arjen holtzer - ipv6 deployment monitoring survey
DESCRIPTION
Arjen Holtzer - IPv6 Deployment Monitoring SurveyTRANSCRIPT
IPv6 deployment monitoringGhent, 14 December 2010
IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey
IPv6 deployment monitoring2
The IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey
• Aim is to establish the best possible comprehensive view - present IPv6 penetration - perceived bottlenecks- current future plans
• Best way to establish this is to ask the Internet providers and users, basically: the RIR communities around the world
• ARIN carried out such a survey with its members in March 2008, a starting point for the currently proposed survey
IPv6 deployment monitoring3
The IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey
• RIPE NCC and APNIC carried out this same survey in 2009. In 2010, all RIRs participated to the survey:
• Survey was prepared and carried out by TNO/GNKS in close collaboration with RIPE NCC, APNIC, ARIN, AFRINIC and LACNIC
• Survey was kept short, and focused on essentials• Privacy is guaranteed
• Results of 2010 will be compared with those of 2009 to get a good picture of progress
IPv6 deployment monitoring4
IPv6 deployment monitoring5
RIPE NCC respondents
• In 2010, the RIPE NCC community generated 769 respondents. This is 159 more than 2009 (610 respondents).
• Participation is largely comparable to last year for most counts (and is therefore not explicitly presented)
IPv6 deployment monitoring6
Does your organization have an IPv6 presence ?
33%
16%
15%
9%
16%
40%
37% 35%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010
No
Yes, both internal networks and Internet
Yes, only internal networks
Yes, only on Internet
IPv6 deployment monitoring7
More organizations have or consider having an IPv6 allocation and/or assignment
76%86%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010
No
Yes
IPv6 deployment monitoring8
More customers use IPv6 connectivity in 2010 (ISP’s only)
66%
26%
3% 3% 3%
58%
31%
5%2%
4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
0% 0% - 0.5% 0.5% - 1.0% 1.0% - 2.0% More
2009 2010
IPv6 deployment monitoring9
More ISPs consider promoting IPv6 uptake to their customers in 2010
43%54%
14%
37%43%
9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010
No
Maybe
Yes
IPv6 deployment monitoring10
More organizations with IPv6 in production, yet still mostly insignificant
280
354
54
54
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2009 2010
IPv6 traffic is greater than IPv4 traffic
IPv6 traffic is same as IPv4 traffic
IPv6 traffic is non-negligible but less than IPv4 traffic
IPv6 traffic is insignificant
or82%
or86%
IPv6 deployment monitoring11
More have IPv6 implementation (plans)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ISP to consumersISP to business
internalpeeringtransit
DNS desktops
webserviceshostede-mail
cable/dsl
internalpeeringtransit
DNS desktops
webserviceshostede-mail
cable/dsl
Deployed Plans No plan
2009
2010
IPv6 deployment monitoring12
Attitude, perception and experience with IPv6
IPv6 deployment monitoring13
Why doesn’t your organization consider having an IPv6 allocation cq assignment?
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Other
Cannot meet the requirements
Lack of available config mgt tools
Communications service provider doesn't support …
Cannot afford expense
Cannot afford risk of transition
ISP doesn't support IPv6
Our infrastructure doesn't support it
Haven't gotten around to it
Don't see business need
2010
2009
IPv6 deployment monitoring14
Main motivations to consider having IPv6 allocation cq assignment
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Other
Customer demand
Availability of IPv4 address space
Want to benefit from advantages asap
Make sure IPv6 is supported in our products
Want to be "ahead of the game"
2010
2009
IPv6 deployment monitoring15
The biggest hurdles, compared
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Other
Information security
Vendor support
Business case
Availability of (knowledgeable) staff
Costs
Other
Information security
Vendor support
Business case
Availability of (knowledgeable) staff
Costs (required financial investment/time of staff)
2010
2009
Those who implement or plan to implement
Those who are not ready to go for IPv6
IPv6 deployment monitoring16
The biggest problems with IPv6 in production?
9% 9%
17% 10%
19%
34%
37%
52%
40%
57% 48%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2009 2010
Lack of user demand
No experience, yet
Technical problems
Budget issues: convincing non-technical business responsible people for getting it
Budget issues: no access to investment money due to scarcity of resources
Budget issues
Other (please specify)
IPv6 deployment monitoring17
Overall Conclusions IPv6 Survey
• In the RIPE NCC region, experience and preparedness with IPv6 has grown a lot over the last year, yet real use has not grown that much, yet.
• Vendors, gear up! ISPs are ready to go and need good equipment.
• Next year: another global survey to monitor changes
IPv6 deployment monitoringGhent, 14 December 2010
IPv6 Technical bottleneck analysis
IPv6 deployment monitoring19
IPv6 Technical bottleneck analysis: Goals & work plan
• What are currently the most significant technical issues blocking or slowing down IPv6 adoption?
• E.g. availability of hardware and software• E.g. standardization, architectural issues, replacement strategies etc.
• Include the whole value chain
• Preliminary results based on 16 one-hour interviews with network architects, product specialists and managers related to:
• ISPs with their own network infrastructure (8)• vendors (4)• corporate users (3)• content providers (1)
• Thanks to interviewees for their cooperation – much appreciated!
IPv6 deployment monitoring20
Question: possible IPv6 impact on the Value Chain
Internal network
routers, proxies, DMZ, …
Residential Gateway
External network
core network
access network
network OAMnetwork provisioning
migration techniques
Fiber
Cable
3G
DSL
OperatingSystem
MS, Apple, Linux, …
Communi-cation
software
other IP dependent applications
Browsers
VoIP, chat, …
Service website www
Specific internet service
or platform
VoIP
IPTV
p2p
…
IPv6 deployment monitoring21
Overview of bottlenecks from the interviews (1)
• Communication software• Mobile phones, software apps (fixed & mobile)
• Operating System• In general ok (except for legacy)
• Internal Network• availability of RG’s, large non-IPv6 installed base• Corporate applications• IPv6 in corporate networks is not top priority
IPv6 deployment monitoring22
Overview of bottlenecks from the interviews (2)
• External Network• Inhouse built applications for monitoring and provisioning• BNG, DSLAM and RG IPv6 feature support and maturity• Is your current platform upgradable?• replacement strategy for DSLAM’s, CMTS’s
Vendors and ISP’s need each other!
• Specific internet service or platform and service website• Varied landscape of services. Really depends on the
company that builds the service• Load balancers
IPv6 deployment monitoring23
Main findings
• Feature parity: IPv4 support is still much more widespread than IPv6
• Vendors need ISP’s to do operational testing to mature their products
• still, product-specific bugs are regularly encountered
• Application landscape is huge
• IPv6 deployment is possible, but it’s not ‘plug-and-play’ enough yet
• Focus mainly on internet services: no priority for triple play over IPv6
Tests, trials & pilots are a MUST for 2011
Pool of early-adopters large enough?
Next year: more specific interviews/survey