<div dir="auto"><div>Yeah, fighting with the application developers doesn't appear to be a good option, nor is applying any tunneling mechanisms such as 464xlat.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">One of the main goals is to establish an ipv6 only network that just works. An ipv6 only network doesn't need A records. I'll give a link to my patch or repo when it is ready. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thanks for the feedback though. I appreciate it. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As far as the application developer, it is nearly as frustrating as Android dhcpv6 support. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Kim<br><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, May 1, 2018, 6:30 PM Mark Andrews <<a href="mailto:marka@isc.org">marka@isc.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Which is really because they don’t understand that happy eyeballs is<br>
just a tweak to RFC 1123 multi-homed server support. It isn’t IPv6<br>
transition support. It’s just the IPv6 results in a LOT MORE MULTI-HOMED<br>
sites especially when DNS64 is in the mix.<br>
<br>
Failure to honour address preferences returned from getaddrinfo should<br>
be a firing squad offence. Application developers DO NOT KNOW how the<br>
network the application is connected to is configured.<br>
<br>
You could move to using DS-Lite, MAP-E, MAP-T, 464XLAT etc. to provide<br>
IPv4 as a service instead of DNS64 + NAT64 (I presume you actually meant<br>
DNS64 + NAT64 when you said NAT64). Your local network can still be<br>
IPv6-only. MAP-T and 464XLAT can still use your NAT64 box.<br>
<br>
DS-Lite and MAP-E are different ways to automatically configure<br>
IPv4 in IPv6 tunnels.<br>
<br>
MAP-T and 464XLAT are just different ways to configure the CLAT<br>
which translates IPv4 packets to IPv6 packets before sending them<br>
to the NAT64 for reverse translation.<br>
<br>
nodejs should work fine with all of DS-Lite, MAP-E, MAP-T and 464XLAT<br>
as they allow A records (IPv4 literals) to work for connections.<br>
<br>
Mark<br>
<br>
> On 2 May 2018, at 9:47 am, Kim Ebert <<a href="mailto:kim@developmint.work" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kim@developmint.work</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Developer had refused to apply happy eyeballs. <br>
> <br>
> See <a href="https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/6307" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/6307</a><br>
> <br>
> I can't fix the application, so I need to fix my network.<br>
> <br>
> Kim<br>
> <br>
> On Tue, May 1, 2018, 5:44 PM Mark Andrews <<a href="mailto:marka@isc.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marka@isc.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> If you have a IPv6 only network then there should be no default IPv4 route so<br>
> the connect(), sendto() etc. should all fail immediately with network unreachable.<br>
> If they don’t then complain to your OS developer. If the application does not<br>
> detect these failures complain to the application developer.<br>
> <br>
> Applications should fail over immediately if there is not a covering route.<br>
> <br>
> If you have a local default IPv4 route, the router should be returning network<br>
> unreachable and the OS should be processing them. This should cause network<br>
> errors to be delivered to the application.<br>
> <br>
> The application should also be implementing happy eyeballs where you fail<br>
> over to other addresses with sub second delays when there are multiple<br>
> addresses to try. There is nothing wrong with having multiple connection<br>
> attempts happening in parallel.<br>
> <br>
> Mucking with DNS responses is only covering up application defects. Filtering<br>
> A records also breaks DNS64 for applications that are using DNSSEC as they<br>
> need to see the A records as well as the AAAA responses.<br>
> <br>
> Notify the application vendor they they have a denial-of-service bug.<br>
> <br>
> Mark<br>
> <br>
> > On 2 May 2018, at 9:00 am, Kim Ebert <<a href="mailto:kim@developmint.work" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kim@developmint.work</a>> wrote:<br>
> > <br>
> > Hi All,<br>
> > <br>
> > I recently came across an issue where the user program preferred IPv4 over IPv6. This is a problem because I've created a network that is IPv6 only. I'm currently using NAT64 to provide access to services that don't have any IPv6 access.<br>
> > <br>
> > Now this particular program could work if the DNS records didn't provide A records. I would rather do everything I can as an admin to make the network just work instead of waiting for all of the end user programs to be fixed, so I started working on filter-a functionality to filter out A responses. Currently implementation status is that it sort of works, which is further than I expected to get in 2 days.<br>
> > <br>
> > I wonder if anyone in the community is interested in me sharing the work, and if I should go to the effort to publish the effort?<br>
> > <br>
> > If anyone is curious, the offending program is nodejs and npm.<br>
> > <br>
> > Thanks,<br>
> > <br>
> > Kim<br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > Please visit <a href="https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users</a> to unsubscribe from this list<br>
> > <br>
> > bind-users mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:bind-users@lists.isc.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">bind-users@lists.isc.org</a><br>
> > <a href="https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users</a><br>
> <br>
> -- <br>
> Mark Andrews, ISC<br>
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia<br>
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: <a href="mailto:marka@isc.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marka@isc.org</a><br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On May 1, 2018 5:44 PM, "Mark Andrews" <<a href="mailto:marka@isc.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marka@isc.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> If you have a IPv6 only network then there should be no default IPv4 route so<br>
> the connect(), sendto() etc. should all fail immediately with network unreachable.<br>
> If they don’t then complain to your OS developer. If the application does not<br>
> detect these failures complain to the application developer.<br>
> <br>
> Applications should fail over immediately if there is not a covering route.<br>
> <br>
> If you have a local default IPv4 route, the router should be returning network<br>
> unreachable and the OS should be processing them. This should cause network<br>
> errors to be delivered to the application.<br>
> <br>
> The application should also be implementing happy eyeballs where you fail<br>
> over to other addresses with sub second delays when there are multiple<br>
> addresses to try. There is nothing wrong with having multiple connection<br>
> attempts happening in parallel.<br>
> <br>
> Mucking with DNS responses is only covering up application defects. Filtering<br>
> A records also breaks DNS64 for applications that are using DNSSEC as they<br>
> need to see the A records as well as the AAAA responses.<br>
> <br>
> Notify the application vendor they they have a denial-of-service bug.<br>
> <br>
> Mark<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> > On 2 May 2018, at 9:00 am, Kim Ebert <<a href="mailto:kim@developmint.work" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kim@developmint.work</a>> wrote:<br>
> > <br>
> > Hi All,<br>
> > <br>
> > I recently came across an issue where the user program preferred IPv4 over IPv6. This is a problem because I've created a network that is IPv6 only. I'm currently using NAT64 to provide access to services that don't have any IPv6 access.<br>
> > <br>
> > Now this particular program could work if the DNS records didn't provide A records. I would rather do everything I can as an admin to make the network just work instead of waiting for all of the end user programs to be fixed, so I started working on filter-a functionality to filter out A responses. Currently implementation status is that it sort of works, which is further than I expected to get in 2 days.<br>
> > <br>
> > I wonder if anyone in the community is interested in me sharing the work, and if I should go to the effort to publish the effort?<br>
> > <br>
> > If anyone is curious, the offending program is nodejs and npm.<br>
> > <br>
> > Thanks,<br>
> > <br>
> > Kim<br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > Please visit <a href="https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users</a> to unsubscribe from this list<br>
> > <br>
> > bind-users mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:bind-users@lists.isc.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">bind-users@lists.isc.org</a><br>
> > <a href="https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users</a><br>
> <br>
> <br>
> -- <br>
> Mark Andrews, ISC<br>
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia<br>
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: <a href="mailto:marka@isc.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marka@isc.org</a><br>
> <br>
> <br>
<br>
-- <br>
Mark Andrews, ISC<br>
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia<br>
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: <a href="mailto:marka@isc.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marka@isc.org</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>