Are IPv6 and IPv4 Address Spaces Completely Disjoint?

Answers to your questions:

1. No, just because device supports IPv6 it doesn't mean it support IPv4<>IPv6 transition mechanisms - they're not part of IPv6 protocol specification. So, it may support translating traffic from IPv4 to IPv6 and vice versa but it needs to support mechansism like NAT64.

2. Nodes communicate with the protocol of their choice, depending on the higher layer calls. If your browser points to a name, and the name resolves to IPv4 only, IPv4 will be called in to service it. If it resolves to both IPv6 and IPv4, IPv6 should take precedence, but a lot was done in recent years to make both calls simultaneusly and check which one is faster.

3. You need to have node that is dual-stacked, so supports both IPv4 and IPv6 or have support of translating between protocols somewhere along the way. If your router supports it - fine, if your ISP supports it - it's also fine.

4. You should see IPv6 as it should take precedence. If not, your IPv6 connectivity, at least to this specific site is broken. If you can use only IPv6 (you are not dual stacked) you can only reach around 4-5k prefixes around the internet, which is very small percent (out of 500k for IPv4). Normally, hosts are dual-stacked however, so you should be fine - using IPv6 for IPv6-enabled services, and IPv4 for all the rest.

5. That depends on the type of the service your ISP provides. You may have private IPv4 assigned to your internet interface, and it gets translated somewhere at the ISP edge. You may have public IPv4.

6. For SSL/TLS you're using names, not IPs directly. You should be fine.

7. Yes, while there are still works to provide NAT services for IPv6, general idea about IPv6 was to stop doing NAT, and provide global connectivity. It means that with IPv6 assignment, your entire internal network may be directly reachable from other parts of the internet, if you're using IPv6 addresses from the Global Unicast space. For IPv6 you can use other types, like for example Link Local only, which would provide internal connectivity, but block ability to access from remote locations. Generally, you should filter the traffic at the edge of your network if you don't want the internet to access your resources/nodes.

8. Unfortunately, I don't understand the question. Cloud services are usually OK with IPv6, Amazon at least is.

9. Start from here: http://test-ipv6.com/

Key to answering your question is making a very important distinction: Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) and Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) are completely separate protocols.

Now, that said, I think this paragraph of RFC2710 explains the "duplicate" transmission:

When a node starts listening to a multicast address on an interface, it should immediately transmit an unsolicited Report for that address on that interface, in case it is the first listener on the link. To cover the possibility of the initial Report being lost or damaged, it is recommended that it be repeated once or twice after short delays [Unsolicited Report Interval]. (A simple way to accomplish this is to send the initial Report and then act as if a Multicast-Address- Specific Query was received for that address, and set a timer appropriately).

RFC3810 supersedes RFC2710, but still agrees with the above. (Thanks to @logion for pointing this out!). I'm leaving the quote from RFC2710 in place because I think it lends itself to be more easily understood without additional context. In particular, the part of RFC 3810 that confirms the behavior is here:

To cover the possibility of the State Change Report being missed by one or more multicast routers, [Robustness Variable] - 1 retransmissions are scheduled, through a Retransmission Timer, at intervals chosen at random from the range (0, [Unsolicited Report Interval]).

Which leaves us to having to discuss DAD, and specifically, why DAD is completely independent from MLD.

Before an IPv6 node intends to use an IP address, it must first check if the address in use. This check is done by sending a Neighbor Solicitation (NS) message to the Solicited Node Multicast (SNM) address of the target IP address. The SNM is a multicast address that anyone who would own the target IP address would be listening to.

The Destination IP of the Neighbor Solicitation packet is FF02::1:FFyy:yyyy (where yy:yyyy is the last 24 bits of the target IPv6 address). And the Source IP is ::, the "unspecified" IPv6 address. It must use the Unspecified address, to prevent using the target address itself, since it might trigger a duplicate. At this time, the initial host doesn't know whether the address is unique or not.

If another host on the network already owns the target IPv6 address, they would receive the Neighbor Solicitation message described above, and would respond by sending a Neighbor Advertisement (NA) indicating the IP is already in use.

Here is the key: Since the initial NS was sent from the unspecified address (::), the other host which owns the target IPv6 address will have no way of knowing who to send the responding NA to. As a result, it must send the result to FF02::1, the "All Nodes" Multicast address.

This is how DAD can still perform, if you are blocking all MLD messages. Because joining the All Nodes multicast group doesn't require a MLD transaction, all switches that understand IPv6 will automatically forward the "All Nodes" destined frames to all ports in the respective VLAN. DAD, does not require listening on a particular multicast group to receive notification of an address already in use.

If no one claims the IPv6 address, DAD then determines the IPv6 address is unique, and allows the initiating Host to start using the address itself. This is what prompts the joining of the correlating SNM group for the target address with some MLD messages sent to the MLD multicast address of FF02::16. (and according to the RFC above, this message is intended to be sent twice).

The windows capture seems to use the Source IP before sending out the Neighbor Advertisement that claims the IP on the network which occurs at the end of DAD. I can't help but feel this is jumping the gun a little, since the NA is what marks the end of the DAD process, and the confirmation that the address is indeed unique on the network.

The linux capture has MLD messages sent before the DAD NS, but these are sent from the unspecified address, so can't cause an IP conflict. If any MLD Sniffing switches on the network only need to correlate a MAC address to a joined MLD group, then this would work just fine (Disclaimer: I am not intimately familiar with the intricacies of MLD sniffing, and can not claim whether this is exactly how it works)

The BSD capture doesn't include the NA, but the two MLD messages occur .15 seconds after the DAD NS is sent out. Which to me, seems a bit too short, since the DAD process calls for a wait of just shy of a second before considering an address unique (according to the captures and testing I've done).