IPv4 addresses are nearly exhausted while IPv6 provides a vast address space to support continued Internet growth. While IPv4 and IPv6 can coexist, IPv6 adoption is needed as the only sustainable solution. Global metrics show increasing IPv6 deployment over time through allocations, routing entries, and user access, though challenges remain around applications, skills, and justification. RIRs and IETF are committed to IPv6 to maintain the openness and development of the Internet.

1. The case for IPv6
IETF 97: Public Policy Program
Seoul
November 2016

2. IPv4 and IPv6
• IPv4 (since 1983)
– 32-bit number: 232 = ~4 billion addresses
– Example: 202.12.29.142
– Existing supply is very nearly exhausted
• IPv6 (standardised 1995, revised 1998)
– 128-bit number: 2128 = 340 billion billion billion billion addresses
– Example: FE38:DCE3:124C:C1A2:BA03:6735:EF1C:683D
– Existing supply should/must last for many decades
• Functionally the same, but they’re incompatible
– Deliberate design choice
– IPv6 was developed as an improvement over IPv4

3. How different are they?
IPv4
(Oil)
IPv6
(Electric)
• As a passenger you don’t need
to know if the car you are driving
is electric or gas powered.
• As a driver you do need to know
a bit about the difference.
• As a mechanic, you need to
know a lot, because they are
different under the hood.
• As a road engineer, you also
don’t need to know.
• As a petrol station, you better
get used to the idea that times
are changing!

4. How different are they?
• Both protocols can be used at the same time on the same
network without interference
• IPv6 can be retrofitted into existing networks without
breaking or removing IPv4
• Devices can choose which protocol to use
– Depending on the capability of the other device its communicating
with
– When both available, use IPv6

5. IPv4 exhaustion…
• IANA pool fully distributed in 2011
http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4 as of 10 Nov 2016

6. Remaining IPv4 space
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
AFRINIC APNIC ARIN LACNIC RIPE NCC
/8blocks
Allocated Available
As of 30 September 2016

7. Short term solution: NAT
Internet
10.0.0.202
202.12.29.32
NAT
? Extn 202
Phone
Network
02 6262 9898
PABX

8. NAT at the edge
*Network Address Translation at home router, hotspot, etc
202.12.29.32
Network202.12.29.0/24
The Internet
202.12.29.1 … .2 … .3 … .4
10.0.0.1 ..2 ..3 ..4
NAT*

9. Carrier Grade NAT (CGN)
10.0.0.202
IPv4
CGN
10.255.255.25510.0.0.1
?

10. Double NAT
!!! “Things”
IPv4
CGN
NAT

11. The need for IPv6…
• One reason: more addresses
• The Internet is growing fast
– Broadband: Mobile and WiFi
– Internet of Things
• IPv6 is the only viable option
– Enables sustainable growth
– Maintains the openness of the Internet

12. Other IPv6 benefits
• IPv6 and privacy
– There are a lot of IPv6 addresses per subnet
• 2^64 (18,446,744,073,709,551,616 possible addresses)
• There’s a default address randomisation known as ‘privacy extensions’ that
prevents tracking and port scanning of devices or sessions
– Provider can still attribute the address range
• Provides feature parity to IPv4 in investigation/legal compliance
• Performance
– No network address translation processing overhead, compared to
double/triple NAT commonly seen in IPv4 networks.

13. NAT on IPv6 network
• Can be useful to maintain connection to old IPv4 networks
– Load will decrease over time
– May be discarded once everything has moved to IPv6
IPv6
Client
IPv6 Network
NAT64
IPv4 Host
IPv6 Host

14. IPv6 deployment challenges
• 1990s
– Protocol maturity
– Vendor support (Core network devices)
• 2000s
– Implementation cost
– Vendor support (Customer premises equipment/CPEs)
• 2010s
– Application’s awareness of IPv6
– Business justification
– Technical skill

15. IPv6 deployment status
• Different ways to measure
– Number of IPv6 allocations by RIRs
– Number of active IPv6 BGP entries (FIB) in the routing table
– Comparing the numbers of ASNs advertising IPv4 vs IPv6
– Percentage of devices that prefers to connect over IPv6
– Percentage of users that access a network over IPv6
– The volume of IPv6 requests to a CDN

16. % of IPv6 allocations by RIRs
https://www.nro.net/statistics

17. # of active IPv6 BGP entries in the routing table
http://bgp.potaroo.net/v6/as2.0/index.html as of 10 Nov 2016

18. Comparison of ASNs advertising IPv4 vs IPv6
https://labs.apnic.net/vizas/ as of 10 Nov 2016

19. % of devices that prefers to connect over IPv6
http://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/XA

20. % of users that access Google over IPv6
https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

21. Volume of IPv6 requests to Akamai CDN
https://blogs.akamai.com/2016/10/ipv6-at-akamai-edge-2016.html

22. Latest development…

23. Conclusion
• IPv4 has served its purpose
– Time to move on
– Don’t let NAT become a long term solution
• IPv6 is here
– Deployment growth evident from different global measurements
– IETF will develop networking standards that assume the use of IPv6
and do not require IPv4
• The RIRs are committed to support IPv6 deployment in
their respective communities