Liquid Telecom warns of looming address shortage - Daily Nation
Dear listers Greetings and apologies for cross-posting. Internet service provider Liquid Telecom Kenya has warned that Africa is set to run out of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses as early as next year, potentially slowing down digital growth in the continent. Read on:- http://www.nation.co.ke/business/Liquid-Telecom-warns-of-looming-address-sho... Couple of questions:- 1. How involved are we as a community in ensuring the smooth transition from IPV4 to IPV6? 2. What have been the major impediments to the successful migration? 3. How can we move the needle faster? Ali Hussein Tel: +254 713 601113
Ali, Short answer: IPv6 is better for clients: our ISPs should all agree to begin allocating IPv6 subnets to clients. TL;DR: IPv6 is not compatible with IPv4, but all modern software is IPv6 capable - ie. software implementing IPv6 stacks is incorporated in both end-user (PCs, tablets, phones, etc.) and network devices (routers, switches, etc.) - so a transition to IPv6 should be relatively painless - indeed, even easier than IPv4 as the 'tricks' we use to extend IPv4 space, such as NAT, are no longer required. DHCP is also (almost) redundant as the 128 bits of IPv6 addressing neatly divides into 2 blocks of 64 bits - the first block of 64 bits describing the subnet (which is allocated to the client by the ISP), and the second block of 64 bits is the host address space available to the client - which, by not much coincidence, is the size of the MAC address space. Phew! - what this means is that a device (PC, etc.) IPv6 host address can be it's MAC address - no DHCP or ARP requests required ;) So where's the problem? - Well, as the majority of the 'rest of the internet' is still operating on IPv4 addressing, the ISP (or their upstream) may need to implement IPv6 to IPv4 translation - and this is not so simple: if the 'other end' is also an IPv6 address, but there is no direct IPv6 route between the two, then an IPv6 to IPv4 'tunnel' is needed to transfer the IPv6 packets through an IPv4 routing. If the 'other end' is only an IPv4 address, then the ISP needs to use NAT64 (and other mechanisms) to translate between the two different addressing schemes. Some numbers: 128 bits, split into 2 groups of 64 bits, is approximately 18,446,744,073,709,600,000 IPv6 subnet prefixes, and 18,446,744,073,709,600,000 hosts per subnet. So to reiterate the short answer - IPv6 is a good thing for clients, but introduces some challenges for ISPs. Thanks for waking up my brain this fine Monday morning ;) Cheers, Tony On 10/10/2016, Ali Hussein via kictanet <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear listers
Greetings and apologies for cross-posting.
Internet service provider Liquid Telecom Kenya has warned that Africa is set to run out of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses as early as next year, potentially slowing down digital growth in the continent.
Read on:-
http://www.nation.co.ke/business/Liquid-Telecom-warns-of-looming-address-sho...
Couple of questions:-
1. How involved are we as a community in ensuring the smooth transition from IPV4 to IPV6?
2. What have been the major impediments to the successful migration?
3. How can we move the needle faster?
Ali Hussein Tel: +254 713 601113
-- Tony White
@Tony, rather than do a v4 to v6 tunnel, it maybe better (easier) to implement a dual-stack with your upstream provider. That way you manage the transition better. For example, you may opt to leave your old clients on v4 while putting your new clients on v6 as u gain confidence with v6 implementations. Your upstream provider then seamlessly handles both types of traffic since they are running dual-stack system. ditch your upstream provider if they cannot offer your a dual-stack system. walu.nb: v6 implementation is going to be (may already be) a big deal sooner, rather than later and we tried to capture this in the new ICT policy. Hope it was retained. From: Tony White via kictanet <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: Tony White <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 11:08 AM Subject: Re: [kictanet] Liquid Telecom warns of looming address shortage - Daily Nation Ali, Short answer: IPv6 is better for clients: our ISPs should all agree to begin allocating IPv6 subnets to clients. TL;DR: IPv6 is not compatible with IPv4, but all modern software is IPv6 capable - ie. software implementing IPv6 stacks is incorporated in both end-user (PCs, tablets, phones, etc.) and network devices (routers, switches, etc.) - so a transition to IPv6 should be relatively painless - indeed, even easier than IPv4 as the 'tricks' we use to extend IPv4 space, such as NAT, are no longer required. DHCP is also (almost) redundant as the 128 bits of IPv6 addressing neatly divides into 2 blocks of 64 bits - the first block of 64 bits describing the subnet (which is allocated to the client by the ISP), and the second block of 64 bits is the host address space available to the client - which, by not much coincidence, is the size of the MAC address space. Phew! - what this means is that a device (PC, etc.) IPv6 host address can be it's MAC address - no DHCP or ARP requests required ;) So where's the problem? - Well, as the majority of the 'rest of the internet' is still operating on IPv4 addressing, the ISP (or their upstream) may need to implement IPv6 to IPv4 translation - and this is not so simple: if the 'other end' is also an IPv6 address, but there is no direct IPv6 route between the two, then an IPv6 to IPv4 'tunnel' is needed to transfer the IPv6 packets through an IPv4 routing. If the 'other end' is only an IPv4 address, then the ISP needs to use NAT64 (and other mechanisms) to translate between the two different addressing schemes. Some numbers: 128 bits, split into 2 groups of 64 bits, is approximately 18,446,744,073,709,600,000 IPv6 subnet prefixes, and 18,446,744,073,709,600,000 hosts per subnet. So to reiterate the short answer - IPv6 is a good thing for clients, but introduces some challenges for ISPs. Thanks for waking up my brain this fine Monday morning ;) Cheers, Tony On 10/10/2016, Ali Hussein via kictanet <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear listers
Greetings and apologies for cross-posting.
Internet service provider Liquid Telecom Kenya has warned that Africa is set to run out of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses as early as next year, potentially slowing down digital growth in the continent.
Read on:-
http://www.nation.co.ke/business/Liquid-Telecom-warns-of-looming-address-sho...
Couple of questions:-
1. How involved are we as a community in ensuring the smooth transition from IPV4 to IPV6?
2. What have been the major impediments to the successful migration?
3. How can we move the needle faster?
Ali Hussein Tel: +254 713 601113
-- Tony White _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list [email protected] https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
participants (3)
-
Ali Hussein -
Tony White -
Walubengo J