Hi -

I'm glad you found the problem ... but I'm utterly baffled as to *why* it might be a problem. I've been working with more and more IPv4/IPv6 boxes (Fedora, OpenSUSE, Vista, Server 2008, Windows Embedded 7, etc, etc) and most things I've tried (including Firefox) seem pretty happy.

ANYWAY:

This link might be a viable solution for disabling ipv6:

Strictly speaking, steps 4) and 5) should be all you need.

'Hope that helps .. PSM

Thanks, I'll try as much of this as I have to, i.e., until either something works or nothing does. As to why it's necessary, I don't know anything useful about how TCP/IP protocols work, but I would suggest the following:

It may be that I have IPV6 only partially implemented in my hardware, i.e., my network card and DSL bridge. It may also be that, having gotten an address that is valid under IPV6 protocols but not IPV4, the system tries to use it (partially implemented) and fails (not fully implemented), then doesn't know how to try again with IPV4.

I've been kinda sorta hoping for an excuse to buy a new computer, but my Scottish ancestors' ghosts won't let me while my current one still functions "well enough"; this may be what pushes me over the edge.

As far as I know, IPv4 and IPv6 are device independent. Only place where there might be some coding for IPv6 could be drivers for NIC's, but I doubt even that is the case.

I don't know anything about the internals of either NIC's or DSL bridges, but certainly there is at least a potential for incompatibility, because of the different address formats. IPV4 uses four 8-bit fields, IPV6 uses six 16-bit fields; to be open to both, a device would have to have been designed with an extensible storage for those addresses. Having worked in software development, I know how often designers make the mistake of hard-coding such decisions, and I would be surprised if every NIC and bridge designer in the world had avoided it.

So, I agree that IPV4 protocols should be device-independent with regard to IPV4 devices, and likewise IPV6 with IPV6, but I have a hard time believing that IPV4 hardware will always be compatible with IPV6 protocols. I freely admit I don't know everything there is to know about it.

Sigh....

I'm not sure what your "Sigh" means. Are you saying that, because I admit I'm not familiar with the internals of networking devices, I shouldn't expect differences in data format to matter? On the contrary, I would expect, until proven otherwise, that such differences DO matter.

As I said, I've worked in software design (and, BTW, that was in telecomm, not in databases or business report generation). I know how often things like this can make systems obsolete because of changes to specifications. My NIC and bridge aren't getting periodic updates from the vendors the way our telephone switches did.

"Sigh" was for "I do not know ANYTHING about this topic, but I KNOW what is wrong with it." What kind of %$#^%@ IS that?????

Frankly, with that attitude you wouldn't even clean floors in my company. You would be fired the first time you tried to say something. In networking there are things called Layers, each one doing it's job.

Hardware layer is in charge of sending impulses via wires. I think there is at least one another layer in between TCP/IP (IPv4 and IPv6) and hardware layer, but since I never researched about it not to make a mistake, I chose to say "As far as I know" even if I most likely know more about it then 80-90% of LQ members.

andymck
have you looked over at fedoraforum?
there have been A LOT of problems with ipv6 being set and used as DEFAULT in fedora.
mostly when the isp's have mis set it up and have it not configured right
dns lookups with ipv6 for a bunch of isp's just hit a " black hole"
for example:
opendns & google works fine with ipv6 but AOL ( from what i hear ) dose not.

I didn't say I knew what was wrong with it; I suggested a possibility. Read my post again.

As for cleaning floors in your company, or even wanting to... Well, if people get fired just for expressing an opinion or mentioning a possibility, that pretty much speaks for itself, doesn't it?

I did take a look over there, but very quickly found myself lost in detail -- or, if you prefer, in over my head. I haven't had much chance to experiment with the possibilities you suggested, but I will soon; if they don't get me where I need to be, I'll try fedoraforum again.