IPv6 - The current reality behind the promise Tony Hain IPv6 Forum Fellow Technology Director – NAv6TF Technical Leader – Cisco Systems

Agenda IPv4 allocation status E-nations global gap Cost / benefit trade-off & the IPv4 turnip Public policy impacts

Distribution of IPv4 addresses by /8 31% remaining

Ongoing analysis of IPv4 trends Recent articles suggest an extended lifetime for IPv4, but … …these numbers omit a significant part of the story. Geoff Huston –Mar. 04

Completing the picture The H-D ratio (RFC 3194) is the measure of allocation inefficiency. Adjusting the raw numbers from the RIR’s to compensate for their historical allocation efficiency of 87% matches the published IANA pool. This takes ~ 12 years off the recently projected lifetime. Adding the rest of the historical data further shortens the projected lifetime, and provides a much closer fit with the most recent trend in the remaining IANA pool. » IPv4 protocol published »1985 ~ 1/8 of total space »1990 ~ 1/4 of total space »1995 ~ 1/3 of total space »2000 ~ 1/2 of total space » ~ 2/3 of total space In any case these projections assume no change from the historical rate.

Internet around the world Nation (Internet code) Population (2003) Internet users (2002) % Internet Penetration Rate Global IPv4 address assigned per country Current /8 equivalent addresses needed to reach 20% H-D ratio of 85% Number of IPv4 /8 required for 20% of population with H-D ratio of 85% 209 countries Worldwide6,321,688,311613,040, %2,455,834, ,229,490, China (.cn)1,304,196,00056,600, %44,007, ,761,501, India (.in)1,065,462,0007,000, %2,804, ,699,132, Indonesia (.id)219,883,0004,400, %1,141, ,377, Brazil (.br)178,470,00013,980, %1,199, ,594, Pakistan (.pk)153,578,0001,200, %254, ,020, Bangladesh (.bd)146,736,000150, %128, ,655, Nigeria (.ng)124,009,000100, %114, ,679, Russia (.ru)143,246,00018,000, %7,638, ,059, Vietnam (.vn)81,377,000400, %159, ,758, Philippines (.ph)79,999,0004,500, %765, ,455, Mexico (.mx)103,457,0003,500, %6,311, ,369, Ethiopa (.et)70,678,00020, %16, ,830, Egypt (.eg)71,931,000600, %853, ,382, Iran (.ir)68,920,000420, %581, ,449,

Squeezing the last IPv4 address out of the turnip The allocated private IPv4 address space (RFC 1918) is already inadequate for some –In one example; over 5000 existing facilities with a growth rate around 10%, where the set of new facilities each month consume approximately a /16 Applications support costs –support calls about NAT cost the carrier even when not at fault –any NAT controlled by someone else stifles the ability to deploy new applications

Public policy issues Open access requirements –cable systems have a zero-sum address utilization across all ISPs for a set number of homes passed –current IPv4 policy debate, either allocate enough space for all providers to serve the entire set of homes on a given plant, or require all the participating ISPs to incur ongoing costs dealing with rebalancing to track subscriber churn

Public policy issues Lawful Intercept for the Internet –tracing nodes and application identification by port are inhibited by NAT translation –global uniqueness of IPv6 addresses facilitates identification VoIP call preemption –even when complex NAT traversal schemes allow VoIP to work, identifying specific calls for preemption is difficult –IPv6 has no simple solution to the entire preemption issue, but facilitates the identification part of the problem

Public policy issues Administration challenge - broadband for all –requires compelling consumer applications –developing compelling applications requires innovative freedom –the economic engine of leadership in application innovation is a global political target –NAT restricts innovation to the played-out client/server model Global uniqueness of addresses will impact the model and potential applications in Jordi's upcoming talk

Summary The reserve of IPv4 addresses is dwindling and must be shared globally. History shows us what IPv4 allocations were like, but the looming demand makes it somewhat irrelevant. A variety of public policy choices could further increase demand on the global pool. In short, further IPv4 conservation efforts will not be sufficient to deliver the Internet of tomorrow…