1. Sofía Silva Berenguer sofia @ lacnic.net Paramaribo - Surinam IPv4 Exhaustion And IPv6 Deployment

2. IPv4 There are 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses (32 bits long) but not all of them can be used Looks like a lot, right? But... World population currently stands at just over 6 billion people Mobile penetration 87%, Internet penetration 35% We all normally use more than one IP address (possibly 4) They don't seem to be that many now!

3. Internet Number Resource Management IANA ARIN ISP End users LACNIC NIC.brNIC.mx ISP mx ISP #1 APNIC LIRs/ISPs RIPE NCC LIRs/ISPs AfriNIC

4. Evolution IANA’s central pool

5. RIRs IPv4 Exhaustion Source: Geoff Huston http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/

6. Historical Facts 1983 Research network for ~ 100 computers 1992 Internet is open to the commercial sector : – Exponential growth – IETF urged to work on a IP next generation protocol 1993 Exhaustion of the class B address space – Forecast of network collapse for 1994 ! – RFC 1519 (CIDR) published 1995 : RFC 1883 (IPv6 specs) published – First RFC about IPv6

7. Emergent Measures CIDR (Classless Interdomain Routing) Private Addresses (RFC1918) NAT (Network Address Translation) – IPv4 Address Multiplexing – Global IP Private IP Translation – Global IP Private IP + port (NAT-PT) This measures gave us time to develop and deploy IPv6

8. IPv4 exhaustion consecuences The sky won’t fall and the Internet won’t stop, but … It will be harder to allocate contiguous address blocks (impact to routing tables) IPv4 more expensive and harder to get – IPv4 Transfers and addresses’ market (E.g. Microsoft buying Nortel's legacy IP address space) – RIR’s IPv4 exhaustion policies (i.e APNIC’s last /8, Gradual IPv4 Resource Exhaustion) – IPv4 address allocation will be less equal Restrictions for growth and development on broadband and mobile networks

9. Possible solutions NAT (Network Address Translation), AKA: – Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) – Large Scale NAT (LSN) – NAT444 IPv6

10. Network Address Translation (NAT) Allows sharing a single public IP address among several devices Does not scale 2801::10 CGN Home NAT

11. Issues with NAT When blocking one user's “malicious” traffic, we also risk block traffic from many “good” users. In order to identify which user accessed which services logging the IP address is no longer enough, we also need to log port numbers. NAT“boxes” are limited in the number of simultaneous users they can handle. Harder for Internet Content Providers (i.e. geolocation, sessions based on IP, etc.) Port forwarding will become increasingly difficult to manage for users and ISPs (big impact for gamers for example)

12. NAT is only a pill, the real solution is IPv6

13. IPv6 3.4 x 1038 IP addresses 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,76 8,211,456 IP addresses!! Some say that there are enough IPv6 addresses for each one of the “Sahara's desert grains of sand”.

14. But … IPv4-only devices can't “talk” with IPv6-only devices. A translator is needed (additional equipment, with additional cost, etc.) This translator device also breaks the communication model. Both devices need to “speak” the same IP version

15. Dual Stack The best solution Dual-stack devices can communicate with other dual-stack devices and with IPv4-only and IPv6-only devices.

16. Why IPv6 is important It is the only feasible way to grow the Internet It will allow the Internet to grow open and as an engine of innovation It will create new opportunities on: – P2P Social-Networks, P2P Storage, P2P Clouds – Home Networking

17. IPv6-enabled ASNs

18. IPv6 allocations and routes

19. Organizations routing IPv6 18% average worldwide Very low in the Caribbean, some exceptions are: – Cuba 100% – Netherlands Antilles 25% – Dominican Republic 35% – Bermuda 14% – Trinidad and Tobago 44% – Grenada 50% – Saint Kitts and Nevis 35% Source: LACNIC Registration Services

20. The effective deployment of the IPv6 protocol throughout the region has been one of LACNIC's constant driving forces since 2003. With this objective in mind, more than 6000 technicians have received training through the various activities that LACNIC has coordinated with the support of different stakeholders in every corner of its service region. The support provided to technical forums (FLIP6) shows the level of coordination and collaboration achieved within the region, as does the work conducted with governments and other relevant bodies.

21. Final Thoughts We still need a lot of work to do Hard dates seem useful to set up goals (Regional IPv6 Week, World IPv6 Launch, etc.) We need to reach not just the technical people, but also the people making business decisions and selling services in ISPs, ICPs, etc. This has to be the “IPv6 Year”, failing to deploy IPv6 may deeply harm the Internet as we know it and as we want it to be.

22. Questions? Comments?

23. twitter.com/LACNIC facebook.com/ LACNIC youtube.com/user/lacnicstaff gplusme.at/LACNIC CASA DE INTERNET DE LATINOAMÉRICA Y EL CARIBE

24. Sofía Silva Berenguer sofia @ lacnic.net Thank you!