Re: [IPv6] [v6ops] RFC for fec0:0:0:ffff::1?

I think it is a problem that should be fixed by Microsoft. Bothering this
mailing list about it has created a cost that shouldn't have been incurred,
because site-locals have been deprecated.

If the OP had lodged a ticket with Microsoft then the cost would have been
paid where it was caused. However instead it was asked about on 2 IETF
mailing lists.

On Thu, 1 Dec 2022, 06:52 David Farmer, <farmer=40umn.edu@dmarc.ietf.org>
wrote:

> Furthermore, based on RFC 6724 Address Selection, all other known DNS
> server addresses will be tried before these. They are the last resort, and
> therefore, they probably won't hurt anything, not that they are likely to
> help much, either.
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 1:29 PM Ed Horley <ed@hexabuild.io> wrote:
>
>> From an email exchange with Dave Thaler (Microsoft) back in 2015 when I
>> asked about this:
>>
>> "I’m not in any hurry to see it removed (under the “if it ain’t broke
>> don’t fix it” principle).
>> Even the RFC section you cite says:
>>    Existing implementations and deployments MAY continue to use this
>>    prefix. "
>>
>> So I don't see Microsoft removing this from the OS unless there is a
>> specific existing security exploit or concern that is demonstrated to be
>> exploitable.
>> Also, the draft you found has Dave listed as a co-author. Perhaps that
>> helps close the loop?
>>
>> NOTE - I'm not speaking for Dave or Microsoft - just trying to provide
>> some context.
>>
>> Out of my list of IPv6 asks for the Windows OS, this one isn't high on my
>> personal list to get "fixed". I feel it is a cosmetic issue more than
>> anything else at this point.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 8:36 AM Nick Buraglio <buraglio@es.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I have also heard through the grapevine that those pre-dated the
>>> deprecation of site-local and that there is "no plan to remove them". This
>>> is anecdotal, I have never seen reference to it, just side conversations I
>>> have had over the years.
>>>
>>>
>>> ----
>>> nb
>>>
>>> ᐧ
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 9:53 AM Dale W. Carder <dwcarder@es.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thus spake Klaus Frank (klaus.frank@posteo.de) on Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at
>>>> 04:08:07AM +0000:
>>>> > does anyone know what RFC is responsible for the IPv6 DNS server
>>>> > configuration on all windows clients defaulting to fec0:0:0:ffff::1,
>>>> I was
>>>> > unable to find any. Nor is it listed in the iana special-purpose
>>>> address
>>>> > registry.
>>>> >
>>>> > I however found a draft (draft-ietf-ipv6-0dns-discovery-07) from
>>>> 2002, but
>>>> > no actual RFC.
>>>>
>>>> That draft matches my memory.  Recall that was well before rfc5006
>>>> which was quite late to the party to address a glaring oversight
>>>> as the ra vs dhcpv6 holy wars raged on.
>>>>
>>>> Having well-known resolver addresses be site-local (and anycasted,
>>>> despite what the draft claims on that issue) could have been a
>>>> logical design pattern for local networks.
>>>>
>>>> But more generally, no two people could ever be expected to agree on
>>>> a common definition of what a "site" is.  rfc3879 documents the pain
>>>> very well.  (see a generalized incarnation of this issue in rfc8799).
>>>>
>>>> Dale
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>>> ipv6@ietf.org
>>>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>> ipv6@ietf.org
>>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ed Horley
>> ed@hexabuild.io | (925) 876-6604
>> Advancing Cloud, IoT, and Security with IPv6
>> https://hexabuild.io
>> And check out the IPv6 Buzz Podcast at
>> https://packetpushers.net/series/ipv6-buzz/
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>>
>
>
> --
> ===============================================
> David Farmer               Email:farmer@umn.edu
> Networking & Telecommunication Services
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota
> 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
> ===============================================
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>