Archive for the 'IPv6' Category
Monday, July 25th, 2011 by kc
My third FCC Technical Advisory Council meeting (3-hr. video archive here) was the most exciting yet. The TAC’s Critical Legacy Transition working group, studying the legacy public switched telephone network, recommended that the Council advise the FCC to set a concrete date to sunset (shut down) the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN). (!) The working group recommended the year 2018 as a starting point for lively discussion.
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, Economics, IPv6, Policy, Review | 2 Comments »
Sunday, June 5th, 2011 by kc
On June 8 2011 a group of content providers, including Google, Yahoo and Facebook, are going to dual-stack their content, in an event called World IPv6 Day. This trial will enable content providers to gain experience with increased levels of IPv6 traffic and gauge the extent and effect of broken dual-stack end-users. CAIDA is cooperating with RIPE NCC’s measurements on this day, providing a dozen Ark monitors to increase the number of vantage points from which RIPE will actively test a set of dual-stacked websites for levels of IPv6 support: existence of AAAA records; ping/ping6 response; traceroute/traceroute6; and HTTP reachability.
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, International Networking, IPv6, Topology | No Comments »
Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011 by kc
In light of available data on global IPv6 deployment, ISPs, and those who build equipment for them, have already accepted that multi-level network address translation (NAT, between IPv4 and IPv6 networks) is here for the foreseeable future, with all its limits on end-to-end reachability and application functionality, and its required unscalable per-protocol hacks. Whether “carrier-grade” NAT (CGN) technology supports a transition to IPv6 or becomes the endgame itself is irrelevant to the planning horizon of public companies, who must now develop sustainable business models that accommodate, if not support, IPv4 scarcity. I’ve heard a few notable predicted outcomes from engineers in the field.
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, IPv6, Review, Routing, Topology | 3 Comments »
Saturday, April 30th, 2011 by kc
I recently remotely attended my second meeting of the FCC’s Technological Advisory Council (slides but no video archives). The chairs of four working groups created at the first TAC meeting (Critical Transitions; IPv6; Broadband Infrastructure Deployment; and Sharing Opportunities) presented their interim results. The FCC then issued a set of “TAC recommendations” (which the TAC never saw); it is mostly a wish list from industry to the FCC. Ironically, IPv6 did not appear anywhere in the recommendations, despite being the most popular topic at the first TAC meeting last November, and despite us running out of IPv4 addresses since the last TAC meeting. But the TAC’s IPv6 WG did commit to (on slide 53) delivering a report by November 2011 on what the FCC could or should do to help promote IPv6 deployment. Specifically, the WG has the following charter:
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, International Networking, IPv6, Policy, Review | No Comments »
Friday, April 29th, 2011 by kc
In pursuit of more rigorous data on IPv6 deployment, CAIDA has undertaken four IPv6 measurement and analysis exercises: address allocation data; traceroute-based topology; DNS queries from root servers; and a global survey of network operators in 2008.
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, Domain Name System (DNS), International Networking, IPv6, Topology | No Comments »
Thursday, April 28th, 2011 by kc
[Last month, I remotely attended the second meeting of the FCC’s current Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), where chairs of several working groups set up at the first meeting (in November) reported on their progress and plans. I’m a member of the FCC TAC’s IPv6 working group, (more on this soon), and so far have been asked to answer two questions I’ve been thinking about for a couple of years: what data do we have to gauge IPv6 deployment by Internet service providers, and what data do we need? Last November I addressed the first question in a (still pending) NSF proposal to measure IPv6 deployment, with the following text. I’ll post some updates shortly.]
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, IPv6, Measurement | No Comments »
Monday, November 15th, 2010 by kc
I recently attended my first FCC Technological Advisory Council meeting (video archives). A week before the meeting we received a memo from the chairman of the committee (Tom Wheeler) notifying the committee of a “clear and challenging mandate from Chairman Genachowski: to generate ideas and spur actions that lead to job creation and economic growth in the ICT [information and communication technologies] ecosystem.” Specifically, “The TAC will focus on the short term implementation of innovative ideas to create investment and jobs, as opposed to long term regulatory changes.”
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, Economics, IPv6, Policy, Review | No Comments »
Monday, May 25th, 2009 by kc
Internet infrastructure economics research”, and how to do reasonable examples of it, has come up a lot lately, so i’m posting a brief description of an academic+icann community workshop i’ve been recommending for a few years, which has yet to happen, and (I still believe) is long past due, and specifically more important than passing policies, especially emergency ones to allow IP address markets with no supporting research on the impact on security and stability of the Internet, and even at the risk of killing IPv6 altogether.]
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, Data Collection, Economics, IPv6, Policy, Suggestions | No Comments »
Saturday, May 10th, 2008 by kc
[Jump to a Top Ten item: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10]
#8: The opaqueness of the infrastructure to empirical analysis has generated many problematic responses from rigidly circumscribed communities earnestly trying to get their jobs done.
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, Domain Name System (DNS), Economics, Future, IPv6, Policy, Routing, Suggestions, Top Tens, Topology | No Comments »
Wednesday, August 8th, 2007 by kc
i get this question a lot:
at the current churn rate/ratio, at what size does the
FIB need to be before it will not converge? (also sometimes pronounced ‘when will the current Internet routing architecture break?’)
a good question, has been asked many times, and afaik no one has provided any empirically grounded answer.
a few realities hinder our ability to answer this question.
(more…)
Posted in Commentaries, Future, IPv6, Routing, Suggestions | Comments Off on It is fair to say that we need a new routing system