Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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%
How much IPv4 is left?How much IPv4 is left?
Mid-2010Mid-2010TodayToday
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
Coexistence
The new plan…The new plan…
Size of the Internet
Time
IPv6 Deployment
IPv4 Deployment
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.”
