|

BPF IPv6 4. Understanding the commercial and economic incentives

1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Structure of section 4:

  1. 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
  2. General observations
    1. 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
    2. Motivation to deploy IPv6
    3. Economic and business incentives
    4. Decision making
    5. External factors
    6. Long term cost savings
  3. Sectorial observations
    1. 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0
    2. ISPs
    3. IXPs
    4. Data centers
    5. Cloud service providers
    6. Content providers
    7. Vendors
    8. Mobile networks
    9. Large scale infrastructure and business networks (outside ICT industry)
  4. Regional observations
    1. 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0
    2. Europe
    3. Americas and the Caribbean
    4. Asia and Asia Pacific
    5. MEAC
    6. Africa
    7. Global players
    8. Non-commercial deployment

4. UNDERSTANDING THE COMMERCIAL AND ECONOMIC INCENTIVES

5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 The BPF collected case studies from companies and organisations that finished the transition or are implementing IPv6 for their networks and services. The case studies have been collected via an online survey, online research and direct contributions to the BPF. This section will list general observations and summarise main experiences and lessons learned per sector or type of industry, followed by a description of the case studies within their regional context.

4.1. General Observations

4.1.1. Motivation to deploy IPv6

6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 The imminent shortage of IPv4 addresses is the obvious and most cited motivation behind the decision to deploy IPv6. IPv6 is deployed to be ready for the future and it is recognised that IPv6 is the long term solution for the future.

7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0  

8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 Avoiding costs and more precisely avoiding the high cost of the alternative solutions to get around IPv4 exhaustion and extend the life of IPv4 is the second frequently cited motivation to deploy IPv6.[1]

9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0  

10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 The benefits and the higher quality of service with the IPv6 protocol, is a third argument behind decisions to deploy IPv6. Sometimes the request to deploy IPv6 or to provide new services over IPv6 came from one or more important clients.[2]

11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0  

12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 Deploying early, and creating a momentum for others to follow and start deploying IPv6 has been the motivation for early adopters, among which are several universities and NRENs.

13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0  

14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 In some areas government and regulatory guidelines or requirements and set timelines to deploy IPv6, for example for ISPs, have been an external motivational factor. There are examples of sector organisations that have been promoting IPv6 deployment and providing information or support to their members, for example the Brazilian Federation of Banks.

15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0  

4.1.2. Economic and Business Incentives

16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 The long term sustainability of the business or service is a commonly mentioned reason for deploying IPv6. The transition to IPv6 is inevitable and, in the words of one respondent to the BPF survey, “if you don’t do IPv6 now, you will run into a brick wall at some point”.

17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0  

18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 Being competitive, able to offer IPv6 services as a local ISP and showing to the customer that ‘we know what we’re doing’ is regularly mentioned as a reason to deploy IPv6.

19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0  

20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 Deploying IPv6 to save costs comes back in several case studies. Some calculated the cost of continuing to buy IPv4 addresses to the cost of enabling IPv6 and dual stack technology and concluded that IPv4 is not a good decision to support future customer growth. Other case studies pointed out that a scenario without IPv6 requires to build a more complex, and therefore more expensive solution. Some decided to deploy IPv6 when deploying a new service, to avoid additional costs in the future.

21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0  

22 Leave a comment on paragraph 22 0 There are examples service providers that were obliged to deploy IPv6 because one or more customers started to require IPv6.

23 Leave a comment on paragraph 23 0  

24 Leave a comment on paragraph 24 0 Providing a high quality of service is another reason mentioned in the case studies. The service provider wants to assure that all users can access content from any kind of device and network.

4.1.3 Decision Making

25 Leave a comment on paragraph 25 0 Based on the received case studies it can be concluded that in general, the decision to deploy IPv6 is made at an executive level.

26 Leave a comment on paragraph 26 0  

27 Leave a comment on paragraph 27 0 There have been several cases where IPv6 deployment was first promoted by one, or a few employees, usually at the technical level, before the initiative was pushed up to the decision making level. At the executive level, the engineers or the technical department then had to convince their company to adopt IPv6. Such a scenario seems to be common case in Europe.

28 Leave a comment on paragraph 28 0  

29 Leave a comment on paragraph 29 0 In other cases the decision to deploy IPv6 was triggered by an external factor. The external reason can be an executive who learned about the need to deploy IPv6 at an industry conference, the competitors that deploy IPv6, or a government initiative to promote or require IPv6 deployment. In such cases it is the executive level that requests the technical department to adopt IPv6. This scenario is common in Asian countries where governments took on a leading role in the promotion of IPv6

30 Leave a comment on paragraph 30 0  

4.1.4 External Factors

31 Leave a comment on paragraph 31 0 Many case studies don’t make reference of an external factor that stimulated of obliged them to deploy IPv6. In Asia, however, one can observe a trend where governments play a leading or encouraging role, for example in Japan or Korea, or define requirements (for ISPs) to deploy IPv6 by certain deadlines, as is the case in Malaysia. Case studies from Brazil mentioned the stimulating role from NIC.BR and initiatives in the banking sector. As mentioned in last year’s BPF document, governments in Europe and North America[3] lead by example, for example by defining internal deadlines for IPv6 deployment for government networks and e-gov services and by requiring IPv6 readiness in public procurement.

32 Leave a comment on paragraph 32 0  

33 Leave a comment on paragraph 33 0 One of the replies to the NTIA’s RFC on IPv6 deployment described how governments can play a leading role by bringing industry leaders, government agencies, and civil society together to discuss the transition and accelerate deployment.[4] An example of soft leadership by the Japanese government was shared at AprIGF 2016 (https://aprigf2016.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/tatsuya_akagawa160728_mic_ipv6_aprigf_r04.pdf).

34 Leave a comment on paragraph 34 0  

4.1.5. Long term cost savings

35 Leave a comment on paragraph 35 0 Several case studies mentioned that adopting IPv6 at an early stage and doing it step by step reduces the cost the transition. Planning early allows to align the deployment of IPv6 with regular refresh cycles and other IT initiatives. For an ISP or large network, the planning and preparation can take up several months and the implementation process can then be spread over several years, fitted in other planned or necessary work. The longer well-prepared process has as advantage that the IPv6 enabled machines or programs can replace the existing hard- or software when it comes at the end of its lifecycle. This is much more cost efficient than buying the equipment or develop/buy the software and afterwards, when IPv6 has become inevitable, spend resources on upgrades.

36 Leave a comment on paragraph 36 0  

37 Leave a comment on paragraph 37 0 Other case studies mentioned a policy that requires all new services and applications to have to support IPv6, even if the network does not yet allow IPv6 communication, to avoid the costs of adapting or redeveloping in the future.

38 Leave a comment on paragraph 38 0  

39 Leave a comment on paragraph 39 0 Solutions such as Carrier-Grade NAT (CGN) and the need to continue to buy IPv4 addresses on an IPv4 Transit market as long as the transition to IPv6 hasn’t been completed, can be an important financial burden, in particular for ISPs. There exist different models to assess these costs. Lee Howard calculated that for an ISP in the USA ‘CGN costs $1.5 million over five years for every 10,000 users, or $30 per user per year’[5]. LACNIC developed an economic model to compare the costs of various transition alternatives. The model allows ISPs to assess the cost for their company of three alternative interim solutions: deploying dual-stack with CGNAT, deploying CGNAT44 and purchasing IPv4 addresses to support the growth of their customers without address sharing. The model is available as an easy to use module on the LACNIC website: http://stats.labs.lacnic.net/PROYECTOCAF/modelo/ .[6]

4.2. Sectoral Observations

4.2.1. ISPs

40 Leave a comment on paragraph 40 0 ISPs play an important role in the deployment of IPv6. This is the case in developing and developed countries. ISPs exist in different sizes, operating large scale and smaller networks. There are several examples of ISPs in the case studies from across different regions with different levels of economic development. One general observation for ISPs providing Internet access to home users is that their mainstream customers don’t care whether they have IPv4 or IPv6, as long as they are provided with stable good internet access. Therefore, the decision is up to ISPs. Some ISPs, for example in Japan, even choose to deploy IPv6 without their customers being conscious about the change.

41 Leave a comment on paragraph 41 0  

42 Leave a comment on paragraph 42 0 The fact that the legacy equipment at the customer’s’ premises – the CPE or customer-premises equipment – also needs to be IPv6 ready is one of the main challenges indicated by ISPs. Some cases demonstrate that this can be addressed by planning ahead and deploy IPv6 at the time of large scale network upgrades that require legacy CPE to be replaced, and start to provide all new clients with IPv6 capable equipment.

43 Leave a comment on paragraph 43 0  

44 Leave a comment on paragraph 44 0 A closer look at the respondents to a recent survey (November 2016) on IPv6 deployment showed that 69% of the ISP employees that replied to the survey responded using IPv4, while almost every response came from a network that has both IPv4 and IPv6 allocations. The researchers concluded from this observation ‘that corporate LANs, even in ISP networks have not yet deployed IPv6 in all their subnets.’[7]

45 Leave a comment on paragraph 45 0  

46 Leave a comment on paragraph 46 0 A 2015 LACNIC study[8] asked ISPs for reasons why they did not yet deployed IPv6. ‘The most commonly mentioned reasons were: ‘Current infrastructure presents problems for transitioning to IPv6’, and ‘Deployment and operational difficulties are expected’.[9] ISPs that already finished or had started IPv6 deployment gave as reasons for the deployment:

  1. 47 Leave a comment on paragraph 47 0
  2. Declining availability and raising cost of IPv4 addresses;
  3. Corporate image;
  4. Migrating to IPv6 without further IPv4 growth is the most cost-effective solution;
  5. Significant customer base growth;
  6. Business opportunity.

48 Leave a comment on paragraph 48 0 The study further observed that ‘in many cases deployment began as a result of corporate clients requirements, particularly universities.’[10] And that 58% of the ISPs that already started deploying IPv6 replied that deployment had improved their business results.[11]

49 Leave a comment on paragraph 49 0  

50 Leave a comment on paragraph 50 0 A relative small number of ISPs service a large part of the Internet users. Geoff Huston calculated that in May 2015 the 30 largest ISPs serviced 42% of the entire Internet user population. The effect of an IPv6 deployment by one or more of these large providers on the global IPv6 deployment rate is immediately visible.[12] A number of these largest ISPs, however, operate in the developing world, and tend to be late adopters so as to reduce capital risk for their enterprise.[13]

4.2.2. IXPs

51 Leave a comment on paragraph 51 0 The IPv6 uptake by Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) is uneven across the different continents. Already in 2011 the European IXP Association (Euro-IX) announced that all of its members were IPv6 ready and enabled[14] and today networks can peer IPv6 traffic at all Euro-IX members.

52 Leave a comment on paragraph 52 0  

53 Leave a comment on paragraph 53 0 In developing regions the situation is different. In particular in regions where none of the local networks that peer at the IXP are IPv6 enabled or dual-stack there is not much incentive for starting IXPs to deploy IPv6. Organisations that support the creation of IXPs and the RIRs in developing regions are promoting IPv6 deployment. But it is not because an IXP is capable of handling IPv6, that it will see IPv6 traffic passing through its infrastructure. On the contrary, there is often little or no IPv6 peering activity as member networks often do not yet use IPv6 themselves. UIXP[15], the Uganda Internet eXchange Point, for example has been IPv6 enabled for years (i.e. every member has been assigned an IPv6 address) but saw only recently IPv6 peering after some member networks activated IPv6.[16]

4.2.3. Data centers

54 Leave a comment on paragraph 54 0 There are some commercial deployments observed for long term business preparation. On the other hand, in the short term, data centers still need globally unique IPv4 to be accessible for their customers. Therefore, while some successful cases are observed such as UOL Diveo in Brazil, in general, deployment is still limited. There are cases of data centers providing connectivity in IPv6 but through IPv4 based translation technology such as 6rd.

4.2.4. Cloud Service providers

55 Leave a comment on paragraph 55 0 There have been some recent developments with cloud service providers deploying IPv6 for (parts of) their services. Akamai has made an announcement that IPv6 is on by default for new customers. CloudFlare has enabled IPv6 for their existing customers. AWS and Microsoft Azure gain native IPv6 connectivity:

56 Leave a comment on paragraph 56 0 https://redmondmag.com/blogs/the-schwartz-report/2016/10/azure-gains-ipv6-connectivity.aspx

57 Leave a comment on paragraph 57 0 https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/updates/ipv6-for-azure-vms/

58 Leave a comment on paragraph 58 0 Lee Howard describes the situation for cloud providers in the United States as follows “Content is moving slowly. Only 16 of the top 50 U.S. web sites are capable of IPv64, essentially unchanged for nearly two years5, and 15% of the top 25000 worldwide. Recent announcements from Amazon Web Services (AWS)7 and Microsoft Azure 8 are almost as encouraging Akamai’s announcement that IPv6 is on by default for new customers, and that CloudFlare has enabled it for their existing customer. A lot more companies need to follow CloudFlare’s lead and enable IPv6 for existing web sites.”[17]

4.2.5. Content Providers

59 Leave a comment on paragraph 59 0 Several contents providers at global level support IPv6, among them are Google, Yahoo, Facebook, LinkedIn. The number of users accessing content over IPv6 is increasing. For example, users accessing Google websites with IPv6 is increasing by 1% every three month and over 14% in total, in Sept 2016.

60 Leave a comment on paragraph 60 0  

61 Leave a comment on paragraph 61 0 On the other hand, the web service availability with IPv6 of the Alexa top one million websites is about 5.8%, while service availability of the Top Alexa 1000 was at 22% in October 2016.[18] There is still room for improvement.

62 Leave a comment on paragraph 62 0  

63 Leave a comment on paragraph 63 0 Further, having local content available in IPv6 in each country/economy is another area to be addressed. There are some local content providers observed to have IPv6 availability such as UOL DIVEO in Brazil, Kakao talk in Korea.

4.2.6. Vendors

64 Leave a comment on paragraph 64 0 Vendors of ICT equipment play an important role as their implementation and feature roadmap decisions have an impact on the IPv6 readiness of other actors in the chain. Important progress has been made, but there are definitive areas that need improvement. This is only possible with more wider adoption since primarily the improvements are related to issues typically found with practical experience. For ISPs and network operators, nearly all current routers and access equipment support IPv6. The most recent mobile devices also fully support IPv6. All current computer operating systems (OS) support IPv6, therefore, once IPv6 is turned on by default, users will connect to IPv6 without needing to do any configurations or settings.

65 Leave a comment on paragraph 65 0  

66 Leave a comment on paragraph 66 0 There are already devices for consumers, such as cameras, televisions and others on the market that support IPv6. However, most consumer devices that are being used do not support IPv6. The consumer market is still evolving in the direction of IPv6 adoption. There are still issues due to overall lack of understanding and Internet protocol knowledge, but many efforts are being undertaken to help resolve this.

67 Leave a comment on paragraph 67 0  

68 Leave a comment on paragraph 68 0 The security features and functionalities for both IPv4 and IPv6 capable devices need consistent enhancements as the Internet keeps evolving. For IPv6 there are some varying protocol nuance which vendors need to understand to create effective mitigation features. Also the interaction between IPv4 and IPv6 co-existing networks need to be taken into account. As much as operational training is needed for engineers deploying IPv6 networks, vendors also need training to effectively create and implement security solutions for IPv6 capable devices.

69 Leave a comment on paragraph 69 0  

70 Leave a comment on paragraph 70 0 Some areas that need added attention are logging, auditing and filtering capabilities which directly influence devices such as intrusion detection and firewall devices.

71 Leave a comment on paragraph 71 0  

72 Leave a comment on paragraph 72 0 “IPv6 requirements for ICT equipment – RIPE-554”

73 Leave a comment on paragraph 73 0 To address the needs of the ICT vendor community and the people responsible for procuring IPv6 capable equipment, the RIPE community developed a procurement document, titled “IPv6 requirements for ICT equipment” and named RIPE-554. The document is used by many global organizations as a guideline during equipment evaluation and in the RFP creation process, to require IPv6 support in equipment and software. RIPE-554 is a list of IPv6 requirements that vendors must meet in order to qualify for consideration for IPv6 capable equipment purchases. RIPE-554 has been translated in numerous languages and widely used around the world. As a result, many vendors have included this set of specifications in their IPv6 implementation roadmaps.

74 Leave a comment on paragraph 74 0  

75 Leave a comment on paragraph 75 0 RIPE-554 advises that every tender includes the following text:
All ICT hardware as subject of this tender must support both the IPv4 and IPv6 protocols. Similar performance must be provided for both protocols in input, output and/or throughput data-flow performance, transmission and processing of packets.

76 Leave a comment on paragraph 76 0 IPv6 support can be verified and certified by the IPv6 Ready Logo certificate.

77 Leave a comment on paragraph 77 0 Any software that communicates via the IP protocol must support both protocol versions (IPv4 and IPv6). The difference must not be noticeable to users.”

78 Leave a comment on paragraph 78 0  

79 Leave a comment on paragraph 79 0 After this general requirement the tender should list detailed specifications and requirements for the equipment or software needed. RIPE-554 provides guidelines to specify requirements and lists for different types of hardware and software what standards the tender initiator require. Please see https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-554

80 Leave a comment on paragraph 80 0  

81 Leave a comment on paragraph 81 0 Note to the tender initiator:

82 Leave a comment on paragraph 82 0 RIPE-554 is intended to be used as a template to include detailed requirements into the RFP. Adding the words “equipment must be compliant with RIPE-554” is not sufficient! To support the authors of the tender, there’s a must-read first section, called “how to use this document”.

4.2.7. Mobile networks

83 Leave a comment on paragraph 83 0 Expected need to accommodate large numbers of subscribers in coming years. IPv6 provides advantage from scale. Several mobile vendors have recently started deployment in IPv6. In the US, <refer to the link shared by Michael>. Out of the cases collected, this is the next area where Japanese government, at the national level has put focus for IPv6 deployment, with a milestone for major mobile phone providers to adopt IPv6 by default in 2017, as a way to accommodate growth in this service sector. SKTelecom in Korea has completed commercial deployment in mobile network in Sep 2014. Apple made it a requirement for all applications in Apple Store to support IPv6 from iOS9. For the handsets, both Android and iPhone support IPv6.

4.2.8. Adoption for non-Internet large scale infrastructure/Large business networks

84 Leave a comment on paragraph 84 0 IPv6 adoption is observed in some applications outside the conventional global Internet connections. Some examples are use in nation wide Smart Meter for electricity supplies, IPv6 multicast services as infrastructure platform for image streaming in nation wide scale by its largest Telecom in Japan with over 19 million subscribers, which they see benefit in IPv6 for large scale multicast service. BMW[19] is IPv6 ready for their website, and they have presented about their idea of IPv6 transition steps as being ready in network infrastructure, then devices and services, and for innovation. There are several banks and financial services firms which have adopted IPv6, such as Banrisul, Banco do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul, Rabobank and Wellsfargo.

4.3 Regional Observations

85 Leave a comment on paragraph 85 0 From Europe, we would like to share cases of ISPs in Switzerland and  Greece which both have IPv6 deployment rate of over 27% as of Sep 2016 according to APNIC labs IPv6 measurement. In addition,  we cover the case of  Continental which has deployed IPv6 for their website. There are also cases from Proximus (Belgium), Tele2 (Sweden), PC Extreme.B.V (Netherlands) which are published in the list of case studies.

86 Leave a comment on paragraph 86 0 Disclaimer:

87 Leave a comment on paragraph 87 0 The BPF wants to share a variety of experiences and examples. This section does intent to be exhaustive or representative for a specific country or region!  

Switzerland

88 Leave a comment on paragraph 88 0 Swisscom (Telecom operator, Switzerland)

89 Leave a comment on paragraph 89 0 Swisscom is a full-service telecom operator: Service include wireless and wireline services (voice, TV, Internet, networking) for residential, business and wholesale customers in Switzerland. Their IPv6 capable rate is 58%, as of Sep 2016, according to APNIC labs IPv6 measurement.

90 Leave a comment on paragraph 90 0 For Swisscom the main motivation to deploy IPv6 was that IPv6 is the only long term solution to the shortage of IPv4 addresses. By deploying early, they wanted to create momentum for others to deploy IPv6 and use as well. IPv6 is a strategic technical decision to keep the services that are offered today running in the future. The introduction of IPv6 – and in particular of IPv6 only networks – helped to relieve the impending shortage of IPv4 addresses. Deploying IPv6-only networks is possible for wireless networks. Swisscom  deployed VoLTE on an IPv6-only APN, and they are planning to migrate the APN for Internet-access to IPv6-only.

91 Leave a comment on paragraph 91 0 Taking an incremental approach in the IPv6 deployment was a factor that contributed the the success of the project. Swisscom started early and progressed with small steps, so that no big “program” was necessary. The two elements that helped the IPv6 deployment to succeed were:

  1. 92 Leave a comment on paragraph 92 0
  2.  Convince the right people that IPv6 must be deployed and that deployment better start early than late;
  3.  Develop and deploy in small increments that fit normal project budgets

93 Leave a comment on paragraph 93 0 Using 6rd (RFC 5969) helped immensely to start an IPv6 service early that scales to carry all traffic.

94 Leave a comment on paragraph 94 0 IPv6 is a factor that sets Swisscom apart from competitors. Leadership on IPv6 deployment contributes to the image of being a technical leader, which in commercial terms translates into a willingness of customers to pay for quality. So far, Swisscom doesn’t consider IPv6 (yet) to be an enabler for new business, and customers that prefer to stick to IPv4 can still do so.  So far, IPv6 is not yet an enabler for new business for Swisscom. Customers can still do with just IPv4.

95 Leave a comment on paragraph 95 0 The Swisscom  case study also mentioned that throughput of 1Gb/S of data costs CHF 8,000 over IPv4-CGN (without cost for logging) and CHF 1,650 over IPv6, a simple calculation concludes that the IPv4-CGN solution is four times more expensive.

Greece

96 Leave a comment on paragraph 96 0 Forthnet (ISP, Greece)

97 Leave a comment on paragraph 97 0 Forthnet S.A. is a Greek Internet Service Provider. Forthnet enabled IPv6 on its corporate network in 2011 and its retail internet service is fully IPv6 enabled since 2013. At the time of writing Forthnet was running a pilot project for the business service and expected to have its business Internet service fully IPv6 enabled in Q4 of 2016.

98 Leave a comment on paragraph 98 0 As of September 2016 Forthnet had an IPv6 capable rate of 43%. Their motivation to deploy IPv6 was the imminent lack of IPv4 addresses and the high cost of other solutions

99 Leave a comment on paragraph 99 0 From a comparison of the cost of “buying” IPv4 addresses vs enabling IPv6 and DS-Lite, Forthnet concluded that continuing on the IPv4 path would not support the customer growth envisaged by their business plan. Forthnet started migrating existing customers to DS-Lite, freeing IPv4 addresses for new customer In addition, the was an internal requirement for every new network-related project at Forthnet to take IPv6 into account.

Germany

100 Leave a comment on paragraph 100 0 Continental (Automobile Industry, Germany)

101 Leave a comment on paragraph 101 0 Continental, the globally active German Automotive Group, has enabled IPv6 for their website in Germany, the Asia Pacific, Europe, North America and Latin America. Overall target is to enable the IPv6 protocol and dual-stack on the network infrastructure of Continental to the public Internet. Continental set the requirement that connectivity to external partners via Internet must run over IPv6, and the own network of Continental is being prepared for this situation. Below are the most important steps:

  • 102 Leave a comment on paragraph 102 0
  • Public DMZs of Continental is IPv6 enabled incl. lines. (ext. IPv6 clients can connect to IPv6 web service in DMZ)
  • Continental public websites are accessible from IPv6-only consumer
  • Public-websites-content provided over IPv6 is accessible via Continental Internet-proxies (dual-stack enabled including lines).
  • Employees using IPv6 can connect via Conti-Remote Access; Remote Access Gateways are IPv6 enabled incl. Lines.
  • Ext. Continental DNS-root is IPv6
  • IP-Address-Management  tool of Continental is functional to register IPv6
  • IPv6-addresses used for public internet access are registered in Continental IP-Address-Management tool
  • IPv6 address/subnet routing concept for Corporate Services is documented

103 Leave a comment on paragraph 103 0 The driving factor behind the deployment of IPv6 on the Continental network was the company’s which that connectivity to external partners via Internet must run over IPv6. Therefore, the network of Continental needed to be prepared for this situation.

104 Leave a comment on paragraph 104 0 There was no defined business case with a financial benefit. The major driver was to avoid any risks in connectivity for B2B and B2C, for example in case a business partner or consumer can only access via IPv6 or IPv4 CGN.

105 Leave a comment on paragraph 105 0 Evaluation for IPv6 in Continental products/services or IoT/smart factory is ongoing. The main lesson learnt was it requires high effort in training, planning and testing for IT-staff. There was no major invest in hardware, licenses or services for IPv6.

106 Leave a comment on paragraph 106 0 BMW

107 Leave a comment on paragraph 107 0 German car manufacturer BMW presented at the Cisco Live 2016 event in Berlin in February 2016, on it’s approach to deploy IPv6:

108 Leave a comment on paragraph 108 0 “BMW Group –  An Enterprise Introducing IPv6”, Christian Huber, at Cisco Live 2016, Berlin,February 2016

109 Leave a comment on paragraph 109 0 Presentation: http://d2zmdbbm9feqrf.cloudfront.net/2016/eur/pdf/CCSIP6-2006.pdf

110 Leave a comment on paragraph 110 0 Video: https://www.ciscolive.com/online/connect/flowPlayerRedirect.ww

111 Leave a comment on paragraph 111 0 (free registration needed for video)  

Estonia

112 Leave a comment on paragraph 112 0 Estonia Telekom (ISP, Estonia)

113 Leave a comment on paragraph 113 0 In 2015 IPv6 in Estonia went from almost not existing to 6% in little than four weeks time. The main reason for this sudden uptake was that Estonian Telekom, the largest Internet provider in the country enabled IPv6 in its networks. One of the leading engineers documented the IPv6 project in a blog post.

114 Leave a comment on paragraph 114 0 Several years of planning preceded the actual IPv6 deployment. It was difficult to build a business case that justified the cost of the IPv6 deployment. Therefore it was decided to wait and combine the transition to IPv6 with a major infrastructure update – the replacement of the broadband network gateway (BNG) platform. To avoid future additional costs it was decided to provide native IPv6 from day zero. In order to minimise the disruption to the services that transition might cause, it was chosen to make the transition in one time and roll out IPv6 connectivity to all end users with last generation CPE.

115 Leave a comment on paragraph 115 0 The transition had to happened without the end users noticing it. While the ISP can decide to deploy IPv6 on its network, it has no control on the the customer’s home network on the the other side of the CPE. To avoid causing problems for the user at home it was decided to rely on Happy Eyeballs  to have an IPv4 fallback mechanism in case the IPv6 connection malfunctions. More technical detail can be found here (link).

116 Leave a comment on paragraph 116 0 The transition went smoothly as planned and also in the months after the transition there were no problems affecting the customers.  Six month after the deployment almost 15% of the customer base were active IPv6 subscribers, and 81% of them had at least one IPv6-enabled device in their LAN.

117 Leave a comment on paragraph 117 0 Next Estonia Telekom intends to deploy IPv6 in its mobile network.

Belgium

118 Leave a comment on paragraph 118 0 Proximus, the incumbent telecom operator and one of the mains ISPs in Belgium, started the implementation of IPv6 more than 10 years ago, with as main motivation to be ready by the time IPv4 exhaustions impacts. The deployment is seen as a ‘must do’, while the business case is negative, and the cost to replace CPE as an important factor to be taken into consideration. The program board that oversees the IPv6 deployment consists of representatives from different departments.

119 Leave a comment on paragraph 119 0 Even though the Proximus started deploying IPv6 more than 10 years ago, it will take another 5 to 10 years to have all services IPv6 ready.

120 Leave a comment on paragraph 120 0 A recent article on IPv6 in Belgium mentioned that in 2012 the Belgian Regulator, Federal Computer Crime Unit (police) and the ISPs agreed on a code of conduct to limit the use of CGN, concretely to limit the sharing of 1 IPv4 address to a maximum of 16 subscribers. One can assume that this agreement and the fact that it made using CGN/NAT solution more costly, was an motivational factor for the operators to start deploying IPv6, and is probably one of the factors behind the high IPv6 deployment rates in Belgium.

121 Leave a comment on paragraph 121 0 The Belgian regulator is currently working on a report on the IPv6 deployment in the country, which amongst other will assess the effect of the code of conduct.

4.3.2. Americas  (and the Caribbean)

4.3.2.1.  Latin America

122 Leave a comment on paragraph 122 0 Ecuador, Peru and Brazil are the top three countries with  high IPv6 deployment rate in the region, according to APNIC labs. Both Ecuador and Peru have IPv6 deployment rate of 18% as of Sep 2016, according to APNIC lab’s IPv6 measurement. IPv6 deployment rate in Brazil is approximately 10%, according to  APNIC lab’s IPv6 measurement. We introduce the cases of ISPs in Ecuador and Peru, and contents providers in Brazil.

Peru

123 Leave a comment on paragraph 123 0 Telefónica del Perú (ISP, Peru)

124 Leave a comment on paragraph 124 0 Within Peru, Telefonica Peru has the highest IPv6 deployment rate of 24% IPv6 capable (APNIC labs stats). Telefónica del Perú has deployed IPv6 native connectivity to more than 2.5 million broadband residential customers (mainly ADSL lines). Thanks to this, Peru has been the leading country in the región until Apr 2016 (later on surpassed only by Ecuador) with around 16% of accesses to Google over IPv6.

125 Leave a comment on paragraph 125 0 Telefónica is a leading provider within the Hispam region. Telefónica del Perú has modern infrastructures and experienced engineers. Therefore Perú was well placed to roll out the new IPv6 technology.

126 Leave a comment on paragraph 126 0 IPv6 is a matter of business continuation and is simplifying comms for new business paradigms such as IoT, Smartcities, Smart Industry, etc. Only those playing with the technology at first hand will be able to identify the business and differentiation opportunities:

  • 127 Leave a comment on paragraph 127 0
  • New businesses such as IoT, Smartcities, etc. are all developed with IPv6 in mind.
  • IPv6 means costs today that might be lowered by correctly phasing network deployments/updates. Benefits will be more experimented as long as the majority of the traffic becomes IPv6 (as it is already happening in some other countries) or new businesses take benefit of that. For the latter, we expect IoT to play this business role as long as we start to see large IoT deployments, not just reduced testing pilots.

128 Leave a comment on paragraph 128 0 The government in Perú has been pretty active by promoting the leading role of Peru in IPv6 to local corporations and the local administration, for example by organising events.

129 Leave a comment on paragraph 129 0 One of the most important lessons that was shared in the case study was to plan ahead and correctly phase the deployment; this will reduce complexity and save on extraordinary costs.

Brazil

130 Leave a comment on paragraph 130 0 UOL DIVEO  (Brazil)

131 Leave a comment on paragraph 131 0 Universo Online (known by the acronym UOL) is a Brazilian company that provides web content, products and internet services. UOL is subsidiary of  Grupo Folha. As of January 2015, UOL’s website was ranked 73rd on SimilarWeb and 108th on the Alexa Internet globally.[2][3]

132 Leave a comment on paragraph 132 0 In 2012, UOL was ranked by Alexa as the fifth most visited website in Brazil, after the Google portals (Google Brasil, Google EUA, YouTube) and Facebook.[4]  According to Ibope Nielsen Online, UOL is Brazil’s largest internet portal with more than 50 million unique visitors and 6.7 billion page views every month.[5][6]

133 Leave a comment on paragraph 133 0 UOL started providing IPv6 for its service infrastructure to be able to handle IPv6 end user traffic to UOL websites which increased when the telecommunication companies started to delivery IPv6 to their customers. There was no external factor involved.

134 Leave a comment on paragraph 134 0 The short term motivation was to continue to receive the traffic from users that had migrated from ipv4 to ipv6. UOL has many end users using ipv6. They need to continue to access the products and reached by advertisement traffic.

135 Leave a comment on paragraph 135 0 The mid term motivation was the end of availability of IPv4.

136 Leave a comment on paragraph 136 0 Long term: Customers started to ask for IPv6 as a new requirement. UOL provides both hosting services and contents. Customers of hosting services started to request IPv6 service so that they can set up IPv6 supported websites. UOL also received request to have their website, as contents provider IPv6 ready.

137 Leave a comment on paragraph 137 0 The main takeaway from the UOL is : the market demanded IPv6, so it was necessary to deploy IPv6. Without the IPv6 deployment UOL would had lost clients and revenue in the last 4 years.

138 Leave a comment on paragraph 138 0 Globo (Brazil)

139 Leave a comment on paragraph 139 0 Globo is a contents provider for the largest media group in Brazil. Their motivation for IPv6 deployment is to ensure that the quality of service for their users is not affected by CGNAT and other techniques that will be used to deal with the IPv4 exhaustion. The stimulus to deploy came from NIC.BR.

140 Leave a comment on paragraph 140 0 By deploying IPv6 Globo wanted to assure that all its users can access their content from any kind of device and network. IPv6 will assure that Globo can reach all of its users without the limitations that they have in IPv4.

141 Leave a comment on paragraph 141 0 One of the main takeaways from the Globo case study is that they needed the commitment from the board to implement IPv6 and to get that commitment, the board needed to understand the importance the IPv6 deployment.

142 Leave a comment on paragraph 142 0 America Movil Brasil (Brazil)

143 Leave a comment on paragraph 143 0 The exhaustion of free IPv4 addresses was the main motivation for the IPv6 project. The exhaustion could force the company to suspend new sales, because of a lack of  IPv4 Public Address available in the network.

144 Leave a comment on paragraph 144 0 There was a great government incentive for the creation of standards and deadlines for CPE manufacturers. The rules were adapted to avoid new products to be “IPv4 only” under the sentence of sales blocking. That decision helped companies like America Movil that wanted to deploy IPv6 on their network, because IPv6 ready equipment became available on the market.

145 Leave a comment on paragraph 145 0 The biggest challenge was the lack of content and Dual Stack and unavailability of CPE  compatible with IPv6, which forced:
– to use CGNAT in many locations;
– to develop an automated process to provide fallback for customers who have applications only capable of IPv4 that do not work with CGNAT (IP cameras for example);

146 Leave a comment on paragraph 146 0 – to set up an audit process to identify unjustified public address requests to prevent any IPv4 public address waste.

147 Leave a comment on paragraph 147 0
Other devices like as IP Cameras, Residencial WiFi Routers, Connected Home devices and SmartTVs without support IPv6 generated an important financial impact in CGNAT and Legal ID Platform.

148 Leave a comment on paragraph 148 0 After defining the strategy and solution, a program was created inside the Corporate PMO (Project Managing Office) involving several projects and company’s areas in 4 fronts:
a) IT Front: New legal identification system / big data; adequation of provisioning systems, CRM, BSS and Field Services; new BI reports.
b) Engineering Front: IPv6 implementation along the whole network; CGNAT implementation on the main cities; log collector systems; team training; adequation of Management, Provisioning and OSS platforms.
c) Customers Front: internal and external communication, training of the call center and field technicians; revision of the customer service processes; monitoring of customer experience KPIs (churn, visits, contact rate, etc).
d) Regulatory and legal Front: coworking with NIC.br, government areas, customer defense entities; revision of contracts and services delivered to the clients.

149 Leave a comment on paragraph 149 0 The project implementation was managed inside the company as a survival strategy and technological evolution. There was no business gains up to now.

150 Leave a comment on paragraph 150 0 Conclusions:

151 Leave a comment on paragraph 151 0 There was no financial gain in the IPv6 deployment.
The costs of CGNAT increased, but delivering only IPv6 was not an option for our customers, because of the resistance coming from the industry (IoT, IP Cameras, WiFi routers, SmartTV, etc) about IPv6 compatibility of their products.
Several cloud systems, APPs, eCommerce and eGov still don’t support IPv6, what forces the ISPs to use CGNAT solutions and pay the bill.

152 Leave a comment on paragraph 152 0 The key factor contributing to the success was that a enough time was spent on tests, homologation and planning. In addition, the simulation of the client’s environment, the small pilots and the accompaniment of the project’s engineers / IP architects in the field visits were very important.  

The support from the executive level to maintain the project’s original guidelines also contributed to the success.

153 Leave a comment on paragraph 153 0 Banrisul –  Banco do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil)

154 Leave a comment on paragraph 154 0 Banrisul is a Brazilian bank that deployed IPv6, for the following two main reasons:
1. Allow new clients who already use IPv6 connectivity to have access to the Internet Banking of the Banrisul.
2. Guideline of FEBRABAN – The Brazilian Federation of Banks – (The main entity representing the Brazilian banking industry) to have all financial institutions implement IPv6 before July 2016 for access to Internet Banking services.

155 Leave a comment on paragraph 155 0 The pressure of FEBRABAN made that the company management took a favourable position so that it was possible to mobilize the main areas of the bank (development, security, infrastructure, etc.) and overcome the initial challenges of mobilization and commitment to the project.
The main challenge is to maintain the mobilization and commitment to the project. IPv6 training needs to be emphasised and maybe repeated in some areas.

156 Leave a comment on paragraph 156 0 Takeaways from the Banrisul case study:

157 Leave a comment on paragraph 157 0 The main lesson learned is that training is essential.
The commercial and economic incentives were attracting new customers that are in line with new technologies and require alternatives to access services available on the Internet.

158 Leave a comment on paragraph 158 0 Banrisul didn’t measure the financial impact of the IPv6 deployment in the Internet Banking services, yet. However, one was surprised of the amount of IPv6 connections whihc exceeded all expectations.

159 Leave a comment on paragraph 159 0  

160 Leave a comment on paragraph 160 0 The project was of low cost: the internal costs of the teams involved, and the cost of hiring a consultant expert in IPv6.

161 Leave a comment on paragraph 161 0
Included IPv6 training for all teams involved at the beginning of the project a would have made it easier to overcome some challenges, especially in the Development Unit.

162 Leave a comment on paragraph 162 0  

163 Leave a comment on paragraph 163 0 As a financial institution, Banrisul must capture the source IPv6 address and store logs for legal purposes. This was a challenge to the Development Unit.

164 Leave a comment on paragraph 164 0 NIC.br and CGI.br stimulating IPv6 deployment (Brazil)

165 Leave a comment on paragraph 165 0 Since 2009, the Brazilian Network Information Center (NIC.br) along with Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br) led the deployment of IPv6 in Brazil. Together, they created a project, IPv6.br, to help all Brazilian companies that have services related to Internet to work with IPv6. Three main activities of this project has been made to improve IPv6’s deployment.

166 Leave a comment on paragraph 166 0 First of all, free IPv6 training courses. As ISOC has stated in their website, one of the major IPv6 transition costs is staff training. In order to minimize cost and help companies, NIC.br gave more than 150 courses teaching over 6000 network administrators around the country.

167 Leave a comment on paragraph 167 0 Second, collaborating with working groups that seek what is the biggest problem to deploy IPv6 in different areas. For the cases stated in this document two groups are relevant. One group was formed by the Brazilian Government in order to coordinate the work required to adoption of IPv6 in large telecommunications companies (like AMERICA MOVIL BRAZIL), and other was created by FEBRABAN in order to assist banks to migrate to IPv6 (like Banrisul).

168 Leave a comment on paragraph 168 0 Lastly, promoting events related to IPv6, like “World IPv6 day”, “Semana IPv6” (local event), “World IPv6 Launch” and “Fórum IPv6” (local event). All these events were important to increase the recognition of the companies which have deployed IPv6, primarily to content providers like Globo and UOL that have participated in all events.

4.3.2.2.  North America
United States

169 Leave a comment on paragraph 169 0 AT&T:

170 Leave a comment on paragraph 170 0 AT&T envisions a future in which literally billions of IP-enabled devices are connected to the network, and IPv6 is a critical enabler of this vision. Accordingly, AT&T began planning for the transition to IPv6 in 2006.As ever more devices connect to the Internet such as  computers, smart phones,netbooks, tablets, connected vehicles, smart cities and the Internet of Things (IoT), each of which requires its own unique IP address the legacy system supplying those addresses is rapidly nearing the point of exhaustion.In short, we are running out of IP addresses.Transitioning to IPv6 is a critical step for supporting the continued, sustainable growth of the Internet. Ultimately, IPv6 gives the industry greater room to grow, innovate and support new devices. According to WorldIPv6Launch.org, as of September 30, 2016, approximately 60% of the wireline traffic and nearly 15% of the wireless traffic originating from AT&T Autonomous System Numbers (ASNs) is using IPv6 today.

171 Leave a comment on paragraph 171 0 The single largest factor that contributed to AT&T’s decision to migrate towards IPv6 remains overcoming the impending unavailability of IPv4 addresses. Also, the greatest incentive for dual stack of native IPv6 is the cost of implementing other technologies (such as Carrier Grade Network Address Translation (CGN), tunneling (6rd) or other work-arounds).

172 Leave a comment on paragraph 172 0 They describe  primary benefit of IPv6 is that :

  • 173 Leave a comment on paragraph 173 0
  • It addresses the address exhaust concerns around IPv4.
  • Direct connection
    • 173 Leave a comment on paragraph 173 0
    • IPv6 is critical for the deployment of Voice over LTE (VoLTE) services because VoLTE is dependent upon a direct connection to the end user and will not function behind Network Address Translation (NAT) or other technologies that would otherwise be used to extend the life cycle of IPv4 addresses.
    • Because IPv6 enables that direct connection, IPv6 can offer lower latency, which improves call quality.
    • More advanced users also may find it easier to run servers; e.g., host games, support their own email server etc., again because of the absence of NAT.

174 Leave a comment on paragraph 174 0 The fundamental motivation behind an organization’s decision to implement IPv6 ultimately boils down to necessity. ISPs or service providers such as AT&T know that, despite current workarounds, eventually IPv4 addresses will exhaust, and that supporting the ever-escalating demand for Internet access makes migration to IPv6 inevitable.

175 Leave a comment on paragraph 175 0 6connect (Network Resource Provisioning , US)

176 Leave a comment on paragraph 176 0 6connect provides network resource provisioning and automation. IPv6 is not planning for 6connect, it’s a required part of all deployments.Most internal resources in the company are v6 only.

177 Leave a comment on paragraph 177 0 The decision was made a few years ago to treat v4 as legacy and not to turn back. This means in many cases, not only are they single stacked over v6, but even dual stacked hosts have heavy dependency on v6 only services. As the motivation behind the decision to deploy IPv6, first, IPv6 has an attractive factor for 6 connect . It gave the the ability to deploy more infrastructure at a lower cost and a repeatable architecture done once, without ever having to look back and size of pop or resource utilization. The  costs are now easily calculated for new deployments and have no unknown cost factors. The vendor selection and partner selection has become far easier with v6 intelligence at the top of the requirements list. Second, they could completely eliminate NAT. They are now able to have a single security policy which applies globally simplifying security policy. Lastly, compared to other current technology, IPv6 turns out to be low hanging fruit. There are far greater challenges in the orchestration automation technology space, so v6 is one of many easy things to tick off the list and keep the company on its toes.The biggest issue is having to educate partners, vendors and customers. The technology itself will always have some issues just like every other protocol or network service out there.

178 Leave a comment on paragraph 178 0 As business case, as a cost factor, they updated their architecture in  hardware, software, services, etc, while this technology had an economic impact, the was relatively small, compared to technologies such a virtualization. IPv6 is just another required update to the architecture. 6 connectr sees that , while there are some performance and policy benefits, the true benefit is staying in business. They consider v6 is a _requirement_ to continue to conduct business on the Internet.

179 Leave a comment on paragraph 179 0 As lessons learnt, 6connect believes IPv6 will be only as hard as you make it. Many inefficiencies were removed related to Out Of Band networks and NAT. They are now able to operate with lower network cost and no longer need to check on IP resource utilization per pop. All pop sizes are now the same IP architecture despite serving small, medium or large service areas. To have done better planning, removing dual stack earlier would have saved time and money. IPv4 support turned out to be the larger cost than just moving to single stack IPv6 where possible.

180 Leave a comment on paragraph 180 0 Microsoft

181 Leave a comment on paragraph 181 0 Microsoft has a long history of supporting IPv6, starting with Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008, and Windows XP Service Pack 3. document assumes IPv4 and IPv6 coexist for some time. Aside from the obvious benefit of a much-larger address space, IPv6 benefits to Microsoft include improved peer-to-peer networking for communications and multiplayer gaming and improved delivery of personalized user experience using IP-based location services.

182 Leave a comment on paragraph 182 0 As a provider of online services, Microsoft’s motivations are described above. As a networked organization, Microsoft is looking for internal efficiencies in its “Intranet of Things”, including servers, workstations, BYOD, and infrastructure embedded devices such as cameras, sensors, clocks and displays. The demand for low-latency peer-to-peer networking in communications and gaming has greatly increased, mobile operators are attempting to build IPv6-only LTE networks to deal with IPv4 address depletion, and governments are considering support mandates for IPv6 from their vendors and suppliers.  IPv4 addresses are increasingly difficult and costly to obtain, and location services which deliver targeted experiences to end users based on IP addresses are hobbled by network address translations.  Each of these changes accelerates the need for native IPv6 support at the customer-facing network edge and further vindicates Microsoft’s early and ongoing investments of IPv6 in our online services and in Windows clients and servers.

183 Leave a comment on paragraph 183 0 They expect to see minor performance benefits as address translators are removed and implementations are improved. Since some equipment implements IPv4 in hardware, but IPv6 in software, hardware parity over time should improve performance. To date, IPv6 performance in Microsoft has been the same as IPv4 for practical purposes.

184 Leave a comment on paragraph 184 0 As return investment, for Microsoft as a service provider, the anticipated return is a mixture of reduced risk and increased market opportunity. The internal use of globally non-routable addresses creates risk because the addresses can leak into the Internet due to human error and misconfiguration. Moreover, the need to purchase IPv4 addresses on the open market introduces risk due to fluctuating commodity prices.Market opportunities increase when customers mandate IPv6 support and when IPv6 allows faster infrastructure growth for services experiencing rapid customer usage.Microsoft corporate IT efforts are based on a belief that IPv6 support is a cost of business, with returns on investment to be seen only over a very long time frame.

185 Leave a comment on paragraph 185 0 They have not included any discussion about potential power, computational or software maintenance efficiencies which would arise from a purely IPv6 environment, as this BPF

186 Leave a comment on paragraph 186 0 WelsFargo

187 Leave a comment on paragraph 187 0 Wells Fargo & Company is an American international banking and financial services holding company. To WelsFargo, IPv6 provides numerous benefits, including:  greater space for growth; reduced requirement for readdressing duplicate address space in mergers/acquisitions; the ability to support low-functionality end-points that may lack DHCP and static addressing capabilities (IoT, even Android devices); the ability to reduce reliance on NAT (and associated logging complexity); the ability to more universally geo-locate address space (assuming ULA usage is reduced compared to RFC1918); and the simplification of routing tables through improved summarization.

188 Leave a comment on paragraph 188 0 They also observe unexpected benefits of implementing IPv6 include gaining a very detailed knowledge of all the technology used in the organization; Establishing closer working relationships with application and procurement teams; gaining deeper insight into asset/inventory systems and how to establish relationships between elements; opportunity to provide specific, relevant technical training to a wide variety of engineering teams. It also provides a clean-slate for designing from the ground-up..

189 Leave a comment on paragraph 189 0 Risk mitigation of the Internet transitioning to IPv6, or IPv6 being required of the organization without appropriate preparation is the driving motivation for IPv6 implementation.The desire to remain fully connected to the Internet and support all customers as well as employees (i.e. VPN, outbound web proxy, email) is a significant factor driving implementation. Risk mitigation in having to otherwise enable v6 in a rapid, reactive fashion (and possibly root out rogue internal implementations where it was needed but not supported) is another significant factor, as is perception that future mergers and acquisitions will be simpler if IPv6 is the pervasive enterprise communication standard protocol.

190 Leave a comment on paragraph 190 0  

4.3.3. Asia Pacific

191 Leave a comment on paragraph 191 0 From South East Asia, we see Malaysia with high IPv6 deployment rate of approximately 14%, according to APNIC lab’s meansruement. From East Asia, Japan is observed to have high deployment rate in the region, more of less the same as Malaysia with approximately 15% deployment rate. Deployment rate in Korea is not high overall at this stage (1.15%) but  has a few initiatives observed as case  studies in area where challenges remain in the region for IPv6 deployment such as case studies from contents provider and mobile network service provider.

Malaysia

192 Leave a comment on paragraph 192 0 Telecom Malaysia

193 Leave a comment on paragraph 193 0 In August 2015, Telecom Malaysia became one of the top-10 IPv6 network operators in the world, according to World IPv6 Launch, measuring over 15% IPv6 deployment.

194 Leave a comment on paragraph 194 0 TM’s deployment of IPv6 was driven by two primary factors: the responsibility to drive IPv6 adoption as the nation’s leading communication service provider; and to ensure business continuity for all the customers, in view of global IPv4 address exhaustion.

195 Leave a comment on paragraph 195 0 TM took the following economic and business factors into consideration

196 Leave a comment on paragraph 196 0 1)  Ability to offer IPv6 services give competitive edge amongst local ISP

197 Leave a comment on paragraph 197 0 2)  Graceful migration of unmanaged customer devices / CPE (no force migration).

198 Leave a comment on paragraph 198 0 3)   Minimize capex through natural progression of hardware refresh (no drastic network equipment upgrades)

199 Leave a comment on paragraph 199 0 While IPv6 used to be something on the network strategy map years ago,  IPv6 deployment is considered as something done and is now a pre-requisite / enabler of other potentials.

200 Leave a comment on paragraph 200 0 In addition,  the regulatory body (MCMC) in Malaysia developed strict guidelines that provided the necessary push required for all Malaysian ISPs to move to IPv6. Without the act, ISPs may delay IPv6 adoption due to the lack of commercial demand and the associated costs. (For full story, see: “Championing IPv6 deployment in Malaysia” http://blog.apnic.net/2015/12/01/championing-ipnt-in-malaysia/).

201 Leave a comment on paragraph 201 0 Lessons Learnt:

  1. 202 Leave a comment on paragraph 202 0
  2. Top-down support & company-wide communication is key to the success of any initiative.
  3. Spread the deployment cost – try to slot in during typical network tech refresh
  4. IPv6 by default for any new network/service implementation
Japan

203 Leave a comment on paragraph 203 0 Japan: NTT East (IPv6 Multicast):

204 Leave a comment on paragraph 204 0 NTT East is the telecommunications services provider which cover  Eastern  Japan, with 19 million subscribers as of March 2016. With NTT West which cover the west areas of Japan, they provide nation wide telecommunications services in Japan. They use their platform for their intranet services and adopted IPv6 in their IP based network in 2004. They wanted to provide platform for  image streaming as their business strategy at the time and it was technically challenging to provide the  PPPoE service in IPv4.  They saw benefit in IPv6 to provide multicast service in large scale. They also consider IPv6 from mid-short term business perspective,: It has no risk to impact continuity of the services in the future , such as IPv4 address exhaustion. From a business perspective, adopting IPv6 is working positively for future service continuity

205 Leave a comment on paragraph 205 0 IPv6 Multicast has greatly contributed for providing videos and image based services.There was no degrading of performance nor scalability as initially anticipated as concerning factor of IPv6 adoption.There was no impact on cost. The equipment was both IPv4 and IPv6 capable, therefore there was no additional cost. Based on NTT East’s  IPv6 Multicast Streaming infrastructure, NTT Plala provides image streaming service to its subscribers for optical fibre service .

206 Leave a comment on paragraph 206 0 Others:

207 Leave a comment on paragraph 207 0 As another aspect of NTT group’s service, The largest fiber-to-home infrastructure, deployed by NTT group (http://www.ntt.co.jp/index_e.html), has been deploying the default IPv6 service capability since around 2012. IPv6 promotion council and Task force on IPv4 address exhaustion Japan (http://www.kokatsu.jp/blog/ipv4/en/) has worked with NTT to monitor the progress of this deployment activities.  As in summer of 2016, about 20% of fiber-to-home residential customer houses of NTT group are IPv6 capable without any notification nor configuration by their customers, as shown at http://v6pc.jp/jp/spread/ipv6spread_03.phtml .  

208 Leave a comment on paragraph 208 0 This site provides other  ISP’s (i.e., KDDI and CTC) IPv6 service status, as well.  

209 Leave a comment on paragraph 209 0  

210 Leave a comment on paragraph 210 0 In the area of mobile, Japan has three major MNO (Mobile Network Operator), which is NTT DoComo, KDDI and SoftBank.  In the discussion at MIC (Minister of Information and Communication) in 2015, Japan will progress “IPv6 Mobile Launch” in 2017 (next year), which means all three mobile carriers in Japan will start the full-scale IPv6 service deployment in their commercial mobile networks.   Page 8 in http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000388371.pdf .

211 Leave a comment on paragraph 211 0 There are also other application observed in Japan as as smart meter for electricity measurement in nation wide scale. Smart meter system for residential houses in Japan, deployed by major electric utility companies.  Especially, TEPCO (http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/index-e.html), that is the largest company in Japan accommodating more than 30 Million residential houses, and Kyushu Electric Power Company (http://www.kyuden.co.jp/en_index.html), that accommodates more than 8 million residential house, has been developing IPv6 single stack smart meter access network. TEPCO mainly uses multi-hop wireless network with 6LOWPAN and Kyushu Electric Power Company mainly uses 4G LTE IPv6 service for the access network.

Korea

212 Leave a comment on paragraph 212 0 SKTelecom (Mobile, Korea):

213 Leave a comment on paragraph 213 0 The motivation behind the decision to deploy IPv6 is to solve the problem of IPv4 exhaustion and to take technology leadership in the market. As an external factor, there was  IPv6 government project with KISA (tax reduction for corporate). As business factor, the issue of IPv4 address exhaustion and increase in IoT devices, to deal with the problem of IP needs for exploding devices in IoT environment. Consideration was needed to build up infrastructure for the services which require device to device communications. They carried out as a 3G government project in 2010 and a LTE government project in 2012. They started to commercialize IPv6 service in Mar. 2013 and completed in Sept. 2014. They have launched IPv6 default devices to deal with IP shortage problem for new services. IPv6 traffic was increased through cooperation with Google.

214 Leave a comment on paragraph 214 0 It was relatively easier to deploy IPv6 on the new networks than the existing networks, therefore they decided to deploy IPv6 mainly on the networks for mobile services. As effect they observe in busines through IPv6 deployment, SKT (ISP) secured potential sales increase and a cooperative business relationship with Kakao (CSP) in the process of IPv6 commercialization. Further, SKT reduced IPv6 adoption cost by conducting a government project in cooperation with KISA.

215 Leave a comment on paragraph 215 0 Kakao Talk (Contents Provider, Korea)

216 Leave a comment on paragraph 216 0 Kakao Talk provides similar Messenger service to WhatsApp, an similar Portal Web service for news, mail and web surfing to Yahoo.com. They have undertaken IPv6 deployment activity through cooperation with Kisa and ISPs.Their  motivation behind the decision to deploy IPv6 is to o provide Mobile centered services. They saw  that end user’s IPv6 only devices are getting increased and there is a need to give the best support  native IPv6 environment. They have considered balance between  costs through additional purchase of equipments for IPv6 deployment and development of human resources for IPv6 operation, and service quality improvement by providing Native IPv6 environment. They believe considering cost, it is reasonable to keep IPv4. It took them review IPv6 deployment. Currently, IPv6 is supported in some of services, and their ur goal is provide all the services through Dual Stack, and we have completed IPv6 deployment in about 10% of our services. They observe no benefit in early IPv6 deployment without additional supports. As incentive to deploy IPv6, they see changes in users’ environment are needed ro requiring IPv6 deployment on the Apps such as Apple, Google will be efficient. IPv6 deployment will cause additional cost anyway, and they deployed IPv6 stage by stage solving the difficult cases of IPv6 deployment on application and OS with NAT64 and Proxy.

217 Leave a comment on paragraph 217 0  

218 Leave a comment on paragraph 218 0 Observations on the IPv6 Deployment in Korea

219 Leave a comment on paragraph 219 0 contributed by Billy MH Cheon, KISA, www.kisa.or.kr

220 Leave a comment on paragraph 220 0 < IPv6 Deployment Status in Korea >

221 Leave a comment on paragraph 221 0 The first IPv6 allocation to Korea was made for the KOrea advanced REsearch Network in 1999. Since then a lot of efforts have been made for IPv6 deployment. Korea has a fairly enough amount of IPv6 addresses, 5,245 /32. However, Korea has kept a quite low profile in terms of actual IPv6 usage regardless its multifaceted efforts. The figures of IPv6 measurement by country from Google was 3.58% as of July 28 and the graph showed the increase in 2014.

222 Leave a comment on paragraph 222 0 In the private sector, SKT deployed IPv6 on the voice and data of commercial LTE networks in Sep. 2014. Followed by this, in Dec. 2015, in collaboration with KISA, major CATV operators such as CJ hellovision, C&M, and HCN also deployed IPv6 on their commercial services. This year, NAVER, one of large local CSP, commenced IPv6 on its commercial service. Now, IPv6 services are being provided for 11 regions with about 6,0000 subscribers in Korea.

223 Leave a comment on paragraph 223 0 From the public sector, the Korean government & KISA set up a national plan to promote IPv6 deployment. The government made all ministries procure IPv6 compatible equipments by law since 2014. And also, they exempted income and corporate tax in IPv6 equipments purchase – 3% for large companies and 7% for SMEs. KISA established ‘IPv6 deployment support center’ in 2014 and has provided the full range of services such as a helpdesk service, a training as well as a testbed for IPv6 environment. KISA also hosted IPv6 workshops and published guidelines to share technical / managerial know-hows with SMEs.

224 Leave a comment on paragraph 224 0 < Observations in comparison with IPv6 deployment in Europe >

225 Leave a comment on paragraph 225 0 KISA attended one of the 2016 RIPE meetings and interviewed ISPs and companies on IPv6. We asked what made differences between Korea and some of European countries and followings were highlighted questions and answers.

  1. 226 Leave a comment on paragraph 226 0
  2. Why Europe is relatively ahead of other region in terms of IPv6 deployment ?

227 Leave a comment on paragraph 227 0 –  There are many Multi national ISPs and they are making a competitive market environment.

228 Leave a comment on paragraph 228 0 –  CGN may cause legal problems.

229 Leave a comment on paragraph 229 0 –  If CTO has a technical back ground companies more easily adopt IPv6.

  1. 230 Leave a comment on paragraph 230 0
  2. Was there any direct government supports in IPv6 deployment ?

231 Leave a comment on paragraph 231 0 –  Almost none. Even there was, it was not effective.

232 Leave a comment on paragraph 232 0 –  Indirect approach would be more effective. For example, smart city with IPv6

233 Leave a comment on paragraph 233 0 –  voluntary activities in NOG was noted in most of countries with high IPv6 adoption rate.

  1. 234 Leave a comment on paragraph 234 0
  2. Any benefit from IPv6 deployment ?

235 Leave a comment on paragraph 235 0 – None from the short term view

236 Leave a comment on paragraph 236 0 – After complete IPv6 adoption, ISPs may be able to make a profit from selling their IPv4 at good price.

  1. 237 Leave a comment on paragraph 237 0
  2. Any other specific difficulties in operating IPv6 network ?

238 Leave a comment on paragraph 238 0 – Same as IPv4 network, not much different from IPv4 network.

  1. 239 Leave a comment on paragraph 239 0
  2. Additional charging scheme for IPv6 ?

240 Leave a comment on paragraph 240 0 – No additional fee should be charged.

  1. 241 Leave a comment on paragraph 241 0
  2. Any highlighted challenges ?

242 Leave a comment on paragraph 242 0 – Legacy equipments change

243 Leave a comment on paragraph 243 0 – Too many CPE equipments on leased line

244 Leave a comment on paragraph 244 0  

4.3.4. Middle East

245 Leave a comment on paragraph 245 0 In November 2016, Etisalat, one of the first telecommunications service providers in the UAE, announced the rollout of IPv6 for all Etisalat eLife customers across the UAE. eLife is the commercial name used for the company’s tv, Internet and telephone solutions for consumers.

4.3.5.  Africa

246 Leave a comment on paragraph 246 0 / case studies requested /

4.3.6 Global Players

247 Leave a comment on paragraph 247 0 Google

248 Leave a comment on paragraph 248 0 Google support IPv6 in its Google website, youtube, and android (not in all cases).

249 Leave a comment on paragraph 249 0 It also provides Google Public DNS64 service, which administrators of IPv6-only networks can combine this with locally-provided NAT64 using the well-known prefix 64:ff9b::/96 to reach public IPv4-only sites from IPv6-only networks.

250 Leave a comment on paragraph 250 0 LinkedIn (SNS)

251 Leave a comment on paragraph 251 0 Improvement in user experience by adopting IPv6 is observed in LinkedIn, as no large scale TCP timeout in IPv6 compared to IPv4.

252 Leave a comment on paragraph 252 0 Overall,they are happy to report that there is increasing adoption of IPv6 and also better performance when visiting LinkedIn if you are visiting our site through mobile carrier networks.

253 Leave a comment on paragraph 253 0 http://cgi1.apnic.net/conference_data/files/APSr107/APNIC_Keynote_2016_LinkedIn.pdf

254 Leave a comment on paragraph 254 0 https://blog.apnic.net/2016/05/13/linkedin-ipv6-measurements/

255 Leave a comment on paragraph 255 0 Cisco  (Vendor)

256 Leave a comment on paragraph 256 0 Cisco states on its website that they are committed architecturally to IPv6 across the board: All of their devices, all of their applications and all of their services.

257 Leave a comment on paragraph 257 0 It also states that if we don’t overcome the challenges of IPv4 we will slow down the growth of the Internet and lose momentum as an industry. IPv6 is important to all of us, to everyone around the world. It is crucial to Cisco’s ability to tie together everyone and every device.

258 Leave a comment on paragraph 258 0 http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/ipv6/overview.html

259 Leave a comment on paragraph 259 0 Microsoft (OS)

260 Leave a comment on paragraph 260 0 See 4.3.2. America, North Ameri, Case Study for “Microsoft”. The list of IPv6 supported microsoft products and other IPv6 related resources are available at:  https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/network/bb530961.aspx

261 Leave a comment on paragraph 261 0 Apple (Vendor, Mobile Phone handsets, App store for mobile)

262 Leave a comment on paragraph 262 0 Apple made a very clear statement about app availability over IPv6 in 2015.

263 Leave a comment on paragraph 263 0 “Starting June 1st 2016, all apps submitted to the App Store must support IPv6-only networking.” My making such a statement, Apple helps mobile providers making the transition to IPv6 easier.

264 Leave a comment on paragraph 264 0 https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=05042016a

265 Leave a comment on paragraph 265 0 Facebook

266 Leave a comment on paragraph 266 0 Facebook uses Identifier Locator Addressing (ILA)feature of IPv6, to accommodate large scale mobility within their infrastructure.This allows them to maintain coherent identifiers, even if the physical location of the device moves.

267 Leave a comment on paragraph 267 0 https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/20161018_Lapukhov_Internet-Scale_Virtual_Networking_v1.pdf

268 Leave a comment on paragraph 268 0 Netflix(Contents Provider)

269 Leave a comment on paragraph 269 0 Netflix, the Internet tv streaming service is dual stacked.

270 Leave a comment on paragraph 270 0 When devices support IPv6, the Netflix Client supports IPv6. When supported devices run on dual stacked networks, the Netflix client uses IPv6 as a default, but can fall back to IPv4 if needed.

271 Leave a comment on paragraph 271 0 In August 2016 around 10% of global traffic was IPv6 based, with traffic in Western Europe and the US higher than this global average and IPv6 traffic in Africa almost non-existent.

4.3.7 Non commercial deployment

272 Leave a comment on paragraph 272 0 Universidad de  Guadalajara (University, Mexico)

273 Leave a comment on paragraph 273 0 They have shared the case of academic network infrastructure (web server, mail server, Internet connectivity to academic network users). Universidad de Guadalajara UDG is a +265,000 students university with 15 university centers (campus) and +180 high schools; with 95% of it’s locations connected to the data network and the Internet. UDG’s network is composed of 91 Km of its own fiber optic metropolitan network, leased circuits and microwave radios deployed all over the state of Jalisco; it is considered a nationwide leader in ITC. The implementation of Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) in UDG’s  data network , has been a great effort that started in 2001. Since then the university’s ITC staff has promoted IPv6 use within the university and other national entities. This initiative is reflected today in network traffic of the institution reaching  90% of hosts with IPv6 addresses in production.

274 Leave a comment on paragraph 274 0 As the motivation behind the decision to deploy IPv6 in recent years, a change has occurred in the technological paradigm that enables on-demand provisioning, almost in real time, IT resources through virtualization infrastructure of data centers; however, the rigorousness of the networks has become an obstacle to its flexibility and operation. Besides the above, they add depletion Internet addressing, IPv4, as another major limitation in scalability.

275 Leave a comment on paragraph 275 0
The needs of the University of Guadalajara regarding the implementation of Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) represent a major challenge because of the size of its academic community and territorial dispersion. In this sense, the solutions implemented make a number of featuraes that have led us to search the available ICT innovations. The data network of the University of Guadalajara, in the main distribution and dorsal, is not exempt from this situation because it is required to be dynamic and have growth in devices and access points to cover the academic demands.

276 Leave a comment on paragraph 276 0  

277 Leave a comment on paragraph 277 0 [2] For example, with IPv6 managing a real e2e-network will be easier as no middleware is needed. The quality of service for the users is not affected by CGNAT and other techniques to deal with the lack of available IPv4 addresses. New services like VoLTE, IoT and M2M communication would be extremely hard to deploy in full scale without IPv6.

278 Leave a comment on paragraph 278 0 [3] For example: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/egov_docs/transition-to-ipv6.pdf

279 Leave a comment on paragraph 279 0 [4] See Lee Howard: …. + add link to submission

280 Leave a comment on paragraph 280 0 [5] ‘The Cost of Carrier-Grade NAT’, Lee Howard,

281 Leave a comment on paragraph 281 0 https://conference.apnic.net/data/36/cost-of-cgn_1377486548.pdf

282 Leave a comment on paragraph 282 0 [6] The methodology behind the model is described in chapter 6 of the LACNIC/CAF study ‘IPv6 Deployment for Social and Economic Development in Latin America and the Caribbean’, December 2015, http://portalipv6.lacnic.net/wp-content/caf-lacnic/CAF-LACNIC-IPv6-Deployment-Social-Economic-Development-in-LAC.pdf

283 Leave a comment on paragraph 283 0 [7] https://labs.ripe.net/Members/jordipaletm/results-of-the-ipv6-deployment-survey

284 Leave a comment on paragraph 284 0 [8]http://portalipv6.lacnic.net/wp-content/caf-lacnic/CAF-LACNIC-IPv6-Deployment-Social-Economic-Development-in-LAC.pdf

285 Leave a comment on paragraph 285 0 [9] (p.47)

286 Leave a comment on paragraph 286 0 [10] P. 49

287 Leave a comment on paragraph 287 0 [11] p.50

288 Leave a comment on paragraph 288 0 [12] G.Huston calculated that an average 50% IPv6 uptake in the customer’s base of the 30 largest ISPs would have increased the global IPv6 capability rate in May 2015 from 3.6% to 20%.

289 Leave a comment on paragraph 289 0 [13] Geoff Huston ‘May 2015 Update on measuring IPv6’

290 Leave a comment on paragraph 290 0 http://www.potaroo.net/presentations/2015-05-14-ipv6-stats.pdf

291 Leave a comment on paragraph 291 0 [14] ‘Euro-IX IXPs are IPv6 ready!’, Euro-IX, 7 June 2011

292 Leave a comment on paragraph 292 0 http://www.netnod.se/sites/default/files/Euro-IX_IPv6_press.pdf

293 Leave a comment on paragraph 293 0 [15] https://www.uixp.co.ug/

294 Leave a comment on paragraph 294 0 [16] Information received from the IGF BPF on IXPs, bp_ixps@intgovforum.org mailing list, 20 October 2016.

295 Leave a comment on paragraph 295 0 [17] Add link to case study

296 Leave a comment on paragraph 296 0 [18] https://aprigf2016.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/ipv6_measurement20160726-shian-shyong-tseng.pdf

297 Leave a comment on paragraph 297 0 http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/

298 Leave a comment on paragraph 298 0 [19] http://d2zmdbbm9feqrf.cloudfront.net/2016/eur/pdf/CCSIP6-2006.pdf

Page 26

Source: https://www.intgovforum.org/review/2016-igf-best-practice-forums-bpfs-draft-outputs-as-of-2-november/ipv6/bpf-ipv6-4-understanding-the-commercial-and-economic-incentives/