Measuring 
IPv6 
Adop3on 
Jakub 
Czyz, 
University 
of 
Michigan 
Mark 
Allman, 
Interna=onal 
Computer 
Science 
Ins=tute...
Why 
Study 
IPv6 
Adop3on 
Now? 
Total 
Free 
IPv4 
/8 
At 
Registries 
IANA 
Exhaus=on 
(Image 
source: 
Geoff 
Huston, 
...
Our 
Study 
• Goal: 
a 
systemic 
“big 
picture” 
of 
IPv6 
adop=on 
– Trading 
off 
depth 
for 
breadth 
– Are 
there 
cr...
Data 
Analyzed 
• Exis3ng/Public 
Datasets: 
– RIR 
alloca=on 
– Route 
Views 
BGP, 
RIPE-­‐RIS 
BGP 
– Google.com 
client...
Metrics 
Prerequisite 
IP 
Func3ons 
• Address 
Alloca=on 
• Address 
Adver=sement 
• Topology 
• DNS 
Name 
servers 
• DN...
METRICS 
(PREREQUISITE) 
SIGCOMM’14 
Measuring 
IPv6 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
6
Prefix 
Alloca3on 
1000 
800 
600 
400 
200 
0 
0.6 
0.5 
0.4 
0.3 
0.2 
0.1 
0 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2...
Naming: 
Domains 
& 
Record 
Types 
from 
.com/.net; 
IPv4 
& 
IPv6 
name 
servers 
day-­‐long 
packet 
samples 
over 
2.5...
Server 
Readiness: 
Alexa 
Top 
Domain 
Reachability 
0.04 
0.035 
0.03 
0.025 
0.02 
0.015 
0.01 
0.005 
0 
2011-06 2011-...
Client 
Readiness: 
visitors 
to 
google.com 
0.025 
0.02 
0.015 
0.01 
0.005 
0 
(Data 
method 
in 
Colir 
et 
al., 
2010...
METRICS 
(OPERATIONAL) 
SIGCOMM’14 
Measuring 
IPv6 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
11
Global 
Traffic 
• Arbor 
1T 
100G 
10G 
1G 
100M 
10M 
Networks 
global 
provider 
neslow 
data 
• 260 
service 
provider...
Applica3on 
Mix 
(% 
of 
IPv6) 
User 
content 
{ 
Measuring 
IPv6 
SIGCOMM’14 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
13
IPv6 
Transi3on 
Technologies 
(Teredo 
+ 
6to4) 
1 
0.8 
0.6 
0.4 
0.2 
0 
Mostly 
Transi3on 
Mostly 
Na3ve 
2009 2010 20...
CONCLUSIONS 
SIGCOMM’14 
Measuring 
IPv6 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
15
Conclusion 
1: 
Regions 
Differ 
1 
0.1 
0.01 
0.001 
IPv6 
/ 
IPv4 
Ra=o 
0.0001 
1e-05 
AFRINIC 
APNIC 
ARIN 
LACNIC 
RI...
Conclusion 
2: 
Perspec3ve 
Magers 
1 
0.1 
0.01 
0.001 
IPv6 / IPv4 Ratio 
0.0001 
1 
0.1 
0.01 
0.001 
0.0001 
P1 (perfo...
Conclusion 
3: 
IPv6 
is 
Real! 
ß 
20x 
growth! 
ß 
15x 
growth! 
ß 
Traffic 
Flipped 
ß 
Nearly 
on-­‐par 
Measuring...
Thank 
You! 
Ques=ons? 
SIGCOMM’14 
Measuring 
IPv6 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
19
BACKUP 
SLIDES 
Measuring 
IPv6 
SIGCOMM’14 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
20
Internet 
Devices 
and 
Users 
Con3nue 
to 
Increase 
SIGCOMM’14 
Measuring 
IPv6 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
21
Dataset 
Summary 
/day 
/day 
Measuring 
IPv6 
SIGCOMM’14 
Adop=on 
– 
Czyz 
et 
al. 
22
Prefix 
Adver3sement 
1M 
100K 
10K 
1K 
100 
0.1 
0.01 
0.001 
0.0001 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 ...
AS 
Centrality 
16 
14 
12 
10 
8 
6 
4 
2 
0 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 
K-core degree 
Dual...
DNS: 
.com 
& 
.net 
Zones 
1M 
100K 
10K 
1K 
100 
10 
0.01 
0.001 
0.0001 
1e-05 
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 201...
IPv4 
.com/.net 
TLD 
A 
and 
AAAA 
Query 
Rank 
Correla3on 
(Spearman’s 
ρ) 
Within 
type: 
Strong 
Across 
type: 
Weak 
...
Naming: 
Domains 
• Queries 
from 
.com/.net; 
IPv4 
& 
IPv6 
name 
servers 
– Five 
day-­‐long 
samples 
over 
2.5 
years...
Performance 
(using 
10-­‐ 
and 
20-­‐hop 
RTT) 
500 
400 
300 
200 
100 
0 
1 
0.9 
0.8 
0.7 
0.6 
0.5 
2009 2010 2011 20...
Projec3ons 
1 
0.1 
0.01 
0.001 
0.0001 
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 
IPv6/IPv4 
A1 (allocation - cumulat...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Measuring IPv6 adoption

4,948

Published on

Download this presentation for an overview of a collaborative research project between Arbor Networks, the University of Michigan, Verisign Labs, the International Computer Science Institute and the University of Illinois. This research was originally presented at SIGCOMM.

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
4,948
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
36
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
45
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Measuring IPv6 adoption"

  1. 1. Measuring IPv6 Adop3on Jakub Czyz, University of Michigan Mark Allman, Interna=onal Computer Science Ins=tute Jing Zhang, University of Michigan ScoA Iekel-­‐Johnson, Arbor Networks Eric Osterweil, Verisign Labs Michael Bailey, University of Michigan and University of Illinois SIGCOM M 2014 Chicago, IL, USA August 17-­‐22, 2014
  2. 2. Why Study IPv6 Adop3on Now? Total Free IPv4 /8 At Registries IANA Exhaus=on (Image source: Geoff Huston, hAp://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4) • Internet con=nues growing • IPv4 space shrinking… • IPv4 exhaus=on events: – IANA: February 2011 – Asia/Pacific: April 2011 – Europe: September 2012 – La=n America: June 2014 • IPv6 Community Flag Days – 2011 & 2012 SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 2
  3. 3. Our Study • Goal: a systemic “big picture” of IPv6 adop=on – Trading off depth for breadth – Are there cross-­‐perspec=ve insights? • Mul3-­‐perspec3ve: 10 datasets • Mul3-­‐year: 2-­‐10 years • Mul3-­‐aspect: 12 metrics • Findings: IPv6 adop3on – varies by where you measure (region) – varies by what you measure – recently made a qualita=ve jump SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 3
  4. 4. Data Analyzed • Exis3ng/Public Datasets: – RIR alloca=on – Route Views BGP, RIPE-­‐RIS BGP – Google.com clients, – Verisign zone files, – CAIDA Ark RTT • New Datasets: – Traffic: Arbor Networks global traffic – Naming: Verisign .com/.net queries via IPv4, via IPv6 – Content: Tes=ng data of Alexa top-­‐10K sites SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 4
  5. 5. Metrics Prerequisite IP Func3ons • Address Alloca=on • Address Adver=sement • Topology • DNS Name servers • DNS Resolvers • DNS Queries • Server Readiness • Client Readiness Opera3onal Characteris3cs • Traffic Volume • Applica=on Mix • Transi=on Technologies • Performance (RTT) IPv4 to rela3ve level = adop3on” “IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 5
  6. 6. METRICS (PREREQUISITE) SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 6
  7. 7. Prefix Alloca3on 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Monthly Prefix Allocations Ratio IPv6/IPv4 IPv4 IPv6 Ratio IANA Exhaus=on Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 7
  8. 8. Naming: Domains & Record Types from .com/.net; IPv4 & IPv6 name servers day-­‐long packet samples over 2.5 years DNS users query similar types 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 are converging over this =me period: v4 v6 v4 v6 domains v4 v6 as IPv4 v4 v6 v4 v6 • Queries – Query Fraction of All DNS Queries 2011ï06ï08 2012ï02ï23 2012ï08ï28 2013ï02ï26 2013ï12ï23 More Similar (p < 0.05) other ANY TXT NS DS MX AAAA A – Five – IPv6 Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 8
  9. 9. Server Readiness: Alexa Top Domain Reachability 0.04 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 2011-06 2011-12 2012-06 2012-12 2013-06 2013-12 Fraction of Alexa Top 10K AAAA Lookups Reachability IPv6 World Day IPv6 Launch Day Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 9
  10. 10. Client Readiness: visitors to google.com 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01 0.005 0 (Data method in Colir et al., 2010) +151% +147% -­‐7% +61% +43% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fraction Clients Using IPv6 Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 10
  11. 11. METRICS (OPERATIONAL) SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 11
  12. 12. Global Traffic • Arbor 1T 100G 10G 1G 100M 10M Networks global provider neslow data • 260 service providers (Dataset B) ~ 1/3 – 1/2 of all inter-­‐AS traffic +433% +470% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 0.01 0.0064 0.001 0.0001 Traffic Volume/Customer (bps) Ratio IPv6/IPv4 IPv4 A (peak) IPv6 A (peak) Ratio A (peaks) IPv4 B (average) IPv6 B (average) Ratio B (averages) Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 12
  13. 13. Applica3on Mix (% of IPv6) User content { Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 13
  14. 14. IPv6 Transi3on Technologies (Teredo + 6to4) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Mostly Transi3on Mostly Na3ve 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fraction of non-native IPv6 Internet Traffic A Internet Traffic B Google Clients Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 14
  15. 15. CONCLUSIONS SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 15
  16. 16. Conclusion 1: Regions Differ 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 IPv6 / IPv4 Ra=o 0.0001 1e-05 AFRINIC APNIC ARIN LACNIC RIPENCC Address(A1) Routing(T1) Traffic(U1) } Large Inter-­‐Region Differences Large Intra-­‐Region (Cross-­‐Metric) Differences E.g. ARIN last place in alloca3on, first in traffic. Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 16 SIGCOMM’14
  17. 17. Conclusion 2: Perspec3ve Magers 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 IPv6 / IPv4 Ratio 0.0001 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 P1 (performance) A1 (allocation - monthly) A1 (allocation - cumulative) A2 (advertisement) T1 (topology) R2 (Google clients) U1 (traffic - A.peaks) U1 (traffic - B.averages) N1 (.com NS) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2-­‐3 order of magnitude difference Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 17
  18. 18. Conclusion 3: IPv6 is Real! ß 20x growth! ß 15x growth! ß Traffic Flipped ß Nearly on-­‐par Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 18
  19. 19. Thank You! Ques=ons? SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 19
  20. 20. BACKUP SLIDES Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 20
  21. 21. Internet Devices and Users Con3nue to Increase SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 21
  22. 22. Dataset Summary /day /day Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 22
  23. 23. Prefix Adver3sement 1M 100K 10K 1K 100 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Prefix Advertisements Ratio IPv6/IPv4 IPv4 IPv6 Ratio Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 23
  24. 24. AS Centrality 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 K-core degree Dual-Stack IPv6-Only IPv4 Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 24
  25. 25. DNS: .com & .net Zones 1M 100K 10K 1K 100 10 0.01 0.001 0.0001 1e-05 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Records in TLD zones Ratio IPv6/IPv4 (.com) .com A glue .net A glue .net AAAA glue .com AAAA glue Ratio .com glue Ratio .net all probed (H.E.) Ratio .com all probed (H.E.) Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 25
  26. 26. IPv4 .com/.net TLD A and AAAA Query Rank Correla3on (Spearman’s ρ) Within type: Strong Across type: Weak Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 26
  27. 27. Naming: Domains • Queries from .com/.net; IPv4 & IPv6 name servers – Five day-­‐long samples over 2.5 years • Four sets of top 100k domains: – For both IPv4 and IPv6 packets (user popula=ons) – Within each, for domains queried by A and AAAA • Finding: IPv4 to IPv6 popula=ons correlate strongly for the same query type {A,AAAA} – e.g. Spearman’s ρ of 0.7 for IPv4 A versus IPv6 A • So, IPv6 DNS users query similar domains as IPv4 SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 27
  28. 28. Performance (using 10-­‐ and 20-­‐hop RTT) 500 400 300 200 100 0 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Median RTT (ms) Ratio IPv6/IPv4 performance IPv6 - Hop 20 IPv4 - Hop 20 IPv6 - Hop 10 IPv4 - Hop 10 Ratio - Hop 10 Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 28
  29. 29. Projec3ons 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 IPv6/IPv4 A1 (allocation - cumulative) U1 (traffic - A.peaks) Polynomial Proj. (A1:R2 = 0.996; U1:R2 = 0.838) Exponential Proj. (A1:R2 = 0.984; U1:R2 = 0.892) Measuring IPv6 SIGCOMM’14 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 29
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×