Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day

Aftab Siddiqui aftab.siddiqui at gmail.com
Fri Jun 3 08:19:14 CDT 2011


Do they have any good reason to block proto 41?

Generic Homeusers never asked for IPv4 so they won't ask for IPv6. The time
will change many things from CPE to perspective as well. I'm not ready to
answer million calls on World IPv6 only week :)


Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui


On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Alexander Maassen <outsider at scarynet.org>wrote:

> You are missing a big point here, most NL users for example cannot use
> ipv6 tunnels because the isp's equipment doesn't allow them. When I
> called my ISP (online.nl) for example to ask about it, they first had
> something like: what the heck are you talking about. In fact, one of the
> only major isp's in the netherlands actively supporting ipv6 for
> customers is xs4all. On several other providers I had I am simply unable
> to setup a tunnel. The provider itself is the one blocking proto 41. Not
> me or my router, and surely not he.net.
> Another issue is, as long as not many homeusers are aware of ipv6 (for
> them it's just technical mumbo jumbo they don't care about, as long as
> they get the webpages shown they wanna access it's fine for them).
> So having said previous, maybe there should be a World IPv6 only week.
> That would piss off users, make them complain at their isp, and maybe
> THEN they finally wanna do some implementations.
>
> Op 3-6-2011 9:44, Owen DeLong schreef:
> >
> > On Jun 2, 2011, at 11:30 PM, Jaidev Sridhar wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 21:22, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >>> It provides a handy space to comment at the bottom.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps people here would like to let M$ know that it would be
> preferable
> >>> to provide pointers to real workable IPv6 connectivity solutions
> rather than
> >>> merely hotwire the system to temporarily bypass IPv6 in favor of IPv4.
> >>>
> >>> That's the path I chose.
> >>
> >> I guess you're all missing the point here. I've never agreed too much
> >> with M$, but what they're doing is right. IPv6 stacks are quite mature
> >> these days but IPv6 connectivity can be broken due to incorrectly
> >> implemented networks / tunnels (see:
> >> http://ripe61.ripe.net/presentations/223-World_IPv6_day.pdf).
> >>
> >
> > I'm not missing the point, just suggesting that it would be better if
> > Micr0$0ft were part of the solution instead of just hotwiring past
> > the problem.
> >
> >> For those clients there is no option other than disabling IPv6.
> >
> > No, there is the option of troubleshooting why IPv6 doesn't work for
> > them and working to correct it.
> >
> >> Hopefully the service providers & network admins get to identify and
> >> fix issues. This problem is not client OS specific. I'm all for M$
> >> bashing, but not for this reason.
> >>
> >
> > I didn't see where in the M$ propaganda it suggested calling your ISP
> > or network admin to have them help you fix the issue, so, I don't see
> > how what they are proposing has any hope of enabling this.
> >
> > Owen
> >
> >> -Jaidev
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Owen
> >>>
> >>> On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:26 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> >>>
> >
> > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2533454/
> >
> > Uh...
> >
> >                                -Bill
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> The older a man gets, the farther he had to walk to school as a boy.
>
>
>



More information about the NANOG mailing list