Quantifying the Extent of IPv6 Deployment

Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Telecommunications and Informatics Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Signal Processing, 2012

This paper analyzes the technical and nontechnical impediments for a smooth and successful transition from IPv4 protocol to IPv6 protocol in the Internet. It tries to illustrate and defines most obstacles that hold the widespread deployment of IPv6 at both sides: end-users and Internet Service Providers (ISPs). The paper also suggests transparent, auto-configured, and cost effective solutions for both end-users and ISPs parties to allow a smooth and successful widespread deployment of IPv6.

Computers and Communications, 2005. …, 2005

Telematics and Informatics, 2016

The paper examines the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 (Internet Protocol version 4 and 6). More specifically, the aim of the paper is to present an analysis of the status of the transition process and the drivers and barriers concerning this transition. This includes an update on the availability of IPv4 addresses and how far the adoption of IPv6 has come. It also includes a discussion on what but also who the drivers and barriers are, including an examination of the implications of implementing transfer markets for IPv4 addresses.

2006 8th International Conference Advanced Communication Technology, 2006

Numerous IPv6 transition mechanisms have been calculation and so on. For example, if IP-in-IP tunneling developed for supporting interoperability between IPv4 and IPv6. mechanisms are used in IPv6 transition mechanisms, IP header Although performance aspects of these mechanisms are overhead will be increased to 4.81% as shown in Tab. 2. Header requirements for practical deployment, they have yet to be overhead analysis is a very simple and crude way to predict empirically evaluated. In this paper we present the impact of IPv6 transition mechanisms on user application. Our experimental results show that though performance overheads were minimal, We have found that the most significant differentiators of with small, fragmented and translation packets some performance performance lie with more subtle details of protocol and transition degradation did occur. mechanism operations. For example, if an IPv6 source sends

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2012

While the IETF standardized IPv6 more than fifteen years ago, IPv4 is still the prevalent Internet protocol today. On June 8th, 2011, several large content and service providers coordinated a large-scale IPv6 test-run, by enabling support for IPv6 simultaneously: the World IPv6 Day. In this paper, we compare IPv6 activity before, during, and after the event. We examine traffic traces recorded at a large European Internet Exchange Point (IXP) and on the campus of a major US university; analyzing volume, application mix, and the use of tunneling protocols for transporting IPv6 packets. For the exchange point we find that native IPv6 traffic almost doubled during the World IPv6 Day while changes in tunneled traffic were limited. At the university, IPv6 traffic increased from 3-6 GB/day to over 130 GB/day during the World IPv6 Day, accompanied by a significant shift in the application and HTTP destination mix. Our results also show that a significant number of participants at the World IPv6 Day kept their IPv6 support online even after the test period ended, suggesting that they did not encounter any significant problems.

IEEE Distributed Systems Online, 2000

At different rates in different parts of the world, the next-generation Internet protocol, IPv6, is inching its way toward adoption. Asian countries are moving fastest, at least partly because their need for IPv6's expanded address space is greatest, but efforts in the US and Europe also signal that the protocol's detractors haven't stopped its progress. IPv6 got a boost from the US government in June, when the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) announced (

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000

IIn the near term there will be no available, unallocated IPv4 addresses. From original estimates of IPv4 exhaustion in 2037,[12] the most widely-cited current estimates for ARIN IPv4 address depletion is now at 2013[13]. This deadline gives a particular importance to IPv6 adoption. The goals of this work were to identify valid measures of IPv6 diffusion and use classic diffusion models to bound the uncertainty in those measures. With these measures and simple models we can bound best case, current projection and reasonably optimistic cases for the adoption of the IPv6 protocol. For these ends, the work discusses previous analysis of IPv6 routes and ASN data from ARIN to quantify the current adoption rate. We conclude that there is no reasonable case for diffusion of IPv6 before IPv4 full allocation. The second significant contribution, besides measurement and bounding uncertainty, that is provided in this paper is to what extent the now well established fundamental findings of the economics of computer security can apply to the diffusion of IPv6. The second significant but unanswered question is if the creation of a transferrable property interest in IPv4 addresses, informed by computer security economics, will hinder or galvanize IPv6 adoption. In order to address these questions the paper provides some non-trivial insights on IPv6 through presenting sketches of four scenarios: no action, IPv4 market creation, coordination government action and registrar-only management. As much as conclusions, this paper offers a set of questions that are critical to consider.

10th International Conference on Telecommunications, 2003. ICT 2003., 2003

With IPv6's maturity increasing, there is a need to evaluate the performance benefits or drawbacks for endusers that the new IPv6 protocol will have compared to the well-established IPv4 protocol. Theoretically, the expected overhead between the two different protocols should be directly proportional to the difference in the packet's header size, and therefore the expected performance of IPv6 should be similar to IPv4. However, according to our findings, the empirical performance difference between IPv4 and IPv6 in a real setting is much higher than anticipated. Our experimental setup is the key ingredient to our findings since it demonstrates the current performance of IPv6 as delivered by commercial routers supporting IPv6 for performance metrics such as throughput and latency. We hope that our experience and results will be useful to end users who are planning migration to IPv6 as well as designers and implementers of IPv6 (router and host implementations).

IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering (IOSR-JCE), 2015

The issue of deploying IPv6 Technology has been a topic of debate for more than a decade now. Professionals have been discussing on the transition from Internet Protocol version 4 (IPVv4) to Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) due to the fact that the IPv4 address space would soon be exhausted. In this paper, we analyse the IPv4 and IPv6 technologies and look at the benefits of migrating to IPv6, its social implications, risks & challenges and the opportunities the IPv6 migration offers.