IPv6 and the Internet. Leslie Daigle Chief Internet Technology Officer Internet Society

Transcription

1 IPv6 and the Internet Leslie Daigle Chief Internet Technology Officer Internet Society

2 The Internet Society

3 The Internet Society Founded in 1992 by Internet Pioneers International non-profit organization 100+ organization members 28,000+ individual members 90+ chapters worldwide Regional Bureaus: Africa, Latin America & Caribbean, South & South East Asia ISOC is an international cause-related organization that works for the open development and evolution of the Internet for all people. Does so through work across the areas of technical standards, education and capacity-building as well as public policy. 3

4 The Internet Societyʼs principles ISOC's principles and activities are based upon a fundamental belief that the Internet is for everyone. We envision a future in which people everywhere can use the Internet to improve quality of life possible when standards, technologies, business practices, and government policies sustain an open and universally accessible platform for innovation, creativity, and economic opportunity 4

5 What makes ISOC unique? Sole focus is the Internet Education, Standards, Policy Organisational home of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), Internet Architecture Board (IAB), and related bodies Enable capacity and technical community building throughout the world Key player in Internet policy Particularly in the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and other intergovernmental forums 5

6 ISOCʼs Strategic Initiatives Enabling Access through policy, standards and technology, and new resources Technical Capacity Building Policy, Regulation & Access Environment Underserved Community InterNetWorks so that the Internet remains an open end-to-end entity with all of the associated technological, policy, social, and business benefits Common & Open Internet Global Addressing Security & Stability AlterNetives Trust & Identity identifying and promoting activities that resolve some of the persistent issues in this critical area Architecture & Trust: Emerging Research Operationalizing Trust Identity: Managing Trust Relationships 6

7 ISOC and Technologies Inform Tech Priorities Push Technology Evolution Collect Regional Perspectives Develop Key Technology Messages Disseminate Key Technology messages 7

8 Other Parts of the Internet Ecosystem

9 9

10 10

11 A Quick Overview of the IETF The mission of the IETF is to produce high quality, relevant technical and engineering documents that influence the way people design, use, and manage the Internet in such a way as to make the Internet work better. These documents include protocol standards, best current practices, and informational documents of various kinds. RFC3935 A Mission Statement for the IETF 11

12 The Internet Engineering Task Force The IETF is an open, international community of network designers, operators, vendors and researchers Goal: evolution of the Internet architecture and smooth operation of the Internet Open to any interested individual people, not companies Produces Internet standards (and other documents) We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code. Dave Clark (1992) 12

13 The Role & Scope of the IETF Above the wire and below the application IP, TCP, , routing, IPsec, HTTP FTP, SSH, LDAP SIP, MobileIP, PPP, RADIUS Streaming video & audio But wires are getting fuzzy MPLS, GMPLS, PWE3, VPN,... Hard to clearly define the IETF scope Constant exploration of the edges Since attendees must wear their name tags, they must also wear shirts or blouses. Pants or skirts are also highly recommended. RFC4677, The Tao of IETF: A Novice's Guide to the Internet Engineering Task Force 13

14 ICANN Established in 1998 as a global not-for-profit organisation to manage functions that were previously performed by U.S. Government contractors Currently operates the IANA function Responsible for coordinating the management of the Internet domain name system (DNS) Develops policies and procedures for DNS related activities: New Top Level Domains Accreditation of domain name registrars 14

15 IANA Came from the need to start recording unique identifiers on the Internet Jon Postelʼs famous black book Was a function operated by the University of Southern California under contract with the U.S. Government until 1998 when it was moved to ICANN 15

16 Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) APNIC Asia and Pacific AfriNIC Africa RIPE NCC Europe, Middle East, parts of Central Asia LACNIC Latin America and parts of Caribbean ARIN US, Canada and parts of Caribbean

17 RIRs Responsible, within their assigned regions, for allocating globally unique IP addresses (IPv4 and IPv6) and autonomous system numbers (ASNs) Allocation policies determined in-region through open policy development processes Number Resource Organisation (NRO) Comprised of the five RIRs, coordinates global allocation policies 17

18 Network Operators Groups (*NOGs) PacNOG AfNOG SANOG APRICOT NANOG WALC

19 *NOGs Focuses on information exchange between ISPs and network operators within a region Works to deliver key information and experiences to those who need it the network operator Acts as a human networking opportunity so people can meet and interact with their peers and other companies. Critical for when things go bad on the network! 19

20 The Internet

21 The Future Internet Scale 1 More than 1.6 billion devices worldwide were used to access the Internet in 2009, including PCs, mobile phones, and online videogame consoles. By 2013, the total number of devices accessing the Internet will increase to more than 2.7 billion. China continues to have more Internet users than any other country 359 million in 2009 expected to grow to 566 million by 2013 The United States had 261 million Internet users in 2009, a figure that will reach 280 million in 2013 India will have one of the fastest growing Internet populations, growing almost two-fold between 2009 and containerid=prus &sectionid=null&elementid=null&pagetype=synopsis 21

22 Much of it will be mobile 2 There were more than 450 million mobile Internet users worldwide in 2009 a number that is expected to more than double by the end of Driven by the popularity and affordability of mobile phones, smartphones, and other wireless devices: expect the number of mobile devices accessing the Internet to surpass the one billion mark over the next four years. The most popular online activities of mobile Internet users are similar to those of other Internet users: using search engines reading news and sports information downloading music and videos sending/receiving and instant messages 2 containerid=prus &sectionid=null&elementid=null&pagetype=synopsis 22

23 The Future Internet, some expectations Even though Internet-connected devices are getting smaller and more diverse, users still expect the Internet not just a subset of data services There will be more Internet hosts than IPv4 addresses well before the end of this decade Even if we could re-use every IPv4 address, there arenʼt enough IPv6 is the only answer for a globally-connected future Internet 23

24 Future 1: IPv4 What Pros Cons The Internet remains entirely IPv4 No IPv6 upgrades But, things always change anyway No new networks Even with complete recycling of used addresses, there is a limit Network Address Translators (NAT), everywhere In the network not under your control Acknowledged to be very complex to manage Stifling deployment of new products, services on the Internet Degraded performance of existing services Patchy, slow Google Maps, for eg This reflects the past 24

25 Future 2: IPv4 and IPv6 islands What Pros Cons Current network stays IPv4, new networks are IPv6 Continued deployment of Internet New networks Different networks do not natively interconnect Stilted translation Cost of translation IPv4 island is still failing (Future 1) IPv6 islands will grow and outpace IPv4 This is pretty much where we are today but itʼs not stable, and things will go forward (or back) 25

26 Future 3: IPv6 What Pros Cons The Internet becomes entirely IPv6 Back to complete connectivity, wide open address space For the first time since the 1990ʼs Requires virtually all systems to support IPv6 This is years away But I wonʼt speculate how many or how few This is an ideal 26

27 Where do we stand? Acquiring additional IPv4 Addresses 27

28 About Address Sharing

29 Address Sharing Current practice: give a unique IPv4 public address to each subscriber this address can be shared into the residential/office LAN through a NAPT device (in the CPE) With IPv4 free-pool allocation completion this is no longer possible for new subscribers Scalability of RFC1918 space also creating problems A possible solution: allocate the same IPv4 public address to several subscribers at the same time this is what we call large-scale address sharing 29

30 Port multiplexing Q: How is it possible to differentiate between multiple subscribers all sharing a single address? A: Use the transport layer port field to multiplex 30

31 Long tail of subscribers requiring >median number of ports Source: 31

32 30 ports Slide credit: Shin Miyakawa 32

33 20 ports Slide credit: Shin Miyakawa 33

34 15 ports Slide credit: Shin Miyakawa 34

35 5 ports Slide credit: Shin Miyakawa 35

36 Itʼs your problem now Introduction of large-scale address sharing creates potentially serious issues for third parties: Some applications will fail to operate Reverse DNS will be affected Inbound ICMP will fail in many cases Amplification of security issues Service usage monitoring and abuse logging will be impacted Penalty boxes will no longer work Spam blacklisting will be affected Geo-location and geo-proximity mechanisms will be impacted Load balancing algorithms may be impacted Authentication mechanisms may be impacted Traceability of network usage and abusage will be affected 36

37 Impact on applications Breaks applications that Establish inbound communications Carry address and/or port information in their payload Use fixed ports Do not use any port (ICMP) Assume uniqueness of source address Explicitly prohibit concurrent connections from identical addresses 37

38 Geo-proximity, geo-location Conforming with regional content licensing restrictions Targeting advertising Customising content Emergency services Shared addressing may reduce level of confidence and location granularity Application performance may be affected in the presence of highly centralised CGN 38

39 Tracking service usage Monitoring unique users of a service no longer possible by simply counting connections from discrete IP addresses CPE NAT complicates this today, large-scale address sharing will make it a more widespread and severe issue In general, all elements that monitor usage or abusage in the chain between a service provider that has deployed address sharing and a content provider will need to be upgraded to take account of the port value in addition to IP addresses 39

40 Traceability Address sharing solutions must record and store all mappings they create Potentially very large volume of data Pre-allocating groups of ports mitigates Trade-offs between size of pre-allocated groups ratio of public addresses to subscribers Impact on logging requirements Port randomisation security Need for timestamping and accurate timekeeping Densely populated CGN could mean even small amounts of clock skew result in misidentification of subscribers Alternatively SPs start logging destinations, giving rise to privacy concerns, 40

41 The realities of (large scale) address sharing Large-scale address sharing will make many existing address sharing issues more severe and more widespread Large-scale address sharing will also create new technical and business issues Third-parties, content providers, LEAs, will be impacted IPv6 is the only way to avoid this 41

42 IPv6

43 Enter IPv6 128 bit addresses Completely separate from IPv4 New IP packet format Completely new allocations IANA started assignments in 1999 See 43

44 Comparing Internet Protocol v4, v6 IPv4 addresses Enough to accommodate the research network that was being built at the time 32-bit number 2 32 = 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses As of January , 9.38% still available to the world (from IANA) Predicted approximately 2 years until all IPv4 addresses allocated But large allocation requests are already being denied IPv6 addresses defined 1999 Enough to accommodate the global Internet, current & future 128-bit number = 340,282,366,920, 938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 addresses 44

45 Common questions Why not a flag day for IPv6 (i.e., like y2k)? Strength and flexibility of the Internet: Cannot mandate or engineer a global change Change happens organically By the time we agreed on the when and the how Why not reuse old IPv4 address space? Some of it built in as special -- routing infrastructure wonʼt handle it properly How to handle reclaiming from defunct entities Fragmented chunks of address space 45

46 IPv6 is Beginning to Make Business Sense IPv4 addresses now have prices attached NATs are hard and expensive Party lines donʼt work for business Certain apps donʼt work at all (games) New markets are going to be driven by IPv6 46

47 World IPv6 Day

48 8 June

49 World IPv6 Day what it is June h00-23h59 (UTC) Major content providers turn on IPv6 access on their front door Not just side door special hostnames This is not about turning off IPv4 The goal of this test flight is to motivate organizations across the industry Internet service providers, hardware makers, operating system vendors and web companies to prepare their services for IPv6 to ensure a successful transition as IPv4 addresses run out. It is an opportunity for the Internet industry to collaborate to test IPv6 readiness. We expect to lay the groundwork for large-scale IPv6 adoption and help make IPv6 ready for prime time. It is not a first there have been important local efforts, already (e.g., heise.de). 49

50 Motivations Ongoing measurements show that enabling dual-stack for web content results in some users experiencing connectivity issues Very small percentages, but potentially a large number of users for major content providers This creates a disincentive for an individual large content provider to act unilaterally Internet is an exercise in collaboration ISOC can provide a platform to help build confidence across the industry to tackle these IPv6 deployment issues 50

51 World IPv6 Day and ISOC The Internet Society is supporting World IPv6 Day as part of its efforts to accelerate IPv6 deployment is a pivotal year in IPv6 deployment World IPv6 Day will be an important milestone IPv6 has to work It must work for existing companies business viable We need to see a lot more actual traffic and usage out of the realm of the hypothetical IPv6 deployment has been a bit of a moving target Much easier to set up and test your own config if you know there is a body of content available Much better to measure actual impact of v4/v6 coexistence than to estimate 51

52 What weʼve seen already Lots of interest from all over Content providers, ISPs, websites with content Over 550 entities have contacted us so far 220 website collections are listed on our webpage who plan to turn on v6 June 8 Created space for lots of sites who are running dual stack already Created space for networks, hosting companies, etc. who offer commercial v6 and are interested in helping their customers participate People around the globe are organizing in their local region (already have links to Japan and Slovenia, more will be appearing) All across the globe Interest from people on every continent 52

53 What we hope to see Nothinʼ! Itʼll all work, right? Test your IPv6 readiness: And, various measurements, tests, will be undertaken Connectivity from different perspectives Configuration brokenness ( self testing ) 53

54 Any Questions? Thanks! 54

55 Additional materials 55

56 Principles of the IETF Open process Technical competence Volunteer core Rough consensus and running code Protocol ownership 56

57 Design through Consensus Majority of the work happens via mailing lists As a Working Group is formed and chartered, the beginnings of an Internet Draft (ID) begin WG works on the concept of the ID and solidifies via consensus of the working group WGʼs may have more than one ID being worked on at the same time 57

58 IETF Open Standards While the mission of the IETF is to make the Internet work better, no one is in charge of the Internet. Instead, many people cooperate to make it work. Each person brings a unique perspective of the Internet, and this diversity sometimes makes it difficult to reach consensus. Yet, when consensus is achieved, the outcome is better, clearer, and more strongly supported than the initial position of any participant. 58

59 IETF Documents Two Types Internet Draft (ID) Active working documents Not finalized! Not stable! Anyone can submit draft-yourname-... Only some IDs are WG documents! draft-ietf-wgname-... Request For Comment (RFC) Archival publications Never change once published Not all RFCs are standards! Standards track: Proposed Standard Draft Standard Full Standard Other types: Informational Experimental Best-Current-Practice (BCP) 59

60 IETF Meetings Physical meeting happen three times per year around the world Opportunity for engineers to share knowledge and expertise Remote participation is becoming more common and is available for all formal meetings - Audio Streams - Instant Messaging Chat Rooms Birds of a Feather (BoF) meetings where informational discussions about a topic occur 60

61 Most Active IETF Participants 61