Blockers to IPv6 Adoption

Transcription

1 Blockers to IPv6 Adoption Lessons from over 19 years of providing IPv6 services UK IPv6 Council 2017 Dr David Holder CEng FIET MIEEE

2 The Problem Persuading enterprises to adopt IPv6

3 What We See RIPE Head Office End User Application Operating System Customer Network Customer Edge ISP Access Network l Dual stack users: 75% of traffic is over IPv6 l Over 16% of users have IPv6 connectivity l Over 50% of top websites are IPv6 enabled l Annual doubling of IPv6 users l IPv6 is 10-15% faster than l Almost 100% of nodes are IPv6 capable Transit Networks Content Provider Network Hosting Platforms Service or Application ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü Please sir can I have some more?

4 What They See My perception is my reality, but it may not be yours What you have with The Internet = Perception is that they are the same! What you get with IPv6 The Internet Additional CAPEX and OPEX plus deployment effort IPv6 is not even on my radar

5 Reality My perception is my reality, but it may not be yours What you have with They are not the same! What you get with IPv6

6 Sometimes Justifying IPv6 is Easy l New ISPs and providers with no stock of addresses l Operators faced with deploying Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) l Organisations that have exhausted their RFC1918 space l Organisations that have exhausted their public space l App developers for the Apple App Store l Organisations with specific peer to peer requirements l Cyber security organisations l Those deploying the Internet of Things (IoT)

7 Justifying IPv6 l Persuading CTOs is good, but we need to convince the CEOs The good news is that the problems with the internet, that IPv6 solves, can be expressed in language that means something to business managers l Governance, web analytics, cyber security, legal intercept, performance, reliability, internet presence, impact on customers

8 Carrier Grade NAT We have found CGN to be a useful tool in justifying IPv6 l CGN is already acting as a driver for IPv6 adoption l CGN degrades broadband services l CGN impacts all players l CGN impacts business processes l You may have no control over CGN being in the path l No need to use the term Carrier Grade NAT (CGN)! See my CGN presentation at NAv6TF 2017 at

9 Example: CGN Impact on Analytics and Forensics Access Network Routed NAT44 CGN Service Provider Logging Requirements Logging Requirements at Destination None (fixed record of allocation) Source IP address None (fixed record of allocation) Source IP address (and source port) Per session (tens of thousands per user per day): Date and time Internal IP address (may be dynamic) Internal source port External CGN source IP address External CGN source port number Per session (tens of thousands per user per day): Date and time Source IP address Source port number Trivial Small l Difficult (or impossible) to meet lawful intercept obligations Huge Potentially Huge (PBs) Depending on CGN configuration Potential for PBs of logging per million subscribers per year Plus logging data stream bandwidth will be tens of Mbps

10 The Solution Tell enterprises how the degrading internet is affecting business processes

11 IPv6 Website Statistics 100 domains 2834 domains domains

12 Summary Perception No benefit from IPv6 Reality internet is deteriorating Message IPv6 solves business problems

13 Questions and Discussion Further Information Erion IPv6 Training IPv6 Consultancy IPv6 Blog IPv6 Training 29 th Jan 2 nd Feb 2018 London Implementing and Securing IPv6 NEW New for 2018 IPv6 Forensics Closed on-site courses available worldwide Many other IPv6 courses and IPv6 security courses available

14 Profile: David Holder l CEO and Chief Consultant Erion Ltd l Author of numerous reports and whitepapers l Chairman of IPv6 Task Force Scotland l Regular speaker on IPv6 l Extensive experience of IPv6 spanning over 19 years

15 Extra Slides

16 A Brief History of NAT & CGN Pre NAT44 Post NAT44 Post CGN Content Provider Content Provider Applications become NAT aware Content Provider Applications become NAT & CGN aware. Some applications fail. Public Addresses Internet ISP Access Network Subscriber Network End User Public Addresses NAT44 Internet ISP Access Network Subscriber Network End User ALGs UPnP NAT-PMP STUN TURN ICE PCP Port Forwarding Public Addresses CGN NAT44 Internet ISP Access Network Subscriber Network End User ALGs?? PCP?? Port Forwarding?? ALGs UPnP NAT-PMP STUN TURN ICE PCP?? Port Forwarding?? Shared Addresses RFC6598 Private Addresses RFC1918 One IP = ONE Node One IP = ONE End User Network One IP = MANY End User NETWORKS

17 The Big Misconception IPv6 is with longer addresses Prefix (64 bits) Interface ID (64 bits) l It isn t; many complex & subtle differences from l Even addresses are very different: NEW NEW NEW DIFFERENT NEW DIFFERENT DIFFERENT New attributes: length, scope and lifetimes Normal for IPv6 interfaces to have multiple addresses IPv6 addresses can change over time Multicast is very important in IPv6 Large number of methods for assigning interface identifiers How addresses are used and managed is different Global addresses are normal

18 Where we go Wrong Making IPv6 better than l No one is interested l Can make things worse l Don t improve IPv6 in ways that make it worse than l is becoming worse than IPv6 Making predictions that are wrong l It s hard predicting the future Volume Total IPv6