Is Enough Progress being Made on IPv6?

Carl Weinschenk

IPv6 is the corporate and government version of exercising and eating vegetables: Everyone agrees it's a good thing, but somehow most find a way to put it off. Despite the stark reality that the Internet is running out of addresses under the old scheme -- IPv4 -- momentum toward the new approach has been marginal.

 

Both the good news and the root of the problem is that an immediate infusion of new addresses is not necessary, since there still is something of a reserve and work-arounds -- most notably Network Address Translation (NAT) -- are stretching the current supply.

 

But the need is clear. The key reasons for moving are well articulated by Paul Twomey, president and chief executive of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in this ZDNet.co.uk podcast. Among other things, Twomey says that IPv6 will be the only way to expand networks after IPv4 addresses run out. In addition, companies must ensure that they and their ISPs have the proper gear and procedures in place to interconnect seamless connect IPv4 and IPv6 users.

 

IPv6 has been gurgling below the surface for quite some time. In what could be a significant move toward adoption, Google now is fully on board. A couple of months ago, according to Ars Technica, Google made its search available at ipv6.google.com. Now, a Google blog post suggests that the influential company is fully behind the concept. That's good news. The reality remains, as pointed out in the Ars Technica story, that the company has not yet implemented IPv6 capability "to www.google.com proper." The piece also describes some of the challenges of running a hybrid IPv4/IPv6 Internet.

 

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) sounds like an organization in a worried state of mind. InfoWorld's report on a study by the group starts with numbers that can explain the anxiety: The report says that 85 percent of Internet addresses are taken and the pool of available new ones will run out by 2011.


 

The changeover to IPv6, the report says, will require, according to the story, "extensive changes to networking hardware and software." Though the two versions of IP can co-exist and work together, IPv6 must be adopted comprehensively across the Internet to truly be effective. The OECD says that big businesses and ISPs are not doing enough to drive the adoption. Government must use its buying power to drive adoption, the organization says.

 

IPv6 proponents are in for a rude awakening if assume a government push to accelerate IPv6 adoption will occur. Federal agencies face a June 30 deadline for IPv6 upgrades. At the FOSE 2008 conference last month in Washington, D.C., ScienceLogic conducted a readiness survey. It found that only 6 percent of the 107 responding agencies are ready now. Twenty-two percent say they will meet the deadline, 33 percent say they will not and 39 percent aren't sure.

 

The Internet is global, of course, so it is important to keep an eye on what is happening everywhere. Heise Online reports that the European Commission at the end of the month will release a statement calling for 25 percent of all European users to have access to IPv6 by end 2010. The statement will outline four ways in which IPv6 adoption can be pushed. The story provides information on those approaches and says that efforts vary among the 27 member countries. While the piece doesn't mention any that are doing a poor job, it does laud the progress being made by Germany.

 

A lesser publicized advantage of IPv6 is that it could reduce energy consumption, at least according to this post by Greenmonk Associates. NAT works by dynamically allocating a pool of IPv4 addresses across the end points under its control. The devices must periodically send a message to the NAT infrastructure saying that they still are connected, lest the address they are using be given to another end point. The post and those it links to say that the requirement to send these messages -- which would be absent in IPv6 -- cuts battery life. This ultimately requires more frequent recharging. In addition to inconveniencing users, this is not in line with a green philosophy of network operation.



Add Comment      Leave a comment on this blog post
May 22, 2008 2:57 AM James Governor James Governor  says:
Hey Carl good stuff, asking the right questions. I like the way you internationalise the piece by bringing in the EU (which was certainly very influential in adoption of the GSM standard, which kick-started mobility in Europe). The green aspect needs more work, but its certainly an interesting idea. We all know how hot our devices can get, which tends to be evidence of wasted energy. Reply
May 31, 2010 6:29 AM Scrabble Cheat Scrabble Cheat  says:

Two years later, I find that IPV6 is still not that widly spread... Sounds very weird to me...

Reply
Jun 12, 2010 4:15 AM Sarkari Naukri Sarkari Naukri  says: in response to Scrabble Cheat

I am agree with you.

As your staistics, There is no progress made over ip4 till now.

Reply
Jun 16, 2010 10:54 AM industry data industry data  says:

I like ipv6... In my country it is very good.

In combination with DNS it have the majority.

Reply
Jun 26, 2010 6:32 AM Signs Austin Signs Austin  says:

Here the DNN protocol is used.

Now the try to implement a modern version of SOAP.

Reply
Jul 21, 2010 1:39 AM business voip business voip  says:

Everyone is aware that the IPv4 is soon going to be outdated. The address available under IPV4 is not enough for the fast growing Internet. So, the solution for this problem is the latest IPv6. But the sad news is that there is no much progress going on to implement IPv6. There is one relief to this problem. Network Address Translation (NAT) has been meeting demands as of now. Anyway, IPv6 is the last and only solution available.

Reply
Aug 8, 2010 5:00 AM chicago dentist chicago dentist  says:

The devices must periodically send a message to the NAT infrastructure saying that they still are connected, lest the address they are using be given to another end point. The post and those it links to say that the requirement to send these messages -- which would be absent in IPv6 -- cuts battery life.

Reply
Aug 14, 2010 11:42 AM anxiety symptoms anxiety symptoms  says:

The address available under IPV4 is not enough for the fast growing Internet. So, the solution for this problem is the latest IPv6. But the sad news is that there is no much progress going on to implement IPv6.

Reply
Aug 18, 2010 9:14 AM Work Injury Lawyer Work Injury Lawyer  says:

I definitely agree that IPv6 has no progress. And I really wondering why. Thanks for the post...

Reply
Aug 19, 2010 8:39 AM boomschors boomschors  says:

Last time I have not known about IPv6. Now reading this page and get useful info. That is really great to using this tool for my work.

Reply
Aug 28, 2010 7:35 AM allergy symptoms allergy symptoms  says:

Ipv6 is very good but the research item is not complete in this. I don't like this. There is one relief to this problem. Network Address Translation (NAT) has been meeting demands as of now. Anyway, IPv6 is the last and only solution available. As your staistics, There is no progress made over ip4 till now.

Reply
Sep 1, 2010 6:38 AM compensation claims compensation claims  says: in response to Scrabble Cheat

According to the figures the pool of available address should be running out sometime next year so they had better get a shift on with this. Although it may just be a case of Y2k all over again and the problem is actually being solved under all of our noses (lets hope so eh!!!).

Reply
Oct 6, 2010 9:46 AM handmade photo jewelry handmade photo jewelry  says: in response to compensation claims

From what I understand, IPv6 has security and mobility built into? it, instead of having security and mobility available as extensions (as it is with IPv4). Having the security actually built into the protocol reduces its limitations as well as provides greater scalability. So, if anything, I would think of IPv6 as being more secure than IPv4 (in theory).

Reply
Oct 24, 2010 2:26 AM Flyttstdning Stockholm Flyttstdning Stockholm  says:

I think that IP4 and IP6 have differences about the way to using. But IP6 is better than Ip4.

Reply
Nov 16, 2010 2:55 AM Vetement Grossesse Vetement Grossesse  says:

IPv6 is an ever-emerging star of the Internet. Several years ago, when the protocol started to be drafted, it immediately entered under every spotlight available in IT. Back then, the perspective of not having any more IPv4 addresses to assign seemed horrifying: nobody was ready for it, and there were quite a few people who expected the Internet to be dead and buried in a few months.

Reply
Apr 20, 2011 5:01 AM short sale short sale  says:

The real damage caused by NAT is mostly invisible. Because some people don't have IP addresses, creators of applications and protocols must assume that nobody does, making many ideas complicated or impossible. We won't know what branches of innovation we've missed out on until this constraint is lifted. As James Burke teaches us, it's these little things that so often change the course of technology.

Reply
Apr 29, 2011 4:13 AM marin facial marin facial  says:

There is a lot of legacy IPv4 software in networking components will not route packets going to those addresses, since they were designated as future use a long time ago.

Reply
Jun 18, 2011 2:15 AM  freelancer freelancer  says:

I find that IPV6 is still not that widly spread so its not enough!

Reply
Jun 30, 2011 3:59 AM Elliot Travers Elliot Travers  says: in response to freelancer

i agree with freelancer.  It is not spread enough and not growing quick enough to be worth switching to.

Reply

Post a comment

 

 

 

 


(Maximum characters: 1200). You have 1200 characters left.

 

null
null

 

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Sign up now and get the best business technology insights direct to your inbox.