Windows 7 IPv6 fail

[Brian E Carpenter]

> But Teredo was used, but not through the tunnel. It took the wrong way out
> (directly on my ethernet).

Do you mean that it generated IPv6 native packets, rather than
proto-41 IPv4 packets? That would certainly be weird. If it
happened to me, I'd write direct to Dave Thaler <dthaler at microsoft.com>.

Regards
   Brian

On 2010-10-30 05:13, Martin Millnert wrote:
> On Fri, October 29, 2010 12:57 pm, Sean Siler wrote:
>> Here is my translation:
>>
>> You were trying to reach an IPv6 DST (resolvers) with no valid native v6
>> SRC, therefore Teredo was used to connect instead. Additionally, the RAs
>> (I assume) were still present and configured your host for those v6
>> resolvers. Since they were still present, so were the resolvers.
>>
>> Sean
>>
> Hi Sean,
> 
> thanks for your reply.
> 
> See the attached file for more detail (if you didn't before).
> Specifically, the addresses configured from the prefix carried in the RA
> (2a02:9a0:4:104::/64) were deprecated, which you note.
> 
> But Teredo was used, but not through the tunnel. It took the wrong way out
> (directly on my ethernet).
> 
> It really does seem to me that this situation can be avoided somehow. :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Martin
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ipv6-ops-bounces+sean.siler=microsoft.com at lists.cluenet.de
>> [mailto:ipv6-ops-bounces+sean.siler=microsoft.com at lists.cluenet.de] On
>> Behalf Of Martin Millnert
>> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 5:39 AM
>> To: ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de
>> Subject: Windows 7 IPv6 fail
>>
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I'm running Windows 7 on my home box dual-booted, so I had the luck to
>> find a quite severe error (IMHO) in its IPv6 stack today:
>>    When (all?) IPv6 addresses on its wired interface becomes deprecated
>> for whatever reason, it will still send out packets to the (wired)
>> on-link router with Teredo source address.  (uhm, yeah, we were missing
>> BCP38-style filters on the v6 router)
>>
>> My Windows 7 network configuration is entirely vanilla, everything
>> automatic from the network.
>>
>> For a better description on what I found, please see the attached
>> text-file.
>>
>>
>> So this is incorrect behaviour, for various reasons. In my case, our v6
>> resolvers that we hand out via stateless DHCPv6 (resolvers only), are
>> being used for domain name look-up with a Teredo source address.
>> Reasonably, this is unsuccessful, since the source address isn't within
>> the ISP allocated space, and the resolvers won't answer that.
>>
>> Most web browsing worked fine, since there are 3 IPv4 resolvers to
>> fall-back to.  But I stumbled on one name which the system failed entirely
>> to look-up: sr6.se. I'm not sure how this came about; the v4 resolvers
>> would answer this name, yet the system wouldn't give me an answer.
>> ping/browsing to sr6.se failed.
>>
>> A myriad of things could be 'fixed' / looked in to, IMO. For example:
>>  - Why query resolvers configured on the wired interface using an address
>> configured on another interface?
>>  - Why send packets on the wired interface with a source address taken
>> from another interface, in this case Teredo?
>>  - Why keep/use the v6 resolvers on the wired interface when addresses
>> becomes deprecated, and wired IPv6 essentially drops? At least when
>> resolvers aren't using link-local addresses?
>>
>>
>> MS clue greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Martin Millnert <martin at millnert.se>
>>
>>
>>
> 
>