From IPv4 to IPv6… How far have we come? How far to go? Paul Wilson NRO/APNIC.
-
Upload
letitia-webb -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of From IPv4 to IPv6… How far have we come? How far to go? Paul Wilson NRO/APNIC.
From IPv4 to IPv6…From IPv4 to IPv6…
How far have we come?How far have we come?How far to go?How far to go?
Paul WilsonPaul Wilson
NRO/APNICNRO/APNIC
OverviewOverview
• Why IPv6?
• How much IPv4 is left?
• How much IPv6 is being used?
• Do we have a problem?
• What next?
Why IPv6?Why IPv6?
• Just one reason: More addresses– Billions… Trillions… Gazillions…?– Suffice to say, “Enough for a long time”
• Benefits of ample address supply…– Simpler, faster, cheaper network– No more NAT: “Restore Internet transparency”– Better for everyone
• Other benefits of IPv6…– Security, QoS, autoconfiguration, mobility, etc?– All are “built-in” to IPv6– But they are not new: all available in IPv4
How much IPv4 is left?How much IPv4 is left?
Unused42
16%
RIPENCC26
10%
LACNIC6
2%
ARIN27
11%
Historical91
36%
Special use36
14%
AFRINIC2
1%
APNIC26
10%
Coexistence of IPv4 and IPv6 (“Dual Stack”)
The Transition Plan…The Transition Plan…
Size of the Internet
Time
IPv6 Deployment
IPv4 Deployment
How much IPv6 so far?How much IPv6 so far?
* Routing table statistics since 2003, from: http://www.potaroo.net* Routing table statistics since 2003, from: http://www.potaroo.net
IPv4 blocks
240,000240,000
120,000120,000
IPv6 blocks
900900
400400
IPv6 ASNs
800800
300300
IPv4 ASNs
26,00026,000
14,00014,000
Why not IPv6? (so far)Why not IPv6? (so far)
• Internet is now engineered for IPv4+NAT– Many vendors and (de facto) standards– Applications written for NAT– Services built around NAT
• Who bears the cost of NAT?– End users pay for their “home gateways/routers”– Application and service developers do the hard work– ISP costs are externalised
• And there is no business case to change this
• It all seems to work– And nobody is demanding anything different…
End UsersEnd UsersBusinessBusiness
GovernmentGovernment
The Users
Providers
Vendors
We want X!
They want X!
They got it!
You got it!
A question of demand…A question of demand…
What if it takes longer?What if it takes longer?
• IPv4 will live on– No effect on existing infrastructure– New infrastructure requires addresses
• IPv4 address management– Recovery of unused address space– Incentives for higher efficiency of utilisation– Transfers under approved policy framework
• NAT will live on – With all its limitations and costs
• A question of costs…– Cost of IPv4 vs cost of IPv6 deployment– Business will tend to decide
The Blame Game…The Blame Game…
• Industry – “Market failure”?– Markets are oblivious to long-term risks when
short term priorities override
• IETF – “Technical community failure”?– Standards are mostly well developed– But they need “running code”
• Governments – “Countries have failed”?– Individual countries can and do influence
their own industries and populace
In conclusion…In conclusion…
• No one has “failed”– IPv6 deployment is happening
• All players need to work and act together– Technical standards, implementation by vendors,
deployment by operators, use by users
• There is no “flag date” for transition– All stakeholders are free to make decisions and
demands in accord with their own interests– As elements are in place transition will progress
• Best advice: sooner rather than later– Start the planning process now
From IPv4 to IPv6… From IPv4 to IPv6…
NRO perspectivesNRO perspectives
Paul WilsonPaul Wilson
APNIC APNIC
IPv6 – Global allocations by IPv6 – Global allocations by RIRRIR
AFRINIC
37
2%
RIPENCC
737
45%
ARIN
438
27%
APNIC
337
21%
LACNIC
87
5%
Unit: IPv6 prefix
EuropeEurope
Asia PacificAsia Pacific
NorthNorthAmericaAmericaLatinLatin
AmericaAmericaAfricaAfrica
IPv4 – RIR activitiesIPv4 – RIR activities
• Research and publication– Statistics and other reporting– Outreach and educational activities– Information will support informed outcomes
• IPv4 management policies– Policy discussions, panels, roundtables– Informed debates– Global policies regarding IANA allocations– Regional open policy processes
• Voluntary restraint– RIR agreement on IANA allocation process
IPv6 – RIR activitiesIPv6 – RIR activities
• Promotion, Training and education– Support for events including IPv6 Summits– Special sessions during policy meetings– Workshops, eLearning and online information– Case-studies, factsheets, operator experiences
• IPv6 management policies– Well established since 1999– Regular review - Open policy processes
• No barriers– Streamlined application processes– Fees waived or cross-subsidised
RIR StatementsRIR Statements
• AfriNIC board: “resolves that efforts [supporting] IPv6 be intensified, and instructs the staff to take appropriate action”
• APNIC community: “focus our efforts towards comprehensive deployment of IPv6 in the Asia Pacific region.”
• ARIN board: “advises the Internet community that migration to IPv6 numbering resources is necessary”
• LACNIC CEO: “recommend preparing regional networks as soon as possible for using IPv6”
• RIPE-NCC community: “recognise that the widespread deployment of IPv6 will be essential to sustain future growth of the Internet.”