Even though the number of available IPv4 addresses are dwindling faster than expected, the move to IPv6 remains sluggish, according to a recent study from Arbor Networks.
In a study of native IPv6 traffic volumes across multiple large carriers, IPv6 adoption remains minuscule as a result of technical and design challenges, no economic incentives, and a dearth of IPv6 content, according to the Arbor Networks study released on 19 April. During the six-month study period, Arbor Networks researchers found that traffic over IPv4 networks grew by an average of 40 percent to 60 percent while IPv6 traffic actually decreased by an average of 12 percent proportionately because it was not growing fast enough in comparison to IPv4 traffic.
“Despite 15 years of IPv6 standards development, vendor releases and advocacy, only a small fraction of the Internet has adopted IPv6,” said Arbor Networks chief scientist Craig Labovitz.
While actual IPv6 traffic volumes have gone up, it has shrunk as a percentage of all Internet traffic, to a mere 0.25 percent of all net traffic, Labovitz said. The top IPv6 applications are largely peer-to-peer applications such as BitTorrent, accounting for 61 percent of traffic. In comparison, peer-to-peer networks account for 8 percent of IPv4-based traffic. Web traffic makes up the second largest block of traffic on both IPv4 and IPv6 networks, but the differences are still striking. HTTP traffic accounts for 19 percent of IPv4 traffic, compared to a mere 4.6 percent over IPv6.
Online video, such as Netflix, YouTube and web video, accounted for a little less than half of IPv4 traffic, but they didn’t even make a dent over IPv6. It’s ironic considering Netflix is one of the few major companies with an IPv6-accessible website.
Users and businesses that are interested in migrating, but stymied by their ISP’s lack of IPv6 offerings, can use tunnels to get IPv6 connectivity. Arbor examined the total IPv6 traffic over a specific 24-hour period in February and found over 250,000 such tunnels. More than 90 percent of the tunnels belonged to five major tunnel brokers, including Hurricane Electric, Anycast and Microsoft’s Teredo service.
The Arbor research highlighted the fact that most companies and ISPs are way behind in their transition plans to move their networking infrastructure to the newer address space. This is worrying in light of the fact that the remaining IPv4 addresses are running out faster than predicted.
ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) allocated the last blocks of IPv4 addresses to the five regional internet registries in a public ceremony on 3 February.
While existing sites will continue working just fine even when the last IPv4 address has been assigned, any organisations wanting to expand or add new capabilities will be unable to without transitioning their network infrastructure to IPv6.
In fact, that’s more or less the case for Asia-Pacific businesses. The Asia Pacific Network Information Centre, the RIR responsible for assigning IP addresses to the region, announced the release of its last available batch of IPv4 addresses on 15 April. While analysts had predicted APNIC would run out of the IP address blocks first, the predictions had estimated the supply would last till the summer.
“Considering the ongoing demand for IP addresses, this date effectively represents IPv4 exhaustion for many of the current operators in the Asia Pacific region,” said APNIC director general Paul Wilson.
APNIC have placed the remaining IPv4 addresses under limited distribution. “From this day onwards, IPv6 is mandatory for building new Internet networks and services,” Wilson said.
Asia-Pacific is well on the way to become the first “IPv6-enabled region”, but businesses need to begin the migration if they haven’t already done so in order to “remain viable”, according to Wilson.
The American Registry for Internet Numbers received 253 requests for IPv6 address blocks from internet service providers in the first quarter of 2011, compared to 134 requests in the last quarter of 2010. It’s not just ISPs talking about IPv6, as ARIN also received 247 end-user requests for IPv6 address space in the first quarter 2011, compared to 103 requests in first quarter 2010. ARIN received a total of 434 requests from ISPs in 2010, and expects requests to exceed that in 2011.
The upcoming “World IPv6 Day” on 8 June marks “a major milestone in the Internet’s evolution”, Labovitz said, because it will force businesses and ISPs to stress test the global network infrastructure. “Will the flood of IPv6 traffic result in network failures? As an industry, we’re not sure,” Labovitz concluded.
Suspended prison sentence for Craig Wright for “flagrant breach” of court order, after his false…
Cash-strapped south American country agrees to sell or discontinue its national Bitcoin wallet after signing…
Google's change will allow advertisers to track customers' digital “fingerprints”, but UK data protection watchdog…
Welcome to Silicon In Focus Podcast: Tech in 2025! Join Steven Webb, UK Chief Technology…
European Commission publishes preliminary instructions to Apple on how to open up iOS to rivals,…
San Francisco jury finds Nima Momeni guilty of second-degree murder of Cash App founder Bob…
View Comments
Internal networking is still IP4, no one wants to maintain 2 stacks.
I know for me at the moment, I'd be perfectly willing to switch to IPv6, provided there was some sort of back-compatibility.
It's reasonable to me that Routers should be able to NAT both internal IPv4 addresses to IPv4 destinations and likewise for IPv6.
The problem is - it's just not available from the major ISP's.
Even straight-out IPv6.
Comcast, Verizon (FIOS/DSL) neither of which offer v6.
Technically, Comcast does offer v6. They have experimental 6to4 and 6rd offerings (I've used their 6to4 and its actually quite fast), although those are stop-gaps at best. While I'm waiting for them to support native dual-stack to my cable connection I'll continue using my SIXXS 6in4 tunnel for my IPv6 needs.
Dual-stack is a pipe dream, it always was.
The problem is that the original designers envisioned everyone moving to IPv6 while there were still plenty of IPv4 addresses available. This was a naive expectation that pretty much engineer involved should have known wasn't going to happen. Instead, ISPs are delaying conversion to IPv6 until the last possible moment, or even beyond.
Given that the IPv4 pool is exhaused or nearly so, 6to4 is the correct way to get everyone onto IPv6. This allows IPv6 users to access to IPv4 internet without a new IPv4 address for every user.
Servers will have to be IPv4 for quite a while, but IPv6 addresses will, over time, become the norm for users. Once a significant enough portion of any given ISP's user base is on IPv6 (with 6to4), they will probably switch all their existing IPv4 users over to IPv6, and make customers pay extra for IPv4.
Servers will eventually move over to IPv6-only once the majority of users are on IPv6, but that's decades away.
We have 3 ISPs. Verizon, Brighthouse and Rapid Systems. We inquired about getting ipv6 addresses in addition to our ipv4 blocks. They all said they can't give out ipv6 addresses yet and don't know when they will be able to.
Lets face it, IPv4 is here to stay. Everyone can use decimal numbers and full stops (periods)
Since most of the Facebook generation can't handle simple apostrophes properly, what chance for the colon or hexadecimal?
Hey there, guy. I think the Facebook generation is using DNS, just like most everybody else. Half the Facebook generation isn't even using a url, they're just typing Facebook into Google.
Hmm... I have native IPv6 from my provider, and a dual stack router. You cannot use NAT with IPv6. It is not possible with the way the protocol is specified (and thank God for that).
6 Native
I am surprised that IPv4 discussion still takes place. A vast majority of users refer to their browser as "the internet" and, as long as their domain resolves and they are able to browse content, they do not care which standard is being employed. I appreciate that the view is different for security filters and companies having to white/black list by IP. So is this really a public issue.. I suppose, it makes for good conversation =)
“From this day onwards, IPv6 is mandatory for building new Internet networks and services,” Wilson said.
What a load of nonsense. All our new internal are part of one 10.x.y range or another.
Of course IPv6 hasn't "taken off." Major websites either do not have IPv6 support or hide IPv6 behind a subdomain. Those of us who do have IPv6 connectivity don't have much chance to use it without going out of our way. When websites migrate, the traffic will follow.
World IPv6 day can't come soon enough, I just hope they don't get rid of the AAAA records.
My Theory: ISP's don't want to adopt ipv6 because they profit from fabricated scarcity. No scarcity of internet exists, but they pretend it does by allocating bandwidth. (Kind of like how phone companies charge for txt messages, imagine if ISP's charged per email) ... but with ipv4's running out internet prices can rise.
Also, the failure of home networking eqipment to support this really blows. DD-WRT does, though.
also you can get free binary usenet service if you get a tunnel, or have native ipv6. if more people knew this perhaps they would pressure their ISP's to give it to them. I've already emailed mine and they said they have no trials in progress and have no plans yet to start