Upload
arbor-networks
View
3.545
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Download this presentation for an overview of a collaborative research project between Arbor Networks, the University of Michigan, Verisign Labs, the International Computer Science Institute and the University of Illinois. This research was originally presented at SIGCOMM.
Citation preview
Measuring IPv6 Adop3on
Jakub Czyz, University of Michigan Mark Allman, Interna=onal Computer Science Ins=tute
Jing Zhang, University of Michigan ScoA Iekel-‐Johnson, Arbor Networks
Eric Osterweil, Verisign Labs Michael Bailey, University of Michigan and University of Illinois
SIGCOMM 2014
Chicago, IL, USA August 17-‐22, 2014
Why Study IPv6 Adop3on Now?
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 2
(Image source: Geoff Huston, hAp://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4)
• Internet con=nues growing • IPv4 space shrinking… • IPv4 exhaus=on events:
– IANA: February 2011 – Asia/Pacific: April 2011 – Europe: September 2012 – La=n America: June 2014
• IPv6 Community Flag Days – 2011 & 2012
Total Free IPv4 /8 At Registries
IANA Exhaus=on
Our Study
• Goal: a systemic “big picture” of IPv6 adop=on – Trading off depth for breadth – Are there cross-‐perspec=ve insights?
• Mul3-‐perspec3ve: 10 datasets • Mul3-‐year: 2-‐10 years • Mul3-‐aspect: 12 metrics • Findings: IPv6 adop3on – varies by where you measure (region) – varies by what you measure – recently made a qualita=ve jump
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 3
Data Analyzed
• Exis3ng/Public Datasets: – RIR alloca=on – Route Views BGP, RIPE-‐RIS BGP – Google.com clients, – Verisign zone files, – CAIDA Ark RTT
• New Datasets: – Traffic: Arbor Networks global traffic – Naming: Verisign .com/.net queries via IPv4, via IPv6 – Content: Tes=ng data of Alexa top-‐10K sites
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 4
Metrics Prerequisite IP Func3ons • Address Alloca=on • Address Adver=sement • Topology • DNS Name servers • DNS Resolvers • DNS Queries • Server Readiness • Client Readiness
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 5
Opera3onal Characteris3cs • Traffic Volume • Applica=on Mix • Transi=on Technologies • Performance (RTT)
“IPv6 adop
3on” = lev
el rela3ve
to IPv4
METRICS (PREREQUISITE)
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 6
Prefix Alloca3on
0
200
400
600
800
1000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Mon
thly
Pre
fix A
lloca
tions
Rat
io IP
v6/IP
v4
IPv4IPv6
Ratio
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 7 SIGCOMM’14 IANA
Exhaus=on
Naming: Domains & Record Types
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
v4 v6 v4 v6 v4 v6 v4 v6 v4 v6
Frac
tion
of A
ll D
NS
Que
ries
2011ï06ï08 2012ï02ï23 2012ï08ï28 2013ï02ï26 2013ï12ï23
other ANYTXTNSDSMXAAAA A
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 8 SIGCOMM’14
More Similar (p < 0.05)
• Queries from .com/.net; IPv4 & IPv6 name servers – Five day-‐long packet samples over 2.5 years – IPv6 DNS users query similar domains as IPv4 – Query types are converging over this =me period:
Server Readiness: Alexa Top Domain Reachability
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
2011-06 2011-12 2012-06 2012-12 2013-06 2013-12
Frac
tion
of A
lexa
Top
10K
AAAA LookupsReachability
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 9 SIGCOMM’14
IPv6 World Day IPv6 Launch Day
Client Readiness: visitors to google.com
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Frac
tion
Clie
nts
Usi
ng IP
v6
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 10 SIGCOMM’14
(Data method in Colir et al., 2010)
+151%
+147%
+61% -‐7% +43%
METRICS (OPERATIONAL)
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 11
Global Traffic
10M
100M
1G
10G
100G
1T
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 0.0001
0.001
0.01
Traf
fic V
olum
e/C
usto
mer
(bps
)
Rat
io IP
v6/IP
v4
0.0064
IPv4 A (peak)IPv6 A (peak)
Ratio A (peaks)
IPv4 B (average)IPv6 B (average)
Ratio B (averages)
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 12 SIGCOMM’14
• Arbor Networks global provider neslow data • 260 service providers (Dataset B) ~ 1/3 – 1/2 of all inter-‐AS traffic
+433% +470%
Applica3on Mix (% of IPv6)
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 13 SIGCOMM’14
{ User content
IPv6 Transi3on Technologies (Teredo + 6to4)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Frac
tion
of n
on-n
ativ
e IP
v6
Internet Traffic AInternet Traffic B
Google Clients
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 14 SIGCOMM’14
Mostly Transi3on
Mostly Na3ve
CONCLUSIONS
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 15
Conclusion 1: Regions Differ
1e-05
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
Address(A1) Routing(T1) Traffic(U1)
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPENCC
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 16 SIGCOMM’14
IPv6 / IPv4 Ra=
o
} Large Inter-‐Region Differences
Large Intra-‐Region (Cross-‐Metric) Differences
E.g. ARIN last place in alloca3on, first in traffic.
Conclusion 2: Perspec3ve Magers
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 17 SIGCOMM’14
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
IPv6
/ IP
v4 R
atio
A1 (allocation - monthly)
A1 (allocation - cumulative)
A2 (advertisement)
R2 (Google clients)
U1 (traffic - A.peaks)
U1 (traffic - B.averages)
N1 (.com NS)
T1 (topology)
P1 (performance)
2-‐3 order of magnitude difference
Conclusion 3: IPv6 is Real!
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 18 SIGCOMM’14
ß 20x growth!
ß 15x growth!
ß Traffic Flipped
ß Nearly on-‐par
Thank You!
Ques=ons?
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 19
BACKUP SLIDES
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 20 SIGCOMM’14
Internet Devices and Users Con3nue to Increase
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 21
Dataset Summary
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 22 SIGCOMM’14
/day /day
Prefix Adver3sement
100
1K
10K
100K
1M
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20140.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
Pref
ix A
dver
tisem
ents
Rat
io IP
v6/IP
v4
IPv4IPv6
Ratio
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 23 SIGCOMM’14
AS Centrality
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
K-co
re d
egre
e
Dual-StackIPv6-Only
IPv4
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 24 SIGCOMM’14
DNS: .com & .net Zones
10
100
1K
10K
100K
1M
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 1e-05
0.0001
0.001
0.01
Rec
ords
in T
LD z
ones
Rat
io IP
v6/IP
v4 (.
com
)
.com A glue.net A glue
.net AAAA glue.com AAAA glueRatio .com glue
Ratio .net all probed (H.E.)Ratio .com all probed (H.E.)
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 25 SIGCOMM’14
IPv4 .com/.net TLD A and AAAA Query Rank Correla3on (Spearman’s ρ)
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 26 SIGCOMM’14
Within type: Strong Across type: Weak
Naming: Domains • Queries from .com/.net; IPv4 & IPv6 name servers – Five day-‐long samples over 2.5 years
• Four sets of top 100k domains: – For both IPv4 and IPv6 packets (user popula=ons) – Within each, for domains queried by A and AAAA
• Finding: IPv4 to IPv6 popula=ons correlate strongly for the same query type {A,AAAA} – e.g. Spearman’s ρ of 0.7 for IPv4 A versus IPv6 A
• So, IPv6 DNS users query similar domains as IPv4
SIGCOMM’14 Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 27
Performance (using 10-‐ and 20-‐hop RTT)
0
100
200
300
400
500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Med
ian
RTT
(ms)
Rat
io IP
v6/IP
v4 p
erfo
rman
ce
IPv6 - Hop 20IPv4 - Hop 20IPv6 - Hop 10IPv4 - Hop 10
Ratio - Hop 10
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 28 SIGCOMM’14
Projec3ons
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
IPv6
/IPv4
A1 (allocation - cumulative)
U1 (traffic - A.peaks)
Polynomial Proj. (A1:R2 = 0.996; U1:R2 = 0.838)Exponential Proj. (A1:R2 = 0.984; U1:R2 = 0.892)
Measuring IPv6 Adop=on – Czyz et al. 29 SIGCOMM’14