Vista RC2 - Unable to resolve Internet Names in IE but NSlookup works!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Martin
  • Start date Start date
M

Martin

Just installed Vista RC2 - install went without a hitch, all drivers seem to
be detected including NIC but......(-;

Try to browse using IE and "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage"
So I test the basics - can i ping the gateway by IP- Yes
Can I ping google.com - No - ok, so DNS issue but...
I can do a nslookup, uses my ISP's DNS server and I put in google.com and it
resolves it!!! arghh...
I go back into IE and type in 72.14.207.99 and it comes back with Googles
homepage so no connectivity issue...

Now I'm confused - nslookup works, I can also ping by name other PC's on
the LAN (which is using netbios name resolution i guess) but i can't ping by
name, telnet by name or use other apps which need to do a DNS lookup..

My only theory at the moment is that maybe its a IP6 issue - its turned on
by default inVista RC2 but I've unticked it in net connections (can't seem
to uninstall it) and still no go...

Any ideas or similar Vista experiences would be welcome...

cheers / martin
 
Martin said:
Just installed Vista RC2 - install went without a hitch, all drivers seem to
be detected including NIC but......(-;

Try to browse using IE and "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage"
So I test the basics - can i ping the gateway by IP- Yes
Can I ping google.com - No - ok, so DNS issue but...
I can do a nslookup, uses my ISP's DNS server and I put in google.com and it
resolves it!!! arghh...
I go back into IE and type in 72.14.207.99 and it comes back with Googles
homepage so no connectivity issue...

Now I'm confused - nslookup works, I can also ping by name other PC's on
the LAN (which is using netbios name resolution i guess) but i can't ping by
name, telnet by name or use other apps which need to do a DNS lookup..

My only theory at the moment is that maybe its a IP6 issue - its turned on
by default inVista RC2 but I've unticked it in net connections (can't seem
to uninstall it) and still no go...

Any ideas or similar Vista experiences would be welcome...

cheers / martin
Click to expand...
Some progress - If i use ping -4 google.com it works!! So I'm now sure its a
IP6 issue - the question is now how do I remove (or disable) Ip6 from Vista?
 
Martin said:
Some progress - If i use ping -4 google.com it works!! So I'm now
sure its a IP6 issue - the question is now how do I remove (or
disable) Ip6 from Vista?
Click to expand...
google.com has no ip6 address, so should never be affected.

I'm guessing it's one or more of these:

(a) you have an ipv6 router on your network that is broadcasting global
addresses but not routing correctly.
(b) Your DHCP server is giving an ipv6 address for the DNS server but
there is no DNS server at that location.
(c) Your DNS server is broken and returning AAAA records where none exist.

The first two can be checked just by using ipconfig /all. Use nslookup
for the third

nslookup
set type=aaaa
google.com
Click to expand...

You can just unbind ipv6 from the interface to switch it off, but I
strongly recommend fixing the network problem - these things always come
back to bite you in the ass later.

Tony
 
Tony Hoyle said:
google.com has no ip6 address, so should never be affected.

I'm guessing it's one or more of these:

(a) you have an ipv6 router on your network that is broadcasting global
addresses but not routing correctly.
(b) Your DHCP server is giving an ipv6 address for the DNS server but
there is no DNS server at that location.
(c) Your DNS server is broken and returning AAAA records where none exist.

The first two can be checked just by using ipconfig /all. Use nslookup
for the third

nslookup

You can just unbind ipv6 from the interface to switch it off, but I
strongly recommend fixing the network problem - these things always come
back to bite you in the ass later.

Tony
Click to expand...

thanks for the response Tony - no ipv6 router, checked the DNS server
address and its correct and no aaaa records returned from either my dns
server or a couple of others I tried..

I was only using google as an example - its the same for any address - if i
use ping -4 (to force IPv4) it works but otherwise it fails so I'm assuming
its using IP6, can't resolve it and isn't trying IP4 - Maybe I could just
change the dns resolution order....You wouldn;'t know how I do that would
you?? (-;
 
I am certainly no expert in this area, but did you ever use IE7 in XP?
There might be a situation with the security or some other setting in IE or
the Windows Firewall causing the problem. You might think about downloading
the Firefox beta 2.0 or something and see if it can get to the sites. I
seem to remember a problem when I started using IE7 something like you are
having, but I don't remember what changed.

Otherwise, try changing some of the IE settings or the firewall settings.
It would seem strange to me if you were having an IP6 problem that everyone
else wouldn't have it also.

Clark
 
What DNS server is showing in ipconfig /all? Is it the same one that worked
with nslookup?
 
Kerry Brown said:
What DNS server is showing in ipconfig /all? Is it the same one that worked
with nslookup?
Click to expand...

Yes, and I have tried several other ISP DNS servers - same result -
interestingly I have wiped RC2 and installed Vista Beta 2 and don't have the
same issue...

I'm tempted to try an upgrade of beta2 to RC2 (if it lets me) and see if the
issue comes back..

Also, using RC2 I did untick IP6 and check the binding order and IP4 is at
the top and it still appears to use IP6 first when I ping names!! (this is
proven by the fact that ping google.com doesn't work but ping -4 google.com
does work)

Also again (-: this issue doesn't just happen in IE so thanks for the advice
to use firefox but if it effects ping and telnet as well then it isn't a
browser issue.
 
Martin said:
Yes, and I have tried several other ISP DNS servers - same result -
interestingly I have wiped RC2 and installed Vista Beta 2 and don't
have the same issue...

I'm tempted to try an upgrade of beta2 to RC2 (if it lets me) and see
if the issue comes back..

Also, using RC2 I did untick IP6 and check the binding order and IP4
is at the top and it still appears to use IP6 first when I ping
names!! (this is proven by the fact that ping google.com doesn't work
but ping -4 google.com does work)

Also again (-: this issue doesn't just happen in IE so thanks for the
advice to use firefox but if it effects ping and telnet as well then
it isn't a browser issue.
Click to expand...

It does sound strange. If you try the upgrade let us know the results.
 
Kerry Brown said:
It does sound strange. If you try the upgrade let us know the results.
Click to expand...
Hi,

Tried to to an upgrade from within beta2 but it said upgrade was disabled -
only supports upgrade from Vista(!) or XP SP2 so I have a fully working
Beta2 with Cisco Vpn, Office 2K7, NOD32, VNC, Firefox but no way of going to
RC2 without wiping and starting again and maybe having exactly the same
issue.....decisions...decisions (-;

The only other thing that has come to mind since I started this process is I
use an unusual internal subnet - Due to some historical reasons (corp vpn
issues) I'm using 169.254.1.x as my internal IP address range - yes thats
right I'm using the APIPA range instead of 192.168 or 172.16 or 10. - this
has never been an issue so far..... (-;

thanks everyone for their comments.
 
Martin said:
Hi,

Tried to to an upgrade from within beta2 but it said upgrade was
disabled - only supports upgrade from Vista(!) or XP SP2 so I have a
fully working Beta2 with Cisco Vpn, Office 2K7, NOD32, VNC, Firefox
but no way of going to RC2 without wiping and starting again and
maybe having exactly the same issue.....decisions...decisions (-;

The only other thing that has come to mind since I started this
process is I use an unusual internal subnet - Due to some historical
reasons (corp vpn issues) I'm using 169.254.1.x as my internal IP
address range - yes thats right I'm using the APIPA range instead of
192.168 or 172.16 or 10. - this has never been an issue so far.....
(-;

thanks everyone for their comments.
Click to expand...

There is another thread in the
microsoft.public.windows.vista.networking_sharing group with the subject
"Does anyone from Microsoft read this group?" where someone has a very
similar problem. They are also using the APIPA range. You may want to reload
RC2 and report the bug. You could try reporting it from beta 2 but I don't
know if it will get noticed that way.
 
There is another thread in the
microsoft.public.windows.vista.networking_sharing group with the subject
"Does anyone from Microsoft read this group?" where someone has a very
similar problem. They are also using the APIPA range. You may want to reload
RC2 and report the bug. You could try reporting it from beta 2 but I don't
know if it will get noticed that way.
Click to expand...

Kerry!!!! You are da man!! You put it together when you mentioned the other
thread!! I reinstalled Visata RC2 from scratch, changed my local subnet to
172.16.x and its all working!!! I'm amazed that the TCP/IP stack (or maybe
DNS) treats APIPA addresses in this way - the logic must be that an APIPA IP
is only used for emergencies if DHCP is not available from a server or
router so you would only want local connectivity not WAN...Kinda like using
a non-routable protocol like netBEUI.

So the next question is do I change the subnet back to confirm the
issue....hmmm...time is not on my side here ... would like to actually try
this OS out a bit now its Internet connected... Anybody else want to try???

cheers and thanks MVP's (-;
 
Martin said:
Kerry!!!! You are da man!! You put it together when you mentioned the
other thread!! I reinstalled Visata RC2 from scratch, changed my
local subnet to 172.16.x and its all working!!! I'm amazed that the
TCP/IP stack (or maybe DNS) treats APIPA addresses in this way - the
logic must be that an APIPA IP is only used for emergencies if DHCP
is not available from a server or router so you would only want local
connectivity not WAN...Kinda like using a non-routable protocol like
netBEUI.

So the next question is do I change the subnet back to confirm the
issue....hmmm...time is not on my side here ... would like to
actually try this OS out a bit now its Internet connected... Anybody
else want to try???

cheers and thanks MVP's (-;
Click to expand...

You should report it as a bug. I can't see any reason you shouldn't use an
APIPA address if you want.
 
Back
Top