Home
Vendor
Project
  Phase I
Press
  Phase I
About
You Are Using IPv4 To Access This Site
Your IP Address is: 38.103.63.61

RE: 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


John,  

Thats funny :----). THis is all pretty simple and here is the rule. To note and ask does this vendors implementation support A, B, or C is fine. THe vendor will jump in and ask the question. When the discussion gets to does this vendor meet the architecture opinions of the NAv6TF is where the line gets crossed even if it is friendly. We have to limit our discussion of any vendor implementation or we run two risks. The most important one is anti-trust values and that form of issue. THe second is any depth or views really to any vendor that supports NAv6TF like Microsoft, Cisco, Juniper , SIs, Providers or others should not be a theme of a mail thread continuously on the list. The risk is we cross a line either in favor or against said vendor. Thus I sent this mail for both IPv6 Forum base tenet reasons and for legal reasons for the TF.  

Your second point on the topic of technology I stated clearly should be continued for deployment being DNS, DHCP, Management, Transition etc and that conversation should continue and good actually result in the NAv6TF forming a deployment view from the mail which we can then take a position upon as a body,  

Thus if you could start a new thread on that topic and continue the technology analysis of IPv6 analysis that would be great but keep what vendors do what out of the loop.  

I hope this helps you and all with the issue.  

Thanks
/jim 

	From: John L Lee [mailto:john@internetassociatesllc.com] 
	Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 3:28 PM
	To: Bound, Jim
	Cc: Bill Cerveny; Christopher L. Morrow; McGuerty, Jay S.; Chris
Mitchell; Durand, Alain; Dave Green; Joya Subudhi; nav6tf@ipv6forum.com; moonv6@iol.unh.edu

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

        The Boss has given us orders so -         

        If there is continued interest in this thread, is there someone who can collect e-mail addresses and then this can continue off list. It would also appear that in the future when issues of interest come up that should not continue on this list that we have a known method to take them off list.         

        My interest is in the protocol details between client and server implementation in both mixed v4/v6 networks and then v6 only for DNS and DHCP. The behavior issues are also useful.         

        John Lee         

        Bound, Jim wrote:         

                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> <mailto: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>

<mailto: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> <mailto: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>
<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> <mailto:owner-moonv6@io.iol.unh.edu> 
				To: Dave Green

<green@commandinformation.com> <mailto:green@commandinformation.com> ; Bill Cerveny

                                <bill@wjcerveny.com>
<mailto:bill@wjcerveny.com> ; Joya Subudhi <joya@subudhi.com> <mailto:joya@subudhi.com> ;

                                nav6tf@ipv6forum.com
<nav6tf@ipv6forum.com> <mailto:nav6tf@ipv6forum.com> ; moonv6@iol.unh.edu

                                <moonv6@iol.unh.edu>
<mailto: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> <mailto: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>
<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>
<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>
<mailto: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> <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> <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> <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> <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> <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> <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