Vista Not Playing Well With IPv6

netbuzz writes in to note that some early adopters of Microsoft Vista are reporting problems with Vista's implementation of IPv6. An example:"'We are seeing a number of applications that are IP-based that do not like the addressing scheme of IPv6,' says one user. 'We will send a print job to an IP-based printer, and the print job becomes corrupted. We're seeing this with Window's Vista machines. When IPv6 is installed, this happens without fail. As soon as we remove IPv6, all of our printer functions return to normal.'"

Comments

While You're In There

[Mateo_LeFou]

Disable this whole "internet" thing altogether. It's been full of security problems for Windows ever since someone dreamed it up.

Re:While You're In There

[Haydre]

Thanks a lot, Al Gore.

Obligatory

[D-Cypell]

"2^32 unique addresses ought to be enough for anybody."

Re:Obligatory

[TransEurope]

The really cool thing with that is, there are so many adresses that networms cannot jump to machines via the usage of random ip adresses and you cannot scan entire subnets anymore. It's like to try fishing in an ocean with a gun. Maybe you'll never hit any crature in the big water.

Re:Obligatory

[gEvil (beta)]

"2^32 unique addresses ought to be enough for anybody."

It is enough for anybody. The problem is that it's not enough for everybody.

Also IPv4

[VincenzoRomano]

I suspect that also IPv4 is having problems.

Re:Simple solution.

[someone300]

What if you're trying to migrate to IPv6 but still have "classic" IPv4 devices on the network?

Anyway, why is this screwing anything up? My understanding on Linux/OSX is that enabling IPv6 doesn't change anything about the way IPv4 applications function, despite using a different addressing sceme. Why would this be any different for Vista? This is indicative of a layering problem...

MS' Teredo (IPv6) blog

[packetmon]

MS has a blog for this sort of thing. Sean Siler promised to answer questions and provide help on issues pertaining to this via an email list I'm on. http://blogs.technet.com/ipv6/ ... Anyhow, those parties with IPv6 issues, I bet ya a HUGE portion of them are using NAT...

I am NOT surprised, given that...

[CodeShark]

Early attempts by M$ to implement networking foundered badly until they cozied up to Novell for a short stint -- a deal an insider told me was scuttled when Novell code was found on M$ machines without a signed agreement.

It may just be my long memory seeing repetitive mistakes by the software giant, but it seems like ALL of M$ network implementations seem to suffer in the early going until they manage to buy cheat or steal for good code to solve their own implementation messes...

Thoughts anyone?

dot.Excuses ..

[rs232]

"We recognize that not all applications and drivers were up to date by launch and that there have been some compatibility issues as a result,"

"But we also know that Windows Vista is the highest-quality, most secure and most broadly supported operating system we've ever released."

Hameroff adds that Microsoft is running an IPv6 network and "to my knowledge has not experienced these types of issues"

Re:dot.Excuses ..

[QuietLagoon]

"But we also know that Windows Vista is the highest-quality, most secure and most broadly supported operating system we've ever released."

But mediocre is just not good enough anymore.

Re:Oh My God

[RandoX]

I think you responded to the wrong story, but you're amazingly on topic anyway.

So...

[Lisandro]

When IPv6 is installed, this happens without fail. As soon as we remove IPv6, all of our printer functions return to normal.

It fails without fail? ;)

Very funny, but...

[tygerstripes]

Okay, once the M$-bashing has died down, can someone have a think about the subtle implications of this? IPv6 adoption is going to be heavily stunted by this inadequacy if it isn't fixed pretty pronto - and even if it is fixed, with the other problems v6 is having, will anyone actually try trusting it? Not for some time, I suspect.

Vista adoption is going to increase - it's a sad fact, and I can't see anyone denying it. Therefore IPv6 is going to experience stunted uptake from this blow.

The one benefit I can see is that anybody who really does see worthwhile benefits in adopting IPv6 will say "bugger M$, there are hundreds of Open Source solutions that support this without issue out of the box". Maybe this could have a positive impact on OSS uptake in the long-term.

Re:Very funny, but...

[EveryNickIsTaken]

IPv6 adoption is going to be heavily stunted by this inadequacy if it isn't fixed pretty pronto IPv6 hasn't been adopted en masse for years. Why would the release of Vista suddenly give reason for people to switch? There's clearly been resistance to the switch, and Vista has absolutely nothing to do with it.

They need a better implementation

[multipartmixed]

I think they should scoop the one out of BSD UNIX.

Hell, it worked for them pretty good LAST time..

Blame Vista, or applications?

[Vellmont]

I've got Vista, an IP based printer, and even IPV6 via a tunnel broker. I've had no problems with printing or any other network applications.

So I have to wonder, is this really an issue with Vista's IPV6, is it an issue with the driver writers, or is it a minor issue with Vista's implementation of the layer that supports IP printers?

The article seems to indicate "we turned off IPV6 and then it started working". Well that tells us a little, but it's hardly time to start blaming the IPV6 stack. There's quite a few different components that could be responsible. I had problems with Firefox on Ubuntu on my network, and was able to track it down to a faulty implementation of DNS on my DSL modem only under IPV6.

Re:Simple solution.

[Nexx]

Right. Can you do me a favour and "easily remove" kernel modules from any OS please. Meanwhile, removing the IPv6 stack from Windows is trivial -- just a few clicks of the mouse, and you're there.

I'm not a Windows apologist by any stretch of the imagination, but this blatant misinformation needs to be corrected.

Re:Simple solution.

[haapi]

The entire IP stack of Vista/Longhorn has been reimplemented. IPv6 is kind of an "add-on" to the networking code in XP, but in Vista, IPv4 and IPv6 are implemented in a unified stack.

Just sayin', the behavior is going to be different, and having some bugs to shake out is really no surprise.

Re:Some kids are just social outcasts

[walt-sjc]

MS's business model DEPENDS on them not working well with others. Both the US and EU tried to get them to play nice, and both have failed for various reasons (mostly political.) This should not be news to anyone at this point. It's a fact that MS fans don't care about and detractors gnash their teeth over.

Order of magnitude more orders of magnitude

[The Monster]

"2^32 unique addresses ought to be enough for anybody."

Well, there really aren't that many unique addresses available for machines, thanks to the fact that every subnet requires two addresses for the subnet itself and the broadcast address (never did understand why those couldn't have been the same address), but the article puts it this way?

Pv6 supports a 128-bit addressing scheme, which lets it support an order-of-magnitude more devices that are directly connected to the Internet than its predecessor, IPv4.

order of magnitude

: a range of magnitude extending from some value to ten times that value

For every ~3.3 bits added to a binary number, it supports an order of magnitude more addresses. Leaving completely aside the upper half of the address (since devices are supposed to be mobile, and should therefore have a unique 64-bit host address), the added 32 bits add nearly TEN orders of magnitude, or an order of magnitude more orders of magnitude.

Note to authors: If you don't understand what words mean, don't use them.

Re:Simple solution.

[tkdtaylor]

IPv6 FAQ

Q. How do I disable IPv6 in Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008?

A. Unlike Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, IPv6 in Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 cannot be uninstalled. However, you can disable IPv6 in Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 by doing one of the following:

- In the Network Connections folder, obtain properties on all of your connections and adapters and clear the check box next to the Internet Protocol version 6 (TCP/IPv6) component in the list under This connection uses the following items.

This method disables IPv6 on your LAN interfaces and connections, but does not disable IPv6 on tunnel interfaces or the IPv6 loopback interface.

- Add the following registry value (DWORD type) set to 0xFF:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\Tcpip6\Parameters\DisabledComponents

This method disables IPv6 on all your LAN interfaces, connections, and tunnel interfaces but does not disable the IPv6 loopback interface. You must restart the computer for this registry value to take effect.

For additional information about the DisabledComponents registry value, see Configuring IPv6 with Windows Vista.

If you disable IPv6, you will not be able to use Windows Meeting Space or any application that relies on the Windows Peer-to-Peer Networking platform or the Teredo transition technology.

Re:And this is news because?

[vtcodger]

***And this is news because?***

I dunno. How about, it's news because it indicates that Microsoft's product testing is less than industrial strength?

Oh, is that all?

[AdmV0rl0n]

Vista crashes our main network switches here. We did not have a requirement for Vista, so we've banished it until we do an upgrade on firmware project, which will be done on a if/when required by the business (HP pro curve switches).

We found this on Beta and tried to talk to MS, after being passed from piller to post and jerked round (we frankly have real work to get on with) we gave up. We tested with the full release, and, well, until we have time its just barred from the business.

Re:Simple solution.

[3vi1]

Heh... Removing (proper) IPv6 on Linux requires kernel re-compile and if you try on Ubuntu to remove something like Avahi (which 99%+ of people do not need and which _can_ cause a lot of problems with DNS) then you'll see that it would "remove" almost the whole of your system through dependencies.

Or, if you're not an idiot, you just add "blacklist ipv6" to /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist.

Re: open source solutions

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree wholeheartedly with the hope that OSS solutions would gain strength from the IPv6 problems, for much of the business world, M$ is the dominant force -- so like you said -- a bad implementation is a body blow to IPv6's adoption. Too bad Redmond will never learn the Open Source lesson that more eyes find more problems in the early adoption v.9 releases, instead of after-market bad press.

seriously? I'm not trying to be mean here... but have you ever heard of Beta? as in Vista Beta? there were a couple of 'em you know... Gobs of people installed it and provided Microsoft with so much feedback they were overwhelmed initially. You don't need to be OSS to have a decent Beta program that gets your code out into the real world where it can be beat on.

As for IPv6... it's been around forever and no one cares. It hasn't been adopted because it's a hassle and very few people have been forced to. We just did a major network reorganization at our relatively small company - it took an entire weekend and the ensuing issues took about two weeks to fully clean up. Did we go IPv6? no. Why? Because we didn't have to. Because it was one more thing to screw crap up and we didn't want to deal with it. I haven't met too many admins who enjoy setting up stuff that's only going to cause them more problems when they don't even need it in the first place.

The same fanboys that are saying no one is adopting Vista because it sucks fail to understand the real reason - people aren't adopting it because it takes a helluva lot of time to test and roll out a new OS across your entire company. Why are people still running Win 98? 'cause it's better? no, it's a piece of crap compared to Win2k. They're running it because it's easier to leave it on there than it is to upgrade.

Get off the "Microsoft is ruining everything" train and realize that some things don't happen because people are lazy - not because "Microsoft is killing everything". Crappy IPv6 support when Vista has only been installed on a tiny percentage of corporate machines doesn't mean anything. By the time Vista represents a decent market share, it will have been fixed.

Re:Simple solution.

[Movi]

Umm, yes! On linux its as easy as:
rm /lib/modules/'uname -a'/kernel/build/somemodule.ko ; depmod -a on Mac OS X its
rm -r /System/Library/Extensions/YourKext.kext; rm /System/Library/Extensions.*; See?

Vista Performance Tip

[The MAZZTer]

If you have IPv6 enabled (which is the default) on a network which does not support it, all connections are noticeably slower in establishing. Disable IPv6 to get a great speed boost!

Re:Simple solution.

[Bert64]

Windows: A few clicks of the mouse to *disable* ipv6...
Linux: A single command to *remove* ipv6 (rm /lib/modules/`uname -r`/net/ipv6/ipv6.ko)

Re:Microsoft's IPv6 stack

[jacksonj04]

Microsoft's IPv6 stack is extremely secure, more so than the Linux one. It achieves this by simply not talking to anything.