• Save
Upcoming internet challenges
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Upcoming internet challenges

on

  • 7,780 views

Today's Internet faces severe challenges including: ...

Today's Internet faces severe challenges including:

* IPv4 address exhaustion
* explosion of BGP tables and IP routing tables
* exponential traffic growth (which might not be a problem after all)

Statistics

Views

Total Views
7,780
Views on SlideShare
6,573
Embed Views
1,207

Actions

Likes
5
Downloads
0
Comments
0

6 Embeds 1,207

http://blog.ioshints.info 931
http://www.slideshare.net 136
http://blog.ipspace.net 109
http://www.linkedin.com 23
https://www.linkedin.com 6
http://digstil.blogspot.com 2

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Upcoming internet challenges Upcoming internet challenges Presentation Transcript

  • Upcoming Internet challenges
    Ivan Pepelnjak (ip@nil.com)NIL Data Communications
  • The big three (from my perspective)
    IPv4 address exhaustion
    Routing table explosion
    Traffic growth (or maybe not)
    Business model failures
  • IPv4 address exhaustion
    Source: IPv4 address report (Geoff Huston, www.potaroo.net)
  • IPv4 address exhaustion: solutions
    Walled gardens
    NAT444
    DS-Lite/A+P
    IPv6
  • IPv4-only NAT options
    CPE
    CPE
    Baseline:NAT44
    RFC1918
    IPv4 ProviderPrivate
    IPv4 Internet
    IPv4 Internet
    IPv4 Internet
    Walled garden
    NAT44
    IPv4 RFC1918
    LSN
    CGN/LSN
    NAT444
    RFC1918
    LSN
  • NAT options: DS-Lite or A+P
    CPE
    B4
    DS-Lite
    RFC1918
    AFTR
    IPv4 Internet
    IPv4 Internet
    IPv6
    IPv6
    A+P
    RFC1918
    AFTR
    DS-Lite:
    B4 is a smart bridge
    AFTR does NAT44
    A+P:
    B4 is a NAT CPE
    AFTR allocates IP address + port range to B4
  • NAT-less IPv4 4ever
    AFTR
    IPv4 Internet
    IPv6
    A+P on the host
    Native IPv6 for transport only
    Tunnel from host to AFTR
    ~ 100x increase in address utilization
    No need for public IPv6 deployment ... until we colonize the solar system
  • Complexities of NAT
    IPv6 does not require NAT
    • Public IPv6 addresses only
    • Simple P2P session setup
    • Both hosts must be IPv6-enabled
    198.51.100.22
    198.51.100.22
    10.0.0.2
    10.0.0.2
    10.0.0.2
    10.0.0.2
    • NAT works well with client-server applications
    • Requests to server come from public IP address
    • Problem: protocols with embedded addresses (FTP, SIP)
    Network Address Translation (NAT)
    • Maps private IP addresses into public IP address space
    • Requires outbound session setup
    • P2P applications with NAT are a nightmare
    • End-to-end connectivity might not be possible
    • Fallback: public relay servers
  • What is IPv6?
    DNS
    Web, Mail
    DHCP
    UDP
    TCP
    IPv4
    ICMP
    ARP
    IPCP
    DNS
    Web, Mail
    DHCPv6
    UDP
    TCP
    ICMPv6
    IPv6
    IPCP
    • IPv6 is a replacement for IPv4
    • Longer addresses, new routing protocols, some other changes in L2/L3 protocols
    • Upper layers and applications should not change
  • IPv6 adoption: the “ivory-tower” beliefs
    Who caresabout IPv4?
    IPv6 adoption [%]
    IPv6 pilots
    Time [years]
    Ecstatic earlyadopters
    Few years of dual-stack migration
    IPv4 addressexhaustion
  • IPv6 adoption: the unpleasant reality
    IPv6 adoption [%]
    IPv6-onlyclients?
    NAT and RFC 1918
    IPv6 pilots
    Time [years]
    Early adopters
    15 yearswasted
    IPv4 addressexhaustion
  • Enterprise customer connectivity

    IPv6 customer
    IPv4+IPv6/MPLS core


    Easy deployment:
    IPv6 edge is on the PE routers (no IPv6 support needed on access switches)
    IPv6 over MPLS (6PE) or native IPv6 in the core
    IPv6 over MPLS/VPN (6VPE) for L3 VPN services
    Caveats:
    Native IPv6 switching performance (PE routers or the whole core)
    Packet filters
    Keep IPv4 in the SP management plane
  • Content hosting
    IPv6 core
    ?
    ?
    ?
    Various levels of IPv6 support on:
    Network-level firewalls
    Web application firewalls
    Load balancers
    Additional issues:
    Coping with partial IPv6 connectivity
    Application issues:
    Legacy operating systems and web servers?
    Incoming IPv6 session support?
    IP address handling in logs and back-end databases?
  • Residential (consumer) Internet
    ?
    ?
    ?
    IPv4+IPv6/MPLS core
    ?
    ?
    ?

    ?
    Common issues:
    IPv6 support in CPE equipment
    IPv6 multicast support
    IPv6 on 3play devices
    IPv6-to-IPv4 translation
    Consumer awareness
    Legacy operating systems
    Mobile networks
    Only Nokia is IPv6-ready
    DSL issues
    IPv6CP support on CPE devices
    Carrier Ethernet issues
    DHCPv6 support on CPE devices
    DHCPv6 and RA guard on the switches
  • Routing Table Explosion
    Main caveats:
    Careless/clueless Service Providers
    Multihoming
    Traffic engineering
    IPv4 address space fragmentation
    Why is it bad?
    CRS/GSR/7600 memory is expensive
    High-end devices & TCAM not on Moore Law curve
    BGP no longer reaches steady-state
  • The biggest offenders
    Source: CIDR report (Geoff Huston, www.cidr-report.org)
    Potential “reasons”
    Blind & stupid redistribution
    Address space protection
    Traffic engineering
  • Traffic Engineering with BGP
    Upstream ISP #1
    Customer AS
    ½ PI
    PI > /24
    Upstream ISP #2
    ½ PI
  • Multihoming
    Upstream ISP #1
    Customer AS
    PI
    PI prefix
    Commercial reasons
    Cheapest way to redundancy
    Offload your costs to the community
    No pollution tax
    Technical reasons
    Broken protocol stack
    Broken socket API
    IPv6 is not a solution(yet another urban legend)
    Upstream ISP #2
    PI
  • Broken protocol stack
    Application
    Application
    Application
    DNS
    Presentation
    Session
    Transport
    Transport
    TCP
    UDP
    Network
    Internet
    IPv4
    IPv6
    Data-link
    Link layer
    Other people’s problems
    Physical
    ISO/OSI
    IETF
    IETF implementation
    Session layer is missing
    Application sessions established between IP addresses
    DNS is an optional add-on application
  • Broken Socket API
    conn = Network.Connect("example.com","http")
    TBD
    Ideal
    conn = new Socket("example.com",80)
    Java
    OK
    memset(&hints, 0, sizeof(hints));
    hints.ai_family = PF_UNSPEC;
    hints.ai_socktype = SOCK_STREAM;
    error = getaddrinfo("example.com", "http", &hints, &res0);
    if (error) { errx(1, "%s", gai_strerror(error)); }
    s = -1;
    for (res = res0; res; res = res->ai_next) {
    s = socket(res->ai_family, res->ai_socktype, res->ai_protocol);
    if (s < 0) { cause = "socket"; continue; }
    if (connect(s, res->ai_addr, res->ai_addrlen) < 0) {
    cause = "connect";
    close(s);
    s = -1;
    continue;
    }
    break; /* okay we got one */
    }
    if (s < 0) { err(1, "%s", cause); }
    Socket API
    Broken
  • Proposed fixes
    SCTP
    New transport protocol
    Supports multihoming & streams
    LISP
    Global directory-driven mGRE/NHRP-like solution
    shim6
    Add-on for TCP over IPv6
    HIP
    Replaces IP address with signed host identifiers
    Application
    SCTP
    HIP
    TCP
    UDP
    shim6
    IPv4
    IPv6
    LISP
    Other people’s problems
    IETF implementation
  • IPv6 will make matters worse
    IPv6 does not solve multihoming/TE issues
    Even more PI prefixes than in IPv4
    Each prefix requires 4x more memory
    RS_AS6730>show ipbgp summary | include memory
    327801 network entries using 33107901 bytes of memory
    964287 path entries using 46285776 bytes of memory
    98182 BGP path attribute entries using 5498864 bytes of memory
    226 BGP rrinfo entries using 5424 bytes of memory
    62132 BGP AS-PATH entries using 1583924 bytes of memory
    52 BGP community entries using 1526 bytes of memory
    203729 BGP route-map cache entries using 6519328 bytes of memory
    0 BGP filter-list cache entries using 0 bytes of memory
    BGP using 93002743 total bytes of memory
    RS_AS6730>show proc mem | include Process|BGP
    PID TTY Allocated Freed Holding GetbufsRetbufs Process
    119 0 4287871096 23691312 213522288 0 0 BGP Router
    120 0 14954976 0 6856 0 0 BGP I/O
    121 0 23432 1550080 32680 0 0 BGP Scanner
  • Traffic explosion – is it a problem?
    Facts
    HDTV over access networks is a reality
    Proven technology is available
    It’s just a commercial question
    Considerations
    How much bandwidth do we really need?
    What’s the killer application?
    Source: monitoring of 20 Mbps residential Internet link Long-term average: 170 kbps
  • More information
    Webinars: http://www.ioshints.info
    Market trends in Service Provider networks
    Enterprise IPv6 deployment
    Presentations: http://www.slideshare.net/ioshints
    NAT64 and DNS64 in 30 minutes
    Blog posts: http://blog.ioshints.info
    Articles: Ivan Pepelnjak on SearchTelecom @ ioshints.info