Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Latif Ladid
Introduction
Now that they have the millennium bug behind them, network architects might think
some relaxation is in order. But there is no
rest for the weary. Indeed, we must now turn
our attention to IPv4. However, because operators are not faced with the same strokeof-midnight deadline pressuring them to
make the move to IPv6, and because there
are so many ways of making the transition
from IPv4, a simple perusal of the options
can be confusing. Add to this all the smoke
and noise surrounding the subject of IPv6,
and it is easy to see why some network operators are dragging their feet.
Difficult as the decision to migrate might
be, however, it has to be made. Despite strict
rationing, the IPv4 address space is rapidly
being depleted as more nodes and networks
are added to an already overburdened Internet routing structure. In theory, IPv4 can
support as many as four billion unique ad-
BOX A, ABBREVIATIONS
CIDR
DHCP
DS
DVMRP
GPRS
ICANN
IETF
IP
IPng
IPsec
IPv4
IPv6
ISP
MOSPF
NAT
PDA
QoS
RSVP
TC
UMTS
WAN
Y2K
IP version 4
IP version 6
Internet service provider
Multicast open shortest path first
Network address translation
Personal digital assistant
Quality of service
Resource reservation protocol
Traffic class
Universal mobile telecommunications system
Wide arrea network
Year 2000
Matters of time
At the 1999 annual conference of the Association for Computing Machinerys Special
Interest Group on Data Communication
(SIGCOMM99), Sandy Fraser, Chief ScienEricsson Review No. 1, 2000
tist at AT&T, expressed concern over the architecture of the Internet. Is it scalable?
Why have we not yet migrated from IPv4
to IPv6? Has the vaunted Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) ossified?
One of the problems surrounding the
IPv6 debate is that there is no specific date
by which all IPv4 addresses will have dried
up. Optimists claim that IPv4 has a few
good decades left. Pessimists warn that it
has only a few years. Regardless, there is a
big push on for IPv6. Nations like China
and Japanwhich did not receive much
IPv4 address spaceare major proponents,
as are nascent industries. Providers of nextgeneration mobile digital telephony and
vendors of networked appliances point out
that they will need IP addresses for millions
of devices.
There is also movement on the part of the
IETF, whose next-generation Internet protocol (IPng) working group continues to
plug away at IPv6 specifications and the
newly formed IPv6 Forumto promote the
new IP protocol, in order to build the new
Internet.
Millions
1000
Fixed
800
Mobile
600
Internet
400
Mobile Internet
200
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Figure 1
In light of the forecast growth (subscribers) of fixed and mobile telephony and the mobile
Internet, it is not too early for network operators to begin planning, deploying and testing
IPv6 networks.
Get moving!
Says Vint Cerf, Most people who make applications do not know what the IP address
space looks like. If anybody should be paying attention to this, it is the ISPs, most of
whom are betting the farm on NAT (network address translation) boxes in the near
term.
Network managers who think the longterm time frame allows them to put off their
IPv6 decisions should think again. It is not
too early to begin planning, deploying, and
testing IPv6 networks. By preparing for the
transition now instead of later, they can
build a solid knowledge base and avoid the
kind of chaotic response that characterized
so many year-2000 programming (Y2K)
efforts.
Addressing and routing
IPv6 helps solve several of the problems currently found within and between enterprises. On the global scale, IPv6 will allow Internet backbone designers to create a flexible and expandable global routing hierarchy. The Internet backbone (which is where
major enterprises and ISP networks come together) depends on the maintenance of a hierarchical address system that is similar in
nature to that of national and international
telephone systems. For example, large,
Ericsson Review No. 1, 2000
and service offerings mandated by mobile infrastructure (GPRS, UMTS), broadband networks,
consumer electronics and terminals, and the
interoperability and management thereof.
Therefore, Ericsson extends its full support to
the IPv6 Forum.
Jan Uddenfeldt, Senior Vice President and
Technical Director of LM Ericsson
IPv6 is here and now, so lets take the Internet
where no other network has gone before!
Dr. Vint Cerf, Chairman of the Internet Societal Task Force and father of the Internet
Weve known for some years that IPv4 was
heading toward its limits, and the IETF has
been working on IPv6 since 1994. Now, the
basic standards have been agreed on and are
being implemented, and it is time to move forward,
Dr. Brian E. Carpenter, Chairman of the IETF
Internet Architecture Board, and Program Director at IBMs Internet Division
The IPv6 Forums noble objectives will be to
promote this new technology on a worldwide
basis, sharing knowledge, experience and interoperability, and creating common grounds for
the new Internet of the next millennium.
Latif Ladid, President of the IPv6 Forum and
Vice President of Ericsson Telebit.
Transition architecture
There is no getting around the fact that IPv6
will have to interoperate withor tunnel
throughIPv4. The good news is that IPv6
does not create order dependencies: network
architects can upgrade their hosts first and
then the routers, or their routers first and
then the hosts. They can even upgrade some
hosts, some routers, and leave the rest alone.
The question, which of the three main interoperability mechanisms (tunnels, translators, or dual stacks) will predominate, remains open.
Transition strategies
IPv6 transition strategies vary. In some
cases, entire networks can be upgraded to
create small reservoirs of IPv6 support surrounded by oceans of IPv4. In these instances, the nodes in the IPv6 networks will
not necessarily have to support IPv4. However, to support external interoperability,
the devices at the network borders must support IPv4. Internal IPv6 nodes can communicate directly with one another and,
through tunnels via dual-IP routers, with
other IPv6 networks.
Ericsson Review No. 1, 2000
Rolling it out
Early implementers have many options for
building IPv6 support into their networks.
Numerous router vendors support IPv6, including 3Com (USA), Compaq Computer
Corporation (USA), Ericsson Telebit (Denmark), Hitachi Ltd. (Japan), Nokia
Telecommunications (Finland), and Northern Telecom Ltd. (Canada). The Linux kernel also includes IPv6 support. Microsoft
currently offers an alpha version of an experimental IPv6 stack that reportedly works
with Windows NT and the beta version of
Windows 2000.
Managing the transition
Given the ever-increasing business requirements for interactive multimedia and large
bandwidth network applications, IPv6 is
critical to the continued viability of enterprise internetworks and the public Internet
at large. Despite its importance and the efforts of some of the brightest minds in the
network industry, the birth of IPv6 has been
attended by a number of somewhat misleading myths and portrayals that can easily distract network owners who are in the
process of crafting a forward-looking net-
Figure 2
Most descriptions of the future of the Internet emphasize bandwidth. But the next-generation Internet is about much more than high-speed networksthe real issue is not what the
technology can do, but what we can do with it.
Internet
Fixed wired
mobility
Wireless
mobility
To realize the full potential of the new Internet, end-users must be able to trust online information and transactions as much
as or more than they trust hardcopy documents. As digital information becomes a
major commodity, it must be protected and
authenticated. What we see must be the
same as what was sent and what we get. We
must be able to control our data and protect
our privacy in cyberspace. This requires
easy-to-use, inexpensive, universally available mechanisms for security and authentication. In particular, we need a fail-safe
means of
ensuring the confidentiality of data sent
over the Internet;
proving that private data will remain private;
verifying that a message was sent and received properly;
authenticating individuals and information on the Web;
proving that someone signed an electronic document; and
certifying that a transaction took place at
a given time.
Quality of service: speed and differentiated
services
One of the fastest growing business requirements for internetworks is the ability
to transmit a stream of video, audio, news,
financial data, or other timely data to a
group of functionally related but geographically dispersed end-stations. This is best
achieved by means of network-layer multicasting techniques. Typically, a server sends
out a stream of multimedia or timesensitive data. A multicast-capable network
can then automatically replicate the servers
packets and route them to each subscriber
in the multicast group using an efficient
11
Figure 3
IPv6 offers superior processing of destination options, autoconfiguration, routing headers,
encapsulation, security, and anycast addresses.
12
Conclusion
With its immense address space, the IPv6
solution defines a multilevel hierarchical
global routing architecture. Using CIDREricsson Review No. 1, 2000
Wireline
telephony
Telecom
GSM
Voice
over IP
3G
(UMTS)
2G internet
3G internet
Data
com WAN/LAN
data
y
ilit
ob
Mobile
data
1G internet
Figure 4
IPv6 is a key enabler of the New Telecoms World.