Hi
I pointed this issue to the DNS group at the RIPE NCC and their response
is below.
regards
Denis
Business Analyst
RIPE NCC Database Group
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: The IPv6 Transitional Preference Problem]
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:53:53 +0200
From: Anand Buddhdev <anandb(_at_)ripe(_dot_)net>
To: Denis <denis(_at_)ripe(_dot_)net>
CC:
References: <4C1A311A(_dot_)3040801(_at_)ripe(_dot_)net>
It might be an issue with earlier versions of OS X, but on my Snow
Leopard (10.6.3) system, it's not an issue any more. Here's an example:
I type 'www.apnic.net' in my browser, and 2 DNS queries go out. I get
back a response with the A record first, and next I get back the
response with the AAAA record. However, my system does not ignore the
second response. It does make use of the AAAA record, and my browser
connects to APNIC's site over IPv6.
16:40:34.638265 IP 193.0.2.23.51663 > 193.0.19.6.53: 21148+ A?
www.apnic.net. (31)
16:40:34.641143 IP 193.0.19.6.53 > 193.0.2.23.51663: 21148 1/9/12 A
202.12.29.230 (491)
16:40:34.648670 IP 193.0.2.23.51652 > 193.0.19.6.53: 6434+ AAAA?
www.apnic.net. (31)
16:40:34.650519 IP 193.0.19.6.53 > 193.0.2.23.51652: 6434 1/9/12 AAAA
2001:dc0:2001:11::211 (503)
On 17/06/2010 16:28, Denis wrote:
Hi
Does this affect us in any way with all the MAC machines we use
here?
cheers denis
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: The IPv6
Transitional Preference Problem Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:05:09
+0100 From: Sabahattin Gucukoglu <mail(_at_)sabahattin-gucukoglu(_dot_)com>
Reply-To: Sabahattin Gucukoglu
<mail-dated-1279375511(_dot_)e5984a(_at_)sabahattin-gucukoglu(_dot_)com> To:
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org References:
<150FA845-8F32-436D-962C-33A0BAEFE1BA(_at_)sabahattin-gucukoglu(_dot_)com>
<4C1A1561(_dot_)8010200(_at_)gulbrandsen(_dot_)priv(_dot_)no>
On 17 Jun 2010, at 13:30, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
On 06/17/2010 01:38 PM, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
Just in case someone here wants to take sides, have a look at
this thread on the IPv6 discussion list at Apple:
http://lists.apple.com/archives/ipv6-dev/2010/Jun/msg00000.html
(the thread actually goes back earlier than that, but I can't be
bothered going looking for it because I can't stand that awful
PiperMail interface)
What I've never understood is why (almost) everyone tries addresses
in sequence instead of in parallel.
Even applications that routinely open two or more concurrent
connections to the server first try IPvX, then wait many seconds,
then try IPvY. Why not try both in parallel and use whatever
address answers first?
It's Apple we're talking about here. Have a look at this for some
nasty surprises:
http://www.fix6.net/archives/2010/03/06/the-strange-behavior-of-apples-mdnsresponder/
Admittedly this is just for DNS, but I think it illustrates the
general problem, you can't win, you can't break even, and you can't
even quit the game with this one.
Cheers, Sabahattin _______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf