IPv6: lies damned lies and power point

On the 12th of April 2010, the state secretary of Binnenlandse Zaken & Koningsrelaties, formally answered questions raised by Arda Gerkens, member of the 2de kamer about the warnings from the ICANN about the shortage of Internet Protocol addresses.

Yes, our politicians know about these, for most people, obsecure and deeply technical issues. The formal and written answers are, well, interesting to say the least. First there is a little chit chat about the 10% of IPv4 space being available, the prediction that these might be used up in the next 2 years etc. Then comes the part where Marja J.A. van der Hoeven [minister van Economische Zaken] writes:

"I have the recent results from research by the European Commision regarding the transistion to IPv6. This research shows us that 56% of the internet service providers in Europe support IPv6. Participating Dutch ISP's score significantly higher: 92%. From the research it is shown that factual useage of IPv6 in the Netherlands is 3%, higher then Germany, France and the UK."
[Note: slobby translation all done by me]

These numbers are based on this 'document'. I challange you to find any basis of the 92% of Dutch ISP's supporting IPv6.

But it gets worst. The 3% of factual Dutch IP traffic being IPv6 is based on access to one single website of TNO, aka Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research. Certainly a high profile & representative website? I am afraid not.

The reality is sad, and getting sadder. Where the local IT news site Tweakers was happy to show that IPv6 traffic on the AMS-IX 'thouched' the 2Gbps. At the same time the AMS-IX had about 700Gbps IPv4 traffic. That means the total amount of IPv6 traffic was 0.285% of the amount of IPv4 traffic. Around May this year the amount was around 0.2% So were still seeing growth, just not as fast as it has been the last years.

That was back in October 2009. Enter 2010 and IPv6 in absolute numbers is degrading. From a stagering 0.285% it is now even lower and NO WHERE NEAR the 3% our minister van Economische Zaken claims.

I have tried to contact Maarten Botterman [the author of the document that these 'numbers' are based on] for some more insight on the data he based at least his own number on, but to no avail.

Here's some more of my ranting.

Niet rooskleurig, maar wel realistisch en dat mag best wel eens. Rond kijkend in 'mijn netwerk' kan ik alle partijen die ook werkelijk V6 doen op 1 hand tellen [en drie daarvan hebben members op deze lijst]. Kijkend naar klanten van mijn huidige opdrachtgever kom ik ook niet veel verder.

Rond vragen in de [pre-] sales omgeving levert ook een bedroevend beeld op qua interesse voor V6.

Het is niet onwil of onkunde, veel van de clubs waar ik kom doen wel lastigere dingen dan v6, het is veel meer het oorverdovende gebrek aan drivers. Er zijn geen klanten op v6, er is geen content op v6, er is kortom niets te halen.

ISP's als XS4ALL hebben een notoire techniek-bewuste klantenkring en zijn daar mee de uitzondering op de regel, vandaar dat er voor hen een goede driver is om v6 wel aan te bieden. Bij Bit & surfnet werken ongelofelijk goede mensen dus die kunnen het voor een relatief lage prijs aanbieden omdat de kennis er aanwezig is. Maar voor de KPN's, de UPC's, de banken, de Aholds en andere die geld moeten verdienen kost V6 geld, betekend risico, en belooft voorlopig helemaal geen extra opbrengsten.

Vandaar de behoefte om de overheid maar weer in te schakelen. Daar kost geld niets en maakt laten de verantwoordelijke zich met een vage selectie van wat obscure cijfertjes uit een powerpoint presentatie afserveren.

In de commerciële markt is er [nog] helemaal geen vraag naar v6. De kans dat die vraag binnen 2 jaar op grote gaat komen is klein, binnen 5 jaar eventueel, maar garanties zij er niet. De voordelen van nu v6 ondersteunen ten opzichte van de risico's & kosten zijn marginaal als ze al bestaan.

Maar hoe komt dat toch? v6 is toch 'klaar' en bestaat al zo veel jaren? Nou nee, niet echt. v6 verkeerd nog immer in het 'individuele contributie moet het aan de praat krijgen want wij overzien het nog steeds niet helemaal stadium [zie http://fud.no/ipv6 voor een klasiek voorbeeld van 1 individu die 'alle' OS makers moet vertellen hoe v6&v4 te ondersteunen]. Zoals ik, begin 90'er jaren, zelf mijn bastion hosts moest [lees: mocht] bouwen voor bedrijven die 'veilig' wilde snuffelen aan 'het Internet', zo moeten bedrijven nu ook v6 implementeren.

Begin jaren 90 verdiende [grote] bedrijven niets met Internet access, het was een speeltuin waarbij uitval van een dag niet to grote consternatie leiden. Anno nu kan het niet functioneren van 1 knop op een website van een bank leiden tot moeten opdraven van de CEO op het 8 uur journaal om de onrust in de markt te bezweren.

Kortom, v6 staat in de kinderschoenen, er is niets te verdienen, noch te verkopen. Laten we dus ajb een beetje realistisch met de materie omgaan en 'v6 mailing server whitelist' en 'v4 is op over 153 dagen' en '91% van de isp.nl zijn er klaar voor' en 'v6 is mature & prime time ready' gewoon adresseren & behandelen als pipe dreams.

IPv6? Nowhere to be found!

IPv6 has basically disappeared from the wireless router landscape. Try finding a current one < 100 euro. Except for some obscure releases, like the DIR-615 Wireless b/g/n Router but only the hardware revision C with firmware 3.01

Hard to find, and certainly online nearly impossible to get any assurance about the hardware revision level.

Oh wait, my good old loyal WRTG54 [V4 with plenty of RAM] to the rescue! Oh no, not now, with the current 2.6 kernel and the open source b43 broadcom chipset and it's issues. Only with kernel 2.4 and it's 'limited' IPv6 support. You can roll your own WRT54 dd-wrt, if you feel adventures but the drawback is that there is no way to use the GUI. Not a nice plan if you plan to send the devices to parts far far away from home to end users.

There is the Fritz!Box 7270 but that goes for about 200 euro. That is nearly Cisco level pricing. And only with a lab release of the firmware, that is RC in dialect in the rest of the software world. Cisco of course does support IPv6 too but using the word Cisco and a price tag of <100 is like demanding justice from a African dictator.

So is there no solution? Oddly enough, there is... and it is produced by Apple: the AirPort Extreme [ and the AirPort TimeCapsule but for a >100 price tag]. Unfortunately there are gazillion stability issues specially in combination with Apple MBP's but they do IPv6 well with a simple interface.

Frustrating.

Not too bad! Native IPv6 ADSL for 7 euroos a month.
http://www.introweb.net/producten/categorien/internet_toegang/economy_adsl/ipv6_adsl.shtml

And Fritz!Box 7270 is indeed the only commercial IPv6 enabled home grade device available, also used by XS4ALL

Let me hear you say: IPv6!

2.1  Preparation Phase - Present to December 2008

 In the Preparation Phase, entities prepare to provide
 Internet-facing services via IPv6-based connectivity
 while continuing to provide Internet-facing services
 via IPv4 connectivity.

 During the Preparation Phase, the following principles apply:

 2.1.1 Service Providers SHOULD offer IPv6-based Internet Service
      to their Internet customers.  IPv6-based Internet Service
      MAY be provided via IPv6 transition mechanisms or native
      IPv6 network service.
 2.1.2 Organizations SHOULD arrange for IPv6-based Interent
      connectivity for any Internet-facing servers (e.g. web,
      email, and domain name servers).  Internet-facing IPv6
      servers MAY be treated as production by the organization,
      but MUST NOT be treated as production by other Internet
      organizations.
 2.1.3 Organizations MAY provide IPv6-based Internet connectivity
      to internal user communities.

2.2  Transition Phase - January 2009 to December 2010

 In the Transition Phase, entities provide Internet-facing services
 via IPv6-based connectivity in addition to IPv4-based connectivity.

 During the Transition Phase, the following principles apply:

 2.2.1 Service Providers MUST offer IPv6-based Internet Service to
      their Internet customers. IPv6-based Internet Service SHOULD
      be via native IPv6 network service but MAY be via IPv6
      transition mechanisms if necessary. 
 2.2.2 Organizations MUST arrange for IPv6-based Interent
      connectivity for any Internet-facing servers (e.g. web,
      email, and domain name servers).  Internet-facing IPv6
      servers SHOULD be treated as production by the organization,
      and MAY be treated as production by other Internet
      organizations.
 2.2.3 Organizations SHOULD provide IPv6-based Internet connectivity
      to their internal user communities, and provide IPv6 internal
      supporting servers (e.g. DNS, DHCP). IPv6-based Internet
      connectivity MAY be via native IPv6 network service or MAY
      be via IPv6 transition mechanisms. 

2.3 Post-Transition Phase - January 2011 to the Future

 In the Post-Transition Phase, entities provide all Internet-facing
 services via IPv6-based connectivity.

 During the Post-Transition Phase, the following principles apply:
 2.3.1 Service Providers MUST offer IPv6-based Internet Service to
      their Internet customers. IPv6-based Internet Service SHOULD be
      via native IPv6 network service but MAY be via IPv6 transition
      mechanisms if necessary.  IPv6-based Internet Service SHOULD be
      treated as production by other Internet organizations.
 2.3.2 Organizations MUST arrange for IPv6-based Internet connectivity
      for any Internet-facing servers (e.g. web, email, and domain 
      name servers).  Internet-facing IPv6 servers MUST be treated
      as production by the organization, and SHOULD be treated as
      production by other Internet organizations.
 2.3.3 Organizations SHOULD provide IPv6-based Internet connectivity to
      internal user communities, and provide IPv6 internal supporting
      servers (e.g. DNS, DHCP)  IPv6-based Internet connectivity MAY
      be via native IPv6 network service or MAY be via IPv6 transition
      mechanisms. 
 2.3.4 Service Providers area MAY continue to offer IPv4-based Internet
      connectivity to their customers.  Organizations MAY continue to
      use IPv4-based Internet connectivity.  Organizations MAY remove
      IPv4-based Internet connectivity from Internet-facing servers.