Users are complaining of specific instances where Vista's dual IPv4/IPv6 support is causing headaches.
One user notes that ICMP errors aren't exposed to applications running on Vista so an app can’t get access to the error message, all it sees is that the network connection isn't up.
"It’s not clear at all why IPv6 isn't properly supported in this regard,” the user says.
Another says that when IPv6 is turned on, it fouls up the ability to print on IP-based printers. Read the full story.
The Microsoft Subnet blog is the official blog of the Network World's Microsoft Subnet community, managed by editor Julie Bort. Microsoft Subnet is the independent voice of Microsoft customers and is your gateway to daily Microsoft news, blogs, opinion, books, prize giveaways and more. Visit the Microsoft Subnet index page daily, and while you are there, subscribe to the Microsoft newsletter. The newsletter includes news generated by the Microsoft Subnet community as well as other Microsoft news stories published by Network World.
|
|
IPv6 is not the standard yet.........
So why run both is my question and why does vista install both automatically? I can see if the IPv4 standard was going away in a year but it is not so I recommend to remove IPv6. The problem is that most users either do not understand this concept so you are in a catch 22 since the community would have griped it was not auto installed. The current internet's infratructure is no where near the point in hardware compliance to widely support IPv6. It has been tested that running IPv4 and IPv6 can actually slow traffic down consinderably. Has anyone even created a reliable IPv6 stack yet? I dont believe so since no one cares about it yet until they have to go in that direction.
That is what you get for being an early adopter
Your desire to be on the bleeding edge, caused you this issue. While Microsoft is for sure to blame for lack of R&D, it's also your neck on the line for recommending an MS operating system in its first few months of release...
Tell me, do you think Morgan Stanely, Merill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Price Waterhouse are running VISTA yet?
Of course not... Why?
Because they have talented people there that know better...
-Joe
Caution Recommended
It should be obvious by now that any new release of any system as complicated Vista is essentially a beta and should not be considered for important business functions at least until the first service release.
Microsoft's history suggests that Vista will become stable about 18-months after introduction. Prudent IT managers will test Vista now, but schedule large-scale implementation at least a year out.
Microsoft's "embrace and extend" strategy also suggests that incompatibility will be purposely introduced into public domain standards. Kerberos could easily be the poster child here.
Corporations have enough market power to insist that purchased equipment be delivered with whatever operating system supports orderly management of their businesses. They do not, and should not, have to jeoparize their operations to comply with Redmond's marketing plan.
We are the customers -- and we will get better software when demand it.
Vista, IPv6, and printing experience
We've been running a native IPv6 network in our enterprise since early 2006 and had Vista integrated since last fall and never encountered a printing problem. We use Dell Lattitude laptops, Inspiron desktops, and Poweredge servers, along with Dell desktop lasers, and Xerox & HP color print stations in different departments. This print problem is probably being caused by a misconfiguration problem with DNS, Active Directory, or VLAN setup.
Specific Individual Problems?
Why have a two page report of users complaining about a printing application? It is clear that this will be fixed in SP1, or something...
Questionable reporting
I do not see how this article points to Windows Vista IPv6 problems. This article mainly exposes somebody's problems with IPv6 deployments. I didn't hear that they have other operating system that uses IPv6 that works well in their environment.
How about a neck to neck comparison of Vista's IPv6 and other IPv6 implementations out there?
I am disappointed by the quality of reporting in this article.
what a stupid article
sounds like this guy just dosen't know much about networking, i mean maybe he's incompetent -- did it ever occur to him that his cards, drivers, routers, switches, hubs, firewalls, etc, might also have ipv6 problems? why assume it's vista when vista seems to work fine everywhere else, tard.
Biggest problem with IPv6
Is that 90% of system administrators don't understand how it works. It's a new technology that you can't just guess how it will function in your environment. IPv6 was designed to work on your network with IPv4 seamlessly. The migration to IPv6 is not going to be a weekend switch over. People need to do a little basic research and not just freak out when something new arrives on the scene they don't understand.
Blake-
Lets' do maths!
Hands up all those who agree that IPv6 (with 2^128 or 340 billion billion billion billion addresses) supports "an order of magnitude" more devices than IPv4 (with 2^32 or 4.3 billion).
I stopped reading there :-(
Vista Working Very Well with IPv6
At Erion we have been using IPv6 for many years. This includes using Vista with IPv6 since the early betas of Vista. We have had very few problems. Non of the problems we have experienced have been related to faults in the IPv6 stack.
The article doesn't provide enough detail to be able to analyse the alledged problems with Vista and IPv6. However, I suspect that they are not really problems with Vista or IPv6. As another comment has observed the author is 24 orders-of-magnitude out in the difference between the number of IPv4 addresses and the number of IPv6 addresses. This does not instill confidence in the accuracy of the rest of the article.
Regarding the printer problems, it is extremely unlikely that these are caused by IPv6. As any IT administrator knows there are many reasons why printing can go wrong. If the corruption was caused by IPv6 then it wouldn't just affect printing, it would affect all other network services too.
The ICMP issue described in the article does not make sense. ICMPv6 is IPv6's version of ICMP. It carries out the functions that ICMP carries out in IPv4 plus many new functions only found in IPv6. Applications interface to ICMP (and IP) using the socket API. The way in which applications use the socket API is largely the same for IPv4 and IPv6. Not only this but the socket API is almost identical across all operating systems supporting IPv6, not just Vista. This means that ICMP errors are exposed to applications through the socket API. It is hard to understand what the author means here.
I hope my comments above make it clear why I suspect that the conclusions drawn in the article are wrong.
At Erion we have a lot of experience of implementing IPv6. We have found that IPv6 is reliable and stable across many platforms. Indeed, it is in widespread use around the world. We have found that problems with IPv6 are more often to do with misconfiguration of naming services, routing and transition mechanisms than anything to do with IPv6 itself. We always recommend that anyone interested in implementing IPv6 undertakes IPv6 training. For further information see http://www.ipv6training.com and http://www.ipv6consultancy.com. On the subject of IPv6 and Vista I gave a recent presentation at SambaXP on this subject. You can find that at http://www.ipv6consultancy.com/ipv6blog/?p=8.