| rfc9386v3.txt | rfc9386.txt | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| skipping to change at line 415 ¶ | skipping to change at line 415 ¶ | |||
| by APNIC to quantify the adoption of IPv6 by means of a script that | by APNIC to quantify the adoption of IPv6 by means of a script that | |||
| runs on a user's device [CAIDA] is considered. To give a rough | runs on a user's device [CAIDA] is considered. To give a rough | |||
| estimation of the relative growth of IPv6, the next table aggregates | estimation of the relative growth of IPv6, the next table aggregates | |||
| the total number of estimated IPv6-capable users as of 1 January 2022 | the total number of estimated IPv6-capable users as of 1 January 2022 | |||
| and compares it against the total Internet users, as measured by | and compares it against the total Internet users, as measured by | |||
| [POTAROO2]. | [POTAROO2]. | |||
| +=====+==========+==========+==========+==========+==========+=====+ | +=====+==========+==========+==========+==========+==========+=====+ | |||
| | | Jan 2018 | Jan 2019 | Jan 2020 | Jan 2021 | Jan 2022 |CAGR | | | | Jan 2018 | Jan 2019 | Jan 2020 | Jan 2021 | Jan 2022 |CAGR | | |||
| +=====+==========+==========+==========+==========+==========+=====+ | +=====+==========+==========+==========+==========+==========+=====+ | |||
| |IPv6 | 513.07 | 574.02 | 989.25 | 1,136.28 | 1,207.61 |23.9%| | |IPv6 | 513.07 | 574.02 | 989.25 | 1,136.28 | 1,207.61 |23.9%| | |||
| +-----+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+ | +-----+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+ | |||
| |World| 3,410.27 | 3,470.36 | 4,065.00 | 4,091.62 | 4,093.69 |4.7% | | |World| 3,410.27 | 3,470.36 | 4,065.00 | 4,091.62 | 4,093.69 | 4.7%| | |||
| +-----+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+ | +-----+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+ | |||
| |Ratio| 15.0% | 16.5% | 24.3% | 27.8% | 29.5% |18.4%| | |Ratio| 15.0% | 16.5% | 24.3% | 27.8% | 29.5% |18.4%| | |||
| +-----+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+ | +-----+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+ | |||
| Table 2: IPv6-Capable Users against Total Users (in Millions) as | Table 2: IPv6-Capable Users against Total Users (in Millions) as | |||
| of January 2022 | of January 2022 | |||
| Two figures appear: first, the IPv6 Internet population is growing | Two figures appear: first, the IPv6 Internet population is growing | |||
| with a two-digit Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR), and second, the | with a two-digit Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR), and second, the | |||
| ratio IPv6 over total is also growing steadily. | ratio IPv6 over total is also growing steadily. | |||
| 2.3. IPv6 Web Content | 2.3. IPv6 Web Content | |||
| skipping to change at line 541 ¶ | skipping to change at line 541 ¶ | |||
| Local Internet Registries (LIRs), and enterprises or other | Local Internet Registries (LIRs), and enterprises or other | |||
| organizations. An ISP/LIR will use the allocated block to assign | organizations. An ISP/LIR will use the allocated block to assign | |||
| addresses to their end users. The following table shows the amount | addresses to their end users. The following table shows the amount | |||
| of individual allocations, per RIR, in the time period from 2017-2021 | of individual allocations, per RIR, in the time period from 2017-2021 | |||
| [APNIC2]. | [APNIC2]. | |||
| +==========+=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+===========+====+ | +==========+=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+===========+====+ | |||
| | Registry |Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Cumulated |CAGR| | | Registry |Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Cumulated |CAGR| | |||
| | |2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | | | | | |2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | | | | |||
| +==========+=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+===========+====+ | +==========+=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+===========+====+ | |||
| | AFRINIC |112 | 110 | 115 | 109 | 136 | 582 |51% | | | AFRINIC | 112| 110 | 115 | 109 | 136 | 582 | 51%| | |||
| +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | |||
| | APNIC |1,369| 1,474 | 1,484 | 1,498 | 1,392 | 7,217 |52% | | | APNIC |1,369| 1,474 | 1,484 | 1,498 | 1,392 | 7,217 | 52%| | |||
| +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | |||
| | ARIN |684 | 659 | 605 | 644 | 671 | 3,263 |48% | | | ARIN | 684| 659 | 605 | 644 | 671 | 3,263 | 48%| | |||
| +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | |||
| | LACNIC |1,549| 1,448 | 1,614 | 1,801 | 730 | 7,142 |47% | | | LACNIC |1,549| 1,448 | 1,614 | 1,801 | 730 | 7,142 | 47%| | |||
| +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | |||
| | RIPE NCC |2,051| 2,620 | 3,104 | 1,403 | 2,542 | 11,720 |55% | | | RIPE NCC |2,051| 2,620 | 3,104 | 1,403 | 2,542 | 11,720 | 55%| | |||
| +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | |||
| | Total |5,765| 6,311 | 6,922 | 5,455 | 5,471 | 29,924 |51% | | | Total |5,765| 6,311 | 6,922 | 5,455 | 5,471 | 29,924 | 51%| | |||
| +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | +----------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+ | |||
| Table 4: IPv6 Allocations Worldwide (as of January 2022) | Table 4: IPv6 Allocations Worldwide (as of January 2022) | |||
| The trend shows the steady progress of IPv6. The decline of IPv6 | The trend shows the steady progress of IPv6. The decline of IPv6 | |||
| allocations in 2020 and 2021 may be due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It | allocations in 2020 and 2021 may be due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It | |||
| also happened to IPv4 allocations. | also happened to IPv4 allocations. | |||
| [APNIC2] also compares the number of allocations for both address | [APNIC2] also compares the number of allocations for both address | |||
| families. The CAGR looks quite similar in 2021 but a little higher | families. The CAGR looks quite similar in 2021 but a little higher | |||
| for the IPv4 allocations in comparison to the IPv6 allocations (53.6% | for the IPv4 allocations in comparison to the IPv6 allocations (53.6% | |||
| versus 50.9%). | versus 50.9%). | |||
| +=========+=====+=====+========+=======+=======+===========+=======+ | +=========+=====+=====+========+=======+=======+===========+=======+ | |||
| | Address |Dec |Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Cumulated | CAGR | | | Address |Dec |Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Cumulated | CAGR | | |||
| | family |2017 |2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | | | | | family |2017 |2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | | | | |||
| +=========+=====+=====+========+=======+=======+===========+=======+ | +=========+=====+=====+========+=======+=======+===========+=======+ | |||
| | IPv6 |5,765|6,311| 6,922 | 5,455 | 5,471 | 29,924 | 50.9% | | | IPv6 |5,765|6,311| 6,922 | 5,455 | 5,471 | 29,924 | 50.9% | | |||
| +---------+-----+-----+--------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+ | +---------+-----+-----+--------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+ | |||
| | IPv4 |8,091|9,707| 13,112 | 6,263 | 7,829 | 45,002 | 53.6% | | | IPv4 |8,091|9,707| 13,112 | 6,263 | 7,829 | 45,002 | 53.6% | | |||
| +---------+-----+-----+--------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+ | +---------+-----+-----+--------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+ | |||
| Table 5: Allocations per Address Family (as of January 2022) | Table 5: Allocations per Address Family (as of January 2022) | |||
| The reason may be that the IPv4 allocations in 2021 included many | The reason may be that the IPv4 allocations in 2021 included many | |||
| allocations of small address ranges (e.g., /24) [APNIC2]. On the | allocations of small address ranges (e.g., /24) [APNIC2]. On the | |||
| contrary, a single IPv6 allocation is large enough to cope with the | contrary, a single IPv6 allocation is large enough to cope with the | |||
| need of an operator for long period. After an operator receives an | need of an operator for long period. After an operator receives an | |||
| IPv6 /30 or /32 allocation, it is unlikely that a new request of | IPv6 /30 or /32 allocation, it is unlikely that a new request of | |||
| addresses is repeated in the short term. | addresses is repeated in the short term. | |||
| skipping to change at line 594 ¶ | skipping to change at line 594 ¶ | |||
| percentage of Autonomous Systems (ASes) supporting IPv6 compared to | percentage of Autonomous Systems (ASes) supporting IPv6 compared to | |||
| the total ASes worldwide. The number of IPv6-capable ASes increased | the total ASes worldwide. The number of IPv6-capable ASes increased | |||
| from 24.3% in January 2018 to 38.7% in January 2022. This equals to | from 24.3% in January 2018 to 38.7% in January 2022. This equals to | |||
| 18% of the CAGR for IPv6-enabled networks. In comparison, the CAGR | 18% of the CAGR for IPv6-enabled networks. In comparison, the CAGR | |||
| for the total of IPv6 and IPv4 networks is just 5%. | for the total of IPv6 and IPv4 networks is just 5%. | |||
| +==============+========+========+========+========+========+======+ | +==============+========+========+========+========+========+======+ | |||
| | Advertised | Jan | Jan | Jan | Jan | Jan | CAGR | | | Advertised | Jan | Jan | Jan | Jan | Jan | CAGR | | |||
| | ASN | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | | | | ASN | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | | | |||
| +==============+========+========+========+========+========+======+ | +==============+========+========+========+========+========+======+ | |||
| | IPv6-capable | 14,500 | 16,470 | 18,650 | 21,400 | 28,140 | 18% | | | IPv6-capable | 14,500 | 16,470 | 18,650 | 21,400 | 28,140 | 18% | | |||
| +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------+ | +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------+ | |||
| | Total ASN | 59,700 | 63,100 | 66,800 | 70,400 | 72,800 | 5% | | | Total ASN | 59,700 | 63,100 | 66,800 | 70,400 | 72,800 | 5% | | |||
| +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------+ | +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------+ | |||
| | Ratio | 24.3% | 26.1% | 27.9% | 30.4% | 38.7% | | | | Ratio | 24.3% | 26.1% | 27.9% | 30.4% | 38.7% | | | |||
| +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------+ | +--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+------+ | |||
| Table 6: Percentage of IPv6-Capable ASes (as of January 2022) | Table 6: Percentage of IPv6-Capable ASes (as of January 2022) | |||
| The tables above provide an aggregated view of the allocations' | The tables above provide an aggregated view of the allocations' | |||
| dynamic. The next subsections will zoom into each specific domain to | dynamic. The next subsections will zoom into each specific domain to | |||
| highlight its relative status. | highlight its relative status. | |||
| skipping to change at line 658 ¶ | skipping to change at line 658 ¶ | |||
| of IPv6 adoption in several US industry sectors. The analysis tries | of IPv6 adoption in several US industry sectors. The analysis tries | |||
| to infer whether IPv6 is supported by looking from "outside" a | to infer whether IPv6 is supported by looking from "outside" a | |||
| company's network. It takes into consideration the support of IPv6 | company's network. It takes into consideration the support of IPv6 | |||
| to external services, such as Domain Name System (DNS), mail, and | to external services, such as Domain Name System (DNS), mail, and | |||
| websites. [BGR_1] has similar data for China, while [CNLABS_1] | websites. [BGR_1] has similar data for China, while [CNLABS_1] | |||
| provides the status in India. | provides the status in India. | |||
| +===============+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | +===============+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | |||
| | Country | Domains analyzed | DNS | Mail | Website | | | Country | Domains analyzed | DNS | Mail | Website | | |||
| +===============+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | +===============+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | |||
| | China | 478 | 74.7% | 0.0% | 19.7% | | | China | 478 | 74.7% | 0.0% | 19.7% | | |||
| +---------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +---------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | India | 104 | 51.9% | 15.4% | 16.3% | | | India | 104 | 51.9% | 15.4% | 16.3% | | |||
| +---------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +---------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | United States | 1070 | 66.8% | 21.2% | 6.3% | | | United States | 1070 | 66.8% | 21.2% | 6.3% | | |||
| | of America | | | | | | | of America | | | | | | |||
| +---------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +---------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| Table 7: IPv6 Support for External-Facing Services across | Table 7: IPv6 Support for External-Facing Services across | |||
| Enterprises (as of January 2022) | Enterprises (as of January 2022) | |||
| A poll submitted to a group of large enterprises in North America in | A poll submitted to a group of large enterprises in North America in | |||
| early 2021 (see Appendix B) shows that the operational issues are | early 2021 (see Appendix B) shows that the operational issues are | |||
| even more critical than for ISPs. | even more critical than for ISPs. | |||
| skipping to change at line 708 ¶ | skipping to change at line 708 ¶ | |||
| across second-level domains associated with US federal agencies. | across second-level domains associated with US federal agencies. | |||
| These domains are in the form of example.gov or example.fed. The | These domains are in the form of example.gov or example.fed. The | |||
| script used by [NST_2] has also been employed to measure the same | script used by [NST_2] has also been employed to measure the same | |||
| analytics in other countries, e.g., China [BGR_2], India [CNLABS_2], | analytics in other countries, e.g., China [BGR_2], India [CNLABS_2], | |||
| and the European Union [IPv6Forum]. For this latter analytic, some | and the European Union [IPv6Forum]. For this latter analytic, some | |||
| post-processing is necessary to filter out the non-European domains. | post-processing is necessary to filter out the non-European domains. | |||
| +====================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | +====================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | |||
| | Country | Domains analyzed | DNS | Mail | Website | | | Country | Domains analyzed | DNS | Mail | Website | | |||
| +====================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | +====================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | |||
| | China | 52 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 98.1% | | | China | 52 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 98.1% | | |||
| +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | European Union (*) | 19 | 47.4% | 0.0% | 21.1% | | | European Union (*) | 19 | 47.4% | 0.0% | 21.1% | | |||
| +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | India | 618 | 7.6% | 6.5% | 7.1% | | | India | 618 | 7.6% | 6.5% | 7.1% | | |||
| +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | United States of | 1283 | 87.1% | 14.0% | 51.7% | | | United States of | 1283 | 87.1% | 14.0% | 51.7% | | |||
| | America | | | | | | | America | | | | | | |||
| +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +--------------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| Table 8: IPv6 Support for External-Facing Services across | Table 8: IPv6 Support for External-Facing Services across | |||
| Governmental Institutions (as of January 2022) | Governmental Institutions (as of January 2022) | |||
| (*) Both EU and country-specific domains are considered. | (*) Both EU and country-specific domains are considered. | |||
| IPv6 support in the US is higher than other countries. This is | IPv6 support in the US is higher than other countries. This is | |||
| likely due to the IPv6 mandate set by [US-CIO]. In the case of | likely due to the IPv6 mandate set by [US-CIO]. In the case of | |||
| skipping to change at line 739 ¶ | skipping to change at line 739 ¶ | |||
| Similar statistics are also available for higher education. [NST_3] | Similar statistics are also available for higher education. [NST_3] | |||
| measures the data from second-level domains of universities in the | measures the data from second-level domains of universities in the | |||
| US, such as example.edu. [BGR_3] looks at Chinese education-related | US, such as example.edu. [BGR_3] looks at Chinese education-related | |||
| domains. [CNLABS_1] analyzes domains in India (mostly third level), | domains. [CNLABS_1] analyzes domains in India (mostly third level), | |||
| while [IPv6Forum] lists universities in the European Union (second | while [IPv6Forum] lists universities in the European Union (second | |||
| level), again after filtering the non-European domains. | level), again after filtering the non-European domains. | |||
| +================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | +================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | |||
| | Country | Domains analyzed | DNS | Mail | Website | | | Country | Domains analyzed | DNS | Mail | Website | | |||
| +================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | +================+==================+=======+=======+=========+ | |||
| | China | 111 | 36.9% | 0.0% | 77.5% | | | China | 111 | 36.9% | 0.0% | 77.5% | | |||
| +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | European Union | 118 | 83.9% | 43.2% | 35.6% | | | European Union | 118 | 83.9% | 43.2% | 35.6% | | |||
| +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | India | 100 | 31.0% | 54.0% | 5.0% | | | India | 100 | 31.0% | 54.0% | 5.0% | | |||
| +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| | United States | 346 | 49.1% | 19.4% | 21.7% | | | United States | 346 | 49.1% | 19.4% | 21.7% | | |||
| | of America | | | | | | | of America | | | | | | |||
| +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | +----------------+------------------+-------+-------+---------+ | |||
| Table 9: IPv6 Support for External-Facing Services across | Table 9: IPv6 Support for External-Facing Services across | |||
| Universities (as of January 2022) | Universities (as of January 2022) | |||
| Overall, the universities have wider support of IPv6-based services | Overall, the universities have wider support of IPv6-based services | |||
| compared to the other sectors. Apart from a couple of exceptions | compared to the other sectors. Apart from a couple of exceptions | |||
| (e.g., the support of IPv6 mail in China and IPv6 websites in India), | (e.g., the support of IPv6 mail in China and IPv6 websites in India), | |||
| the numbers shown in the table above indicate good support of IPv6 in | the numbers shown in the table above indicate good support of IPv6 in | |||
| skipping to change at line 2006 ¶ | skipping to change at line 2006 ¶ | |||
| 54 organizations provided answers. | 54 organizations provided answers. | |||
| Question 1. How much IPv6 implementation have you done at your | Question 1. How much IPv6 implementation have you done at your | |||
| organization? (54 respondents) | organization? (54 respondents) | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | None | 16.67% | | | None | 16.67% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Some people have gotten some training | 16.67% | | | Some people have gotten some training | 16.67% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Many people have gotten some training | 1.85% | | | Many people have gotten some training | 1.85% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Website is IPv6 enabled | 7.41% | | | Website is IPv6 enabled | 7.41% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Most equipment is dual-stacked | 31.48% | | | Most equipment is dual-stacked | 31.48% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Have an IPv6 transition plan for entire network | 5.56% | | | Have an IPv6 transition plan for entire network | 5.56% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Running IPv6-only in many places | 20.37% | | | Running IPv6-only in many places | 20.37% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Entire network is IPv6-only | 0.00% | | | Entire network is IPv6-only | 0.00% | | |||
| +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +-------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| Table 19: IPv6 Implementation | Table 19: IPv6 Implementation | |||
| Question 2. What kind of help or classes would you like to see INTC | Question 2. What kind of help or classes would you like to see INTC | |||
| do? (54 respondents) | do? (54 respondents) | |||
| +------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Classes/labs on IPv6 security | 66.67% | | | Classes/labs on IPv6 security | 66.67% | | |||
| +------------------------------------------------+--------+ | +------------------------------------------------+--------+ | |||
| skipping to change at line 2055 ¶ | skipping to change at line 2055 ¶ | |||
| | Security | 31.48% | | | Security | 31.48% | | |||
| +-----------------------------+--------+ | +-----------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Application conversion | 25.93% | | | Application conversion | 25.93% | | |||
| +-----------------------------+--------+ | +-----------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Training | 27.78% | | | Training | 27.78% | | |||
| +-----------------------------+--------+ | +-----------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | All the above | 33.33% | | | All the above | 33.33% | | |||
| +-----------------------------+--------+ | +-----------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Don't know enough to answer | 14.81% | | | Don't know enough to answer | 14.81% | | |||
| +-----------------------------+--------+ | +-----------------------------+--------+ | |||
| | Other | 9.26% | | | Other | 9.26% | | |||
| +-----------------------------+--------+ | +-----------------------------+--------+ | |||
| Table 21: Areas of Concern for IPv6 | Table 21: Areas of Concern for IPv6 | |||
| Implementation | Implementation | |||
| Acknowledgements | Acknowledgements | |||
| The authors of this document would like to thank Brian Carpenter, | The authors of this document would like to thank Brian Carpenter, | |||
| Fred Baker, Alexandre Petrescu, Fernando Gont, Barbara Stark, | Fred Baker, Alexandre Petrescu, Fernando Gont, Barbara Stark, | |||
| Haisheng Yu (Johnson), Dhruv Dhody, Gábor Lencse, Shuping Peng, | Haisheng Yu (Johnson), Dhruv Dhody, Gábor Lencse, Shuping Peng, | |||
| End of changes. 29 change blocks. | ||||
| 29 lines changed or deleted | 29 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. | ||||