hosts beyond it's isolated IPv6 network
> (but reachable via IPv4)? For example if I entered
> "www.kame.net" in IE or Firefox from the isolated IPv6
> network with global IPv4 connectivity and got a AAAA record
> for www.kame.net. With Windows XP, I could experience a
> noticeable period where the operating system is figuring out
> that it can't reach www.kame.net via IPv6 and finally decides
> to reach it via IPv4.
>
> This scenario will certainly happen as large enterprise IPv6
> roll-outs occur and for whatever reason, there are intended
> or unintended pockets of isolated IPv6 connectivity within
> the enterprise. Whenever this behavior occurred with Windows
> XP, the rational administrator response was to disable IPv6
> on the computer (and the problem did go away). For
> IPv6 to be successful on Vista, the operating system must
> recover quickly enough that the user doesn't notice any
> discernible delay. The user or network administrator
> shouldn't assume that a fix to a network problem is to "turn
> off" IPv6 on Vista.
>
> Bill
>
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 02:05:16 +0000 (GMT), "Christopher L. Morrow"
> <christopher.morrow@verizonbusiness.com> said:
> > On Sun, 17 Sep 2006, McGuerty, Jay S. wrote:
> >
> > > moonv6 post from "McGuerty, Jay S."
> <JAY.S.MCGUERTY@saic.com> Folks,
> > > In our testing of VISTA we do see continual period
> attempts by VISTA to
> > > find the default Teredo server (and others). As of
> VISTA build 5436 we
> > > simply shut
> > > down the Teredo interface and that stops it. We do see
> the AAAA record
> >
> > I assume your test host wasn't in a domain? (default
> behaviour was to
> > NOT do terado if there was a domain association)
> >
> > > lookup
> > > first (I personally think it is a great idea) like many
> of the "sky
> > > is falling IPv6 alarms"
> > > it seems to me this much to do about nothing. We
> super sized our DNS
> > > server
> > > knowing that more of our dual stack environment was going
> to depend
> > > on DNS resolution anyway.
> >
> > you super sizing your DNS server means something completely
> different
> > to Alain or me... :( There is a concern, and a valid one I believe,
> > though one we'll have to get used it seems.
> >
> > >
> > > v/r
> > >
> > > Jay
> > >
> > > _____
> > >
> > > From: owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu on behalf of Chris Mitchell
> > > Sent: Sat 9/16/2006 10:58 AM
> > > To: Durand, Alain; green@commandinformation.com;
> bill@wjcerveny.com;
> > > joya@subudhi.com; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com; moonv6@iol.unh.edu
> > > Subject: RE: [moonv6] RE: Vista DNS behavior - Re: [nav6tf] IPv6
> > > news - weekly summary
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > moonv6 post from Chris Mitchell <cmitch@windows.microsoft.com>
> > > Alain,
> > >
> > > The current design in Vista is that Teredo addresses will not be
> > > registered in DNS and will not cause AAAA record look ups
> unless an
> > > application is actively using IPv6 via the Teredo tunnel.
> In other
> > > words, "out-of-the-box" Vista systems that are not actively using
> > > Teredo will NOT cause AAAA record look ups.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Chris Mitchell
> > > Group Program Manager
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Durand, Alain [mailto:Alain_Durand@cable.comcast.com
> > > <mailto:Alain_Durand@cable.comcast.com> ]
> > > Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 3:00 AM
> > > To: Chris Mitchell; green@commandinformation.com;
> > > bill@wjcerveny.com; joya@subudhi.com; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com;
> > > moonv6@iol.unh.edu
> > > Subject: Re: [moonv6] RE: Vista DNS behavior - Re: [nav6tf] IPv6
> > > news - weekly summary
> > >
> > > Could someone clarify how this reconcile with teredo
> automatic IPv6
> > > connectivity establishment?
> > >
> > > - Alain.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu <owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu>
> > > To: Dave Green <green@commandinformation.com>; Bill Cerveny
> > > <bill@wjcerveny.com>; Joya Subudhi <joya@subudhi.com>;
> > > nav6tf@ipv6forum.com <nav6tf@ipv6forum.com>; moonv6@iol.unh.edu
> > > <moonv6@iol.unh.edu>
> > > Sent: Thu Sep 14 18:55:43 2006
> > > Subject: [moonv6] RE: Vista DNS behavior - Re: [nav6tf]
> IPv6 news -
> > > weekly summary
> > >
> > > moonv6 post from Chris Mitchell <cmitch@windows.microsoft.com>
> > > Thanks for testing and confirming this Dave. This is
> exactly what
> > > we specified as the expected behavior. If anyone has
> feedback that
> > > this isn't right please let us know.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Chris Mitchell
> > > Group Program Manager
> > > Windows Networking and Devices
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
> [mailto:owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
> > > <mailto:owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com> ] On Behalf Of Dave Green
> > > Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:44 PM
> > > To: Bill Cerveny; Joya Subudhi; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com;
> > > moonv6@iol.unh.edu
> > > Subject: RE: Vista DNS behavior - Re: [nav6tf] IPv6 news - weekly
> > > summary
> > >
> > > Bill, et all:
> > >
> > > We've been aware of this behavior on XP, but had not
> checked for it
> > > in Vista. Since we run a fully dual-stacked environment this
> > > behavior wasn't causing us a problem. However, if it was still
> > > present it could cause long lags on IPv4-only environments so I
> > > tested this today on the Vista Pre-RC1 Build 5536 we are pilot
> > > testing for production. To test this, I used an
> IPv6-capable packet
> > > sniffer to capture and decode all DNS queries with Vista
> on our main
> > > dual stacked environment, and on the v4-only and IPv6-only
> > > environments we run for application testing. This is what I found:
> > >
> > > -On a native IPv6-dual-stacked connection Vista Generated 2 DNS
> > > requests for each record and I was able to reach our
> IPv6-only content sites.
> > >
> > > -In our IPv4-only test environment, I only saw requests for A
> > > records and requests to our IPv6 only content sites failed.
> > >
> > > -In our IPv6-only environment, I only saw requests for
> AAAA records
> > > and our IPv6 content sites worked fine.
> > >
> > > I believe that this behavior is exactly what we wanted
> Vista to do.
> > >
> > >
> > > David Green | VP of R&D | Command Information
> > > 13655 Dulles Technology Drive, Suite 100 | Herndon, VA 20171
> > > O: 703.561.5937 | M: 703.899.9663 | green@commandinformation.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
> [mailto:owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
> > > <mailto:owner-nav6tf@ipv6forum.com> ] On Behalf Of Bill Cerveny
> > > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 6:53 PM
> > > To: Joya Subudhi; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com; moonv6@iol.unh.edu
> > > Subject: Vista DNS behavior - Re: [nav6tf] IPv6 news - weekly
> > > summary
> > >
> > > Does anyone have any experience with Vista beta?
> > >
> > > The two articles below about Vista and DNS melting the Internet
> > > suggest that Vista will always make two DNS requests; one
> for the A
> > > record and the other for the AAAA record. While I might
> expect this
> > > to occur if Vista thinks it is connected to an operational IPv6
> > > network, will Vista still do this if it doesn't have a globally
> > > routable IPv6 address or any other indication that it is
> connected to an IPv6-enabled network?
> > >
> > > Bill Cerveny
> > >
> > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:38:21 -0400, "Joya Subudhi"
> > > <joya@subudhi.com>
> > > said:
> > > > IPv6 news - weekly summary
> > > > Main News:
> > > > Plan for cyberspace available in near future
> > > > http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2237
> > > <http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2237>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Other News:
> > > > IPv6: The future is now
> > > > http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2236
> > > <http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2236>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Security:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Corporate and Products:
> > > > Vista's role in Imminent Net Death overstated
> > > > http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2240
> > > <http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2240>
> > > >
> > > > Command Information Appoints Greg Sloan to Lead
> Commercial Sector
> > > > Business Development
> > > > http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2239
> > > <http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2239>
> > > >
> > > > Will Vista stall Net traffic?
> > > > http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2238
> > > <http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2238>
> > > >
> > > > Using the Network Diagnostic Tester
> > > > http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2235
> > > <http://www.ipv6tf.org/news/newsroom.php?id=2235>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 12/01/06 EST