|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <20150716023244.80481333596E@rock.dv.isc.org> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 23:51:37 -0700 To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org > On Jul 15, 2015, at 19:32 , Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote: >=20 >=20 > In message <55A682E6.1050607@matthew.at>, Matthew Kaufman writes: >> On 7/14/2015 11:22 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: >>>=20 >>> Yet I can take a Windows XP box. Tell it to enable IPv6 and it >>> just works. Everything that a node needed existed when Windows XP >>> was released. The last 15 years has been waiting for ISP's and CPE >>> vendors to deliver IPv6 as a product. This is not to say that every >>> vendor deployed all the parts of the protocol properly but they >>> existed. >>=20 >> This is only true for dual-stacked networks. I just tried to set up = an=20 >> IPv6-only WiFi network at my house recently, and it was a total fail = due=20 >> to non-implementation of relatively new standards... starting with = the=20 >> fact that my Juniper SRX doesn't run a load new enough to include = RDNSS=20 >> information in RAs, and some of the devices I wanted to test with=20 >> (Android tablets) won't do DHCPv6. >=20 > You can blame the religious zealots that insisted that everything > DHCP does has to also be done via RA's. This means that everyone > has to implement everything twice. Something Google should have > realised when they releases Android. Actually, no. In this case, the problem isn=E2=80=99t the things RA does, but the = things his implementation of RA doesn=E2=80=99t do (RDNSS). Without RDNSS, android would still be brain-damaged and unable to figure out what an IPv6 nameserver is. The only way it would be able to talk to the IPv6 internet was if it got nameservers from DHCP4. At least with RDNSS, a thin lightweight client can get nameservers on = IPv6. At least with RDNSS, a network administrator that doesn=E2=80=99t want = to have to do DHCPv6 doesn=E2=80=99t have to in most cases. >> The XP box is in an even worse situation if you try to run it on a=20 >> v6-only network. >=20 > Which is fixable with a third party DHCPv6 client / manual = configuration > of the nameservers. Nope=E2=80=A6 XP=E2=80=99s resolver is utterly and completely incapable = of transmitting an IPv6 DNS request. You _HAVE_ to have an IPv4 resolver reachable to the box or forego any idea of using DNS. Owen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |