|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 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: <fwhjbolfea8jqx51t044ddkq.1437032040124@email.android.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:39:55 -0700 To: Seth Mos <seth.mos@dds.nl> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org > On Jul 16, 2015, at 00:34 , Seth Mos <seth.mos@dds.nl> wrote: >=20 > So, if i get this right. The problem is not quite as bad to fix. >=20 > It just needs a dnscache/dnsproxy process bound to the ipv4 localhost = that uses the ipv6 dns server. >=20 > Basically what dnsmasq does. Biggest problem is that it wouldn't = follow autoconfigure and thus require manual intervention. That is a no = go for dynamic networks of any sort. It=E2=80=99s a fairly safe bet that anything that involves a mobile OS = is most likely a dynamic network of some sort. Owen >=20 > Cheers > -------- Oorspronkelijk bericht -------- > Van: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> > Datum: 16-07-2015 08:51 (GMT+01:00) > Aan: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Onderwerp: Re: Remember "Internet-In-A-Box"? >=20 > > 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. >=20 > Actually, no. >=20 > 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). >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > >> 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. >=20 > Nope=E2=80=A6 XP=E2=80=99s resolver is utterly and completely = incapable of transmitting > an IPv6 DNS request. >=20 > You _HAVE_ to have an IPv4 resolver reachable to the box or forego any > idea of using DNS. >=20 > Owen >=20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |