IPv6 impact study - ARESU · PDF fileIPv6 impact study JTR 2008 – 2 juin 2008 ......

IPv6 impact study JTR 2008 – 2 juin 2008 - Loria, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy

IPv6 impact study

JTR 2008 Loria, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy

2 juin 2008

Fabrice Clari, Zaltana [email protected]


European Policy actions

  2002   Communication from the Commission "Next Generation Internet – priorities for

action in migrating to the new Internet protocol IPv6“

  2002-now   Projects support (€90 millions)

  2006   Public consultation: “Hurdle and triggers deployment of IPv6 technology”   Meeting with the Defense market stakeholders   Meeting with the Media and Telecom stakeholders   International conference on “Convergence: new opportunities to accelerate the

IPv6 momentum” – Vienna   IPv6 global summit – Cannes   Launch of a study: “Impact of IPv6 over vertical sectors”

This presentation does not represent an

official presentation from the European Commission


Methodology

  Sector-based approach (15)

  Desk research

  45+ interviews conducted

  Case studies

  Expert group involved (IPv6 and sectors

experts)

  Web surveys (ISP and users)

Methodology development

Data collection Analysis Study

report Dissemination

  Central Government   Education   Defence   Media/Entertainment: Gaming   Media/Entertainment: Television   Consumer   Tourism   Service operators   Automotive transportation   Collective Transportation   Health   Buildings   Public safety   Finance   Logistics


Special note

Considerations shown in this presentation initially target Europe …

...but can be easily extended to any other region !!!


Extend of the problem (1/2)

  World population

  Internet usage

  Internet services

  Available IPv4 addresses

So.... ? IPv6 should

already be widely used... but is not!

Multiple issues are driving the non

-adoption of IPv6...


Extend of the problem (2/2)

  IPv4: 3.7 billion public addresses

  Wordwide population is 6.5 billion persons

  Mainly developing countries will be impacted

  Europe should not bother: RIPNCC has enough IPv4 addresses to address long-term European needs

NO Addresses pool managed at a

global level

IPv4 exhaustion is going to be a worldwide issue


IPv4 addresses depletion

 Until May 2007, diverging estimates between experts for IPv4 address pool shortfall

  Agreement since 8 May:

Exhaustion of IANA and RIR IPv4 addresses pools forecasted for

2010-2011


 Need for a larger address space

 NAT is a workaround which works but:   NAT breaks the end to end model   Increase network management and software dev. costs

 Allocation mechanism   not clearly understood (e.g. there is no pre-allocation)

Problem drivers (1/2)


Problem drivers (2/2)

 Lack of understanding   Bad wording for IPv6 integration

  Most of universities do not teach IPv6 as they should   New staff is required for IPv6 integration

  Everybody is waiting for the IPv6 killer app   No identified business model

  « Never touch a working system » golden rule

 Expertise required   Integrating IPv6 is not a simple power-on   But requires careful planning and staff expertise

 Does not solve all the issues of the today Internet


IPv6 impact on vertical sectors

  15 sectors analyzed   Qualitative and quantitative description of each sector   Sector specificities   IT applications in the sector   Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) to

integrate IPv6   Adoption scenario

  Central Government   Education   Defense   Media/Entertainment: Gaming   Media/Entertainment: Television   Consumer   Tourism   Service operators

  Automotive transportation   Collective Transportation   Health   Buildings   Public safety   Finance   Logistics


Sector: phone and media (1/2) - Overview

  Market situation: gigantesque revenues!   IP phone market: $300 million (2005) with high growth   Gaming global market: $21 billion (2003) with high growth in

mobile and MMORPG   IPTV subscribers in Europe : 21 million TV (2010) $5.1 billion

  Market trends: new business paradigms   Convergence of devices

 Handle device: mobile phone + console + PDA + MP3 player Smart phones

  Living room devices: Audio-video system + console + Internet router + TV decoder + phone setop boxes

  Content distribution: anywhere, anytime!   Content creation: from everyone to anyone!


Sector: phone and media (2/2) - SWOT

  Strengths   big market   IPv6 more efficient than IPv4   gaming and multimedia (IPTV, Joost-like) applications

  Weaknesses   no killer application   Important application: VoIP - mainly uses IPv4   Intense competition: IPv6 is considered as a cost because of the short

term ROI obligations

  Opportunities   P2P games   creativity enhanced by IPv6

  Threats   Business model of telecom operators / content providers have to be

reviewed   Control over the content could be more complex

Enormous potential but still skeptical


Sector: defense (1/2) - Overview

  Some figures:   Defense expenditures = 2% GDP, $193 billion for EU-25   1,875 million employees (25% civil)   R&D in ICT = €2.2 billion

  Market specificities:   Government investments   Long system life cycle anticipation   Security sensible

  IPv6 oriented policy:   USA (DoD)   French Army   German Army


Sector: defense (2/2) - SWOT

  Strengths   IPv6 is a enabler to achieve superiority in the cyberspace   IPv6 integration will happen in a reasonable period of time   IPv6 is perceive as stable   industry appears to be ready (regular products are IPv6-capable with no extra

cost)

  Weaknesses   Lack of experts   Defense sector is not big enough to be a driver

  Opportunities   opportunities to re-design in a more optimal way   opportunity to go directly to the next generation   some EU member states have plans for IPv6 integration

  Threats   procurement is the main instrument   potential unforeseen cost detected later

Planned transition in a limited market


Sector: education (1/2) - Overview

  Sector specificities:   Administrative processes   93 million students in Europe   ICT penetration very low in some segments (depends on the country

and on the type of schools)   Projects at a global level (Asia-Africa-America-Europe)

  Different roles:   ICT consumer   ICT developer   ICT educator

  IPv6 policy:   Depends on the ICT manager   Few universities or schools are ready in Europe


Sector: education (2/2) - SWOT

  Strengths   universities are non-profit: experimentations can be done « easily »   need IPv6-ready infrastructure to participate in international research

projects

  Weaknesses   no special funding   no interest for most university disciplines

  Opportunities   universities can enhance cooperation with:

•  private sectors •  other universities in foreign countries

  IPv6 can drive ICT penetration

  Threats   bad guidance/lack of plan: higher costs and small impact

Important sector at the education level: show good practices


Sector: transportation (1/2) - Overview

  Market description: diverse, huge and global  Automotive: 300 million cars in Europe  Airplanes: passengers & fret  Fret: Trucks, ships and rail  Global market with strong lobbies

  ICT development:  Road: Intelligent Transportation System (I.T.S.)  Air Traffic Management  Tracking and parcel localization  E-access everywhere


Sector: transportation (2/2) - SWOT

  Strengths   Car manufactures are electronics-oriented to differ themselves from

competitors   Mobility and large address scope

  Weaknesses   Time response   Infrastructure cost

  Opportunities   Telematics enforced by European regulations   IP convergence and new services

  Threats   Privacy issues   Multimedia services brings new source of distraction to drivers

Large sector but competing proprietary protocols


Sector: buildings (1/2) - Overview

  Market description: 3 segments   Home segment: appliances, control and limited sensor networks   Industry segment: huge sensor networks   Tertiary segments: huge sensor networks + applications (voice,

data, video)

  Specificities: diverse, huge and long to penetrate   Residential segment: cost sensitive and long to penetrate due to

the market structure   Long value chain from the R&D to the end-user   Long product life cycle (over 10 years for some products)


Sector: buildings (2/2) - SWOT

  Strengths   Reduce complexity thanks to interoperability

  Weaknesses   The market does not exist yet   Proprietary protocols are more profitable

  Opportunities   Sustainable development   Energy saving activities   New competitive techniques (6LowPan)   Long product life cycle anticipation

  Threats   Entrance of new players in this sector   New business models to develop

An overestimated market that is finally taking off?


The special case of ISPs

Internet Service Provider

Revenue : bandwidth

Revenue : services

IPv6 to support the transition from bandwidth provisioning to service provisioning


Cross-sectors SWOT results

Strenghts Weaknesses

Threats Opportunities

Large address space

Easier development

Mobile & multicast features

IPv4 works

Existence of competitive standards

Do not fulfill all technical

requirements

Product life cycle for some sectors

Globalization and standardization trend

« all over IP » requires a larger address scope

Change established business models

Change the network management model

Raise security and privacy issues

Motivators Challenges

Counter arguments


Adoption scenario

IP addresses

Level of confidence

Uncertain Planned Considered

Massive

Important

Limited

Phone & Media (TV, games)

Buildings

Defense

Banking

Transportation

Health & Central Government

Education

Logistics & Public Safety

Tourism

First deployments foreseen by 2010-2012


Potential evolution if nothing is done

  Momentum to IPv6 is low   End of IPv4 public addressed availability is close

2010 2011 2015+

Demand surge: panic to safeguard infrastructure

Avoidance of consumption: company are

moving to alternate solutions (NAT...)

Effort to delay exhaustion point: update of

the allocation process criteria

Scenario before exhaustion date

Options to extend IPv4 Internet

Trading of IPv4 addresses space: IT market distortion and

increase of the digital divide

Maintenance of the IPv4 Internet: increase of maintenance

costs and make future IPv6 integration harder


The only viable solution

Integration of IPv6 is the only viable solution…

  First IPv6 RFC submitted in 1995

 Huge amount of R&D, standardisation,

integration… made up to now

 No competing alternative in a short term

…to ensure business continuity !


If Europe is a late IPv6 adopter?

Reasons for acting

Do not miss potential spill-over! Prevent coordination failures!

Technology spill-over

  ICT innovation : 40% of EU labour productivity growth in the second half 1990s

  Innovation in vertical sectors

Market spill-over

  Europe : 20% of world ICT supply   WW IT service market: €560 billions

  Exploit IPv6 European expertise

Coordination failures

  IPv6 is a chicken-egg issue.   Support EU development policies


Objectives of an EC action

General objectives

Support EC policies

•  Lisbon agenda •  i2010 •  Single EU information space •  etc...

Specific objectives

Ensure business continuity of European organisations

Exploit European expertise

Ensure Europeans citizens and organisations will benefit

from state of the art innovations

Operational objectives

Availability of IPv6 connectivity

Made IT managers aware of the IPv6

situation

IPv6 integration to be safe

Pool of trained people

Exploitation of the European

expertise


Policy options

3 policy options identified:

  Option 1: let the things on their own way

  Option 2: coordinate integration

  Option 3: law enforcement

Impacts analysis made (Economic / Social / Environmental)


European economic impacts (1/2)

  Direct costs of IPv6 integration

  Network upgrade on ISPs side   Core: Mostly compatible thanks to depreciation renewal cycle   Edge: Still to be invested   Software upgrades   Staff training   Installation & testing

  Users   May keep IPv4 for internal use   Get prepared to IPv6

  NO CAPEX for non IPv6 compliant goods

  Dual stack v4/v6 maintenance   Shorten the global transition period as much as possible


European economic impacts (2/2)

 Economic benefits of IPv6 adoption

  Business-continuity   ICT solutions: 40% of EU labour productivity growth   Europe:20% of ICT World supply

 Prevent market distortion

 Being a first-mover gives a clear competitive advantage   Europe was in good position   strong pressure from Japan, Korea, China and USA

 Develop new services   Services = 2/3 of employment and value creation   IT services market = €560 billions WW

  Simplify the task of ISP to track and record the Internet connection (mandatory in some countries)


Synthesis of options

  Option 1 (do nothing scenario)   No real move observed

  Risk of last minute panic   Extra-costs

–  Long transition period

–  Last minute CAPEX

  Option 2 (coordinate integration)   Large scope of possible actions   Avoid forced investments: Still time to get IPv6 within renewal cycle

  Option 3 (law enforcement)   ~Guaranteed results for connectivity availability

  Extra-costs

–  Early renewals (+285% increase by year)

–  Administrative overhead for implementation and control


Actions recommendations (1/3)

  Ensure common availability of IPv6 connectivity in Europe   Make sure ISPs are made aware of the IPv6 situation

  Monitor progress   Support Ripe-NCC in applying IPv6 oriented policies.   Encourage good communication campaigns around RIPE-NCC actions, as

has been done by APNIC and ARIN

  Encourage use of IPv6 in public procurement making use of financial instruments such as structural funds.

  Ensure all European IT managers are made aware of the IPv6 situation   Large communications campaign associated with a Communication   Implement a ‘road-show’ in ISP and large industries IT services



  Ensure IPv6 integration is made secure   Support ENISA for monitoring of security issues related to IPv6, in particular

during the integration phase. Ensure the presence of a European alert network.

  Support ETSI for maintenance of existing standards and integration of emerging ones

  Ensure existence of a sufficient pool of trained people   Available documentation is abundant but often outdated or incomplete.

Create a reliable,, complete, and objective resource directory   Encourage universities and schools to incorporate IPv6 in the programs.

  Set-up training campaigns focused on ‘training the trainers’, making use of the expertise developed in GEANT2 and the most advanced NREN.



  Encourage proper exploitation of European expertise   Launch an opportunity detection program with universities and research

institutes to increase the European deal-flow associated with IPv6 opportunities

  Launch a communication campaign within the financing community

  Give preference to European vendors in public procurement


Web survey results (1/4)

  A web survey has been launched to identify positioning of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Internet users in respect with IPv6 integration;   Main figures are presented in the two next slides.

ISP: services offer ISP: geographical coverage



ISP: drivers for IPv6 adoption



ISP: details of IPv6 service offer

Inner circle: ISPs already proposing IPv6 connectivity; Outer circle: ISPs planning to provide IPv6 connectivity.



ISP: deployment plans

ISP: integration status

ISP: reason for non planning



Users: triggers for IPv6 adoption


Conclusions

  Shortage of available public addresses is an inevitable result of the 4th version of the Internet Protocol

  Large majority of analysed sectors

  Are actively considering IPv6

  Expect to start deployment by 2010-2012 , with IPv6 or other if no competitive offer available

  Europe has an opportunity to be a leader in the field but increasing international pressure

  A set of ‘soft measure’ to support IPv6 integration is recommended

Immediate consideration of IPv6 integration has to be undertaken as this is the only way to minimize the

costs associated with this activity and to facilitate the smooth transition of this integration tackling the key

issue of the address shortfall.


Thanks!

Merci pour votre attention.

Fabrice Clari, Zaltana [email protected]

IPv6 impact study - ARESU · PDF fileIPv6 impact study JTR 2008 – 2 juin 2008 ......

Documents

Transcript of IPv6 impact study - ARESU · PDF fileIPv6 impact study JTR 2008 – 2 juin 2008 ......