It's not that, exactly. It's that if you turn off IPV6, you're pretty much no longer in a supported configuration, for some of their technologies at least.
And, interestingly, you can turn off Teredo, and might well wish to do so, without turning off IPv6. It's a transitional technology, and MSFT will be phasing it out at some point, along with ISATAP and probably NAT64. Kurt On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr <[email protected]> wrote: > Riiight... leave unnecessary services running, because something unrelated > might break. I understand the concern, but I'd still focus minimizing > problem vectors over something that may or may not happen. If it happens, > then deal with that on a case-by-case basis. I've not encountered any > issues regarding disabling IP6 across the board - but, honestly, its crap > like that that brings us together here, so I'm not pretending weird things > can't and don't happen. > > I'm inclined to think that Microsoft wants IP6 running for all the stats > they can gather via the Teredo connections. > > -- > Espi > > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Erm - not so much... >> >> >> http://blogs.technet.com/b/netro/archive/2010/11/24/arguments-against-disabling-ipv6.aspx >> and >> >> http://blogs.technet.com/b/ipv6/archive/2007/11/08/disabling-ipv6-doesn-t-help.aspx >> and perhaps >> >> http://thommck.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/offline-files-versus-vpn-a-k-a-the-case-of-the-missing-work-online-button/ >> >> Kurt >> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > :-) >> > >> > I just gotta throw-in here that if you don't use it - it should be >> > disabled >> > anyway. >> > >> > -- >> > Espi >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> <gasp> >> >> >> >> Disable IPv6? >> >> >> >> Heresy... >> >> >> >> :) >> >> >> >> Kurt >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Michael B. Smith >> >> <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > I found it easier to disable IPv6 core networking, both input rule >> >> > and >> >> > output rule. >> >> > >> >> > Ymmv. >> >> > >> >> > Sent from my Windows Phone >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > From: Adam Farage >> >> > Sent: 9/19/2013 10:55 PM >> >> >> >> > >> >> > To: New Exchange Admin List ([email protected]) >> >> > Subject: [Exchange] RE: Google rejecting email >> >> > >> >> > I actually had someone post this on Reddit (/r/exchangeserver is a >> >> > subreddit >> >> > forum thing I created about 3 months ago) who experienced the same >> >> > issues, >> >> > and how he resolved it: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > http://www.reddit.com/r/exchangeserver/comments/1kw7cc/gmail_rejecting_mail_from_exchange_because_sender/ >> >> > >> >> > The TL;DR (too long/dont read) version is that he had to run this: >> >> > >> >> > " >> >> > >> >> > I opened a Command Prompt as Administrator and did: >> >> > >> >> > netsh >> >> > interface >> >> > 6to4 >> >> > set state disabled >> >> > .. >> >> > teredo >> >> > set state disabled >> >> > >> >> > " >> >> > >> >> > Check it out though. Friendly crowd, a few MCSM's and MSFT folk and a >> >> > Dell >> >> > guy here and there. >> >> > >> >> > We need more MVP's on there (cough cough) >> >> > ________________________________________ >> >> > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> >> >> > on >> >> > behalf of John Cook <[email protected]> >> >> > Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 3:35 PM >> >> > To: New Exchange Admin List ([email protected]) >> >> > Subject: [Exchange] Google rejecting email >> >> > >> >> > So I have a user that is sending out mail to a number of Gmail >> >> > accounts >> >> > but >> >> > one of them bounces with this error >> >> > The sender does not meet basic ipv6 sending guidelines of >> >> > authentication >> >> > and >> >> > rdns resolution of sending ip >> >> > This has not happened to anyone else and I can email to my Gmail >> >> > account >> >> > fine. The recommended fix is to create a reg key and disable IPv6 >> >> > which >> >> > I am >> >> > reticent to do. Exchange 2010 SP3 on 2008R2, I do not have a static >> >> > IPv6 >> >> > address on the server nor have I ever noted one in our MX records. >> >> > Anyone >> >> > else ever run across this? >> >> > >> >> > TIA >> >> > >> >> > John W. Cook >> >> > Network Operations Manager >> >> > Partnership For Strong Families >> >> > 5950 NW 1st Place >> >> > Gainesville, Fl 32607 >> >> > Office (352)-244-1610 >> >> > Cell (352) 215-6944 >> >> > MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, Security+ VSP4, VTSP4 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ________________________________ >> >> > >> >> > CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained >> >> > or >> >> > attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or >> >> > entity to >> >> > which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information >> >> > (PHI), >> >> > confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, >> >> > dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance >> >> > upon >> >> > this >> >> > information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient >> >> > without >> >> > the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This >> >> > information >> >> > may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and >> >> > Accountability >> >> > Act >> >> > of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or >> >> > unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in >> >> > civil >> >> > and/or criminal penalties. >> >> > Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you >> >> > really >> >> > need to. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >
