empirical analysis of the effects and the mitigation of ...empirical analysis of the effects and the...
TRANSCRIPT
Empirical Analysis of the Effects and the Mitigation of IPv4 Address Exhaustion
wissenschaftliche Aussprache2. August 2017
Philipp Richter
The Internet connects 3.5 billion people as of 2016. (48% of world population)
Internet Penetration, 2017, ISOC.
1
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
year
user
s/su
bscr
iber
s [b
illion
s]
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
01B
2B3B
4B ● Internet usersmobile broadband subscriptionsfixed broadband subscriptions
2
The Internet Protocol Suite
3
The Narrow Waist of the Protocol Stack
‣ Original design: One IP address per host
‣ IPv4: 32-bit addresses, est. 1981~ 4B unique IPv4 addresses
‣ Today: 3.5B users, ~7B connected devices.
3
IPv4 Exhaustion received a lot of attention.But little in terms systematic empirical assessment.
IPv4 Address Exhaustion
4
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Address Exhaustion
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Address Exhaustion
‣ IPv4 addresses need to be globally unique
‣ We need a management body that distributes them
10
Early Registration Needs-Based Provision Depletion & Exhaustion
• Informal Distribution• Scarcity minor issue• Non-commercial Internet
• Distribution process• Justification of need• ISPs don’t pay for IPs
• 4 out of 5 RIRs depleted• Address Markets• Transfer Policies
1981 ~1995 ~2011A History of IPv4 Address Block Management
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
●● ● ● ● ● ●
allocated IPv4 addresses
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
routable IPv4 addresses(3.7B)
5
10
Early Registration Needs-Based Provision Depletion & Exhaustion
• Informal Distribution• Scarcity minor issue• Non-commercial Internet
• Distribution process• Justification of need• ISPs don’t pay for IPs
• 4 out of 5 RIRs depleted• Address Markets• Transfer Policies
1981 ~1995 ~2011A History of IPv4 Address Block Management
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
●● ● ● ● ● ●
allocated IPv4 addresses
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
routable IPv4 addresses(3.7B)
5
10
Early Registration Needs-Based Provision Depletion & Exhaustion
• Informal Distribution• Scarcity minor issue• Non-commercial Internet
• Distribution process• Justification of need• ISPs don’t pay for IPs
• 4 out of 5 RIRs depleted• Address Markets• Transfer Policies
1981 ~1995 ~2011A History of IPv4 Address Block Management
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
●● ● ● ● ● ●
allocated IPv4 addresses
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
routable IPv4 addresses(3.7B)
40% of the space given outby ~1995
“LEGACY” space
5
10
Early Registration Needs-Based Provision Depletion & Exhaustion
• Informal Distribution• Scarcity minor issue• Non-commercial Internet
• Distribution process• Justification of need• ISPs don’t pay for IPs
• 4 out of 5 RIRs depleted• Address Markets• Transfer Policies
1981 ~1995 ~2011
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
●● ● ● ● ● ●
allocated IPv4 addresses
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
routable IPv4 addresses(3.7B)
A History of IPv4 Address Block Management
5
10
Early Registration Needs-Based Provision Depletion & Exhaustion
• Informal Distribution• Scarcity minor issue• Non-commercial Internet
• Distribution process• Justification of need• ISPs don’t pay for IPs
• 4 out of 5 RIRs depleted• Address Markets• Transfer Policies
1981 ~1995 ~2011
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
●● ● ● ● ● ●
allocated IPv4 addresses
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
routable IPv4 addresses(3.7B)
A History of IPv4 Address Block Management
5
10
Early Registration Needs-Based Provision Depletion & Exhaustion
• Informal Distribution• Scarcity minor issue• Non-commercial Internet
• Distribution process• Justification of need• ISPs don’t pay for IPs
• 4 out of 5 RIRs depleted• Address Markets• Transfer Policies
1981 ~1995 ~2011
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
●● ● ● ● ● ●
allocated IPv4 addresses
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
routable IPv4 addresses(3.7B)
A History of IPv4 Address Block Management
5
10
Early Registration Needs-Based Provision Depletion & Exhaustion
• Informal Distribution • Scarcity minor issue • Non-commercial Internet
• Distribution process • Justification of need • ISPs don’t pay for IPs
• 4 out of 5 RIRs depleted • Address Markets • Transfer Policies
1981 ~1995 ~2011
A History of IPv4 Address Block Management
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●●
●●
●● ● ● ● ● ●
cumulative yearly allocations
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
routable IPv4 addresses(3.7B)
Network operators around the world need to find ways to mitigate their IPv4 scarcity issues.
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT Transition to IPv6
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT Transition to IPv6
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Strategy (i): Use IPv4 space more efficiently
Hypothesis
‣ IPv4 space not fully utilized‣ Underutilized space could be freed up and used/transferred
Research Questions
‣ What is the potential for utilization increase?‣ Which knobs could be adjusted here?
6
Degrees of Address Use
Allocation~99%registered to a network?
7
Allocation
Routing
~99%
advertised in the global routing table?
Degrees of Address Use
registered to a network?
7
IPv4 Address Activity: Global Routing Table/8
equ
ivale
nts
● ●●
●●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●● ● ●
0
50
100
150
200
250
Nov 1997 Jan 2001 Jan 2005 Jan 2009 Jan 2013 Jan 2017
routable address space limit (220.7 /8 equivalents)
total address space limit (256 /8 equivalents)
● allocated address blocksrouted address blocks
8
IPv4 Address Activity: Global Routing Table/8
equ
ivale
nts
● ●●
●●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●● ● ●
0
50
100
150
200
250
Nov 1997 Jan 2001 Jan 2005 Jan 2009 Jan 2013 Jan 2017
routable address space limit (220.7 /8 equivalents)
total address space limit (256 /8 equivalents)
● allocated address blocksrouted address blocks
Mostly LEGACY (pre-1995) allocations
8
IPv4 Address Activity: Global Routing Table/8
equ
ivale
nts
● ●●
●●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●● ● ●
0
50
100
150
200
250
Nov 1997 Jan 2001 Jan 2005 Jan 2009 Jan 2013 Jan 2017
routable address space limit (220.7 /8 equivalents)
total address space limit (256 /8 equivalents)
● allocated address blocksrouted address blocks
Mostly LEGACY (pre-1995) allocations
Impact of Internet Governance! 8
Degrees of Address Use
Allocation
Routing
~99%
~75%advertised in the global routing table?
registered to a network?
9
Allocation
Routing
Activity
~99%
~75%advertised in the global routing table?
actively used?
Degrees of Address Use
registered to a network?
9
1101010101111010101011
Passive Measurements Active Measurements
Measuring IPv4 Activity
“How many IPv4 address blocks show activity?”
10
IPv4 Activity - Counting Active Addresses
total active: 36% (5.3M /24s)
Our preliminary study
31% (4.5M /24s)‣ 4 passive vantage points
‣ 3 active scanning campaigns
33% (4.8M /24s)
Overlap, but each vantage point has unique contribution
11
IPv4 Activity - Counting Active Addresses
total active: 36% (5.3M /24s)
Our preliminary study
31% (4.5M /24s)‣ 4 passive vantage points
‣ 3 active scanning campaigns
33% (4.8M /24s)
Related Work (Zander et al.)
total active: 41% (5.9M /24s)
‣ 7 passive vantage points & 2 active campaigns
11
Overlap, but each vantage point has unique contribution
Allocation
Routing
Activity
~99%
~75%advertised in the global routing table?
actively used?lower bound:
~36-41% (/24s)
Degrees of Address Use
registered to a network?
12
Allocation
Routing
Activity
~99%
~75%advertised in the global routing table?
actively used?lower bound:
~36-41% (/24s)
Degrees of Address Use
Significant potential for increasing the utilizationof the IPv4 address space
registered to a network?
12
IPv4 Address Activity from a CDN
The CDN Vantage Point
‣ 200,000+ servers in 1500+ ASes in 120+ countries‣ Web content, mobile content, software updates, etc. ‣ 3 trillion requests on a daily basis
13
IPv4 Address Activity from a CDN
CDN Vantage Point: Active IPv4 Addresses
The CDN Vantage Point
‣ 200,000+ servers in 1500+ ASes in 120+ countries‣ Web content, mobile content, software updates, etc. ‣ 3 trillion requests on a daily basis
‣ 44% active /24 address blocks (6.5M, lower bound raised)‣ 32% active IPv4 addresses (1.2B)
13
IPv4 Address Activity Matrix
130.149.0.6130.149.0.5130.149.0.4130.149.0.3130.149.0.2130.149.0.1
…
…addr
ess
spac
e
days
‣ For each day on which an IP address was active (requested content), we draw a red dot
14
Address Activity Matrix at Scale (“Bacon Strips”)‣ 20K adjacent IP addresses (in active /24s), University Network
time
addr
esse
s
15
Address Activity Matrix at Scale (“Bacon Strips”)
15
‣ Metrics that can capture address activity in space and time‣ Study the effect of addressing mechanisms on‣ Address activity patterns‣ Utilization (seen from the CDN)
time [months]
IP a
ddre
ss a
ctiv
ity w
ithin
/24
0 1 2 3 4
.0.1
27.2
55
time [months]
IP a
ddre
ss a
ctiv
ity w
ithin
/24
0 1 2 3 4
.0.1
27.2
55
time [months]
IP a
ddre
ss a
ctiv
ity w
ithin
/24
0 1 2 3 4
.0.1
27.2
55
University Enterprise ISP Residential ISP
Patterns: Static Address Blocks
Most static address blocks show “activity gaps” 16
time [months]
IP a
ddre
ss a
ctiv
ity w
ithin
/24
0 1 2 3 4
.0.1
27.2
55
time [months]
IP a
ddre
ss a
ctiv
ity w
ithin
/24
0 1 2 3 4
.0.1
27.2
55
time [months]
IP a
ddre
ss a
ctiv
ity w
ithin
/24
0 1 2 3 4
.0.1
27.2
55
DHCP pool US University residential users US ISP residential users DE ISP
Activity/utilization depends on pool size and lease time
Patterns: Dynamic Address Blocks
17
Which Knobs could be adjusted to increase Utilization?
‣ Addressing mechanisms impact address activity
‣ Utilization seen from the CDN:
‣ Static address blocks harbor large supply of potentially unused addresses
‣ Dynamic address blocks could be adjusted to free up underutilized space
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT Transition to IPv6
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
ACM IMC ’16 (Best Paper Award)IEEE JSAC ‘16
ContributionMulti-perspective analysis of
address activity, churn, addressing, and utilization.
Findings‣Strong potential for utilization
increase.‣Knobs to adjust: Governance
& Addressing mechanisms.‣Exhaustion effects, stagnation
of routed & active addresses.
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT Transition to IPv6
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
ACM IMC ’16 (Best Paper Award)IEEE JSAC ‘16
ContributionMulti-perspective analysis of
address activity, churn, addressing, and utilization.
Findings‣Strong potential for utilization
increase.‣Knobs to adjust: Governance
& Addressing mechanisms.‣Exhaustion effects, stagnation
of routed & active addresses.
Multiplex IPv4 space with Carrier-Grade NAT
130.149.0.1
130.149.0.1
(Carrier-Grade)NAT
18
‣ CGN allows end-user ISPs to ease scarcity issues‣ At the cost of breaking the end-to-end Internet
‣ “Nobody really talks about it”‣ Uncertainty in the community
‣No systematic studies!
Carrier-Grade NAT
19
Research Questions
‣ How can we detect Carrier-Grade NAT?‣ How widespread is Carrier-Grade NAT?‣ What’s the effect on the Internet and its users?
Carrier-Grade NAT
‣ CGN allows end-user ISPs to ease scarcity issues‣ At the cost of breaking the end-to-end Internet
‣ “Nobody really talks about it”‣ Uncertainty in the community
‣No systematic studies!
19
NATs between Subscribers and the Internet
public IPv4
InternetISPSubscriber
public IPv4
internal spacee.g., 192.168.0.0/16 CPE
NAT
NAT44 (subscriber-side)
20
NATs between Subscribers and the Internet
internal spacee.g., 10.0.0.0/8
public IPv4
InternetISPSubscriber
public IPv4Carrier-GradeNAT
internal spacee.g., 192.168.0.0/16 CPE
NAT
internal spacee.g., 192.168.0.0/16 CPE
NAT
NAT44 (subscriber-side)
NAT44 (carrier-side)
NAT444 (subscriber-side
and carrier-side)
20
NATs between Subscribers and the Internet
internal spacee.g., 10.0.0.0/8
public IPv4
InternetISPSubscriber
public IPv4Carrier-GradeNAT
internal spacee.g., 192.168.0.0/16 CPE
NAT
internal spacee.g., 192.168.0.0/16 CPE
NAT
NAT44 (subscriber-side)
NAT44 (carrier-side)
NAT444 (subscriber-side
and carrier-side)
20ICSI Netalyzr
BitTorrent DHT
The BitTorrent DHT
Classic BitTorrent Tracker stores peer contact information
tracker
give me peers for torrent XYZ
130.149.1.1:6881130.149.1.2:6882130.149.1.3:6883
BitTorrent DHTPeers store each others’
contact information
give me peers
130.149.1.2:6882130.149.1.3:6883
…
We can use DHT peers as vantage points21
Crawling the BitTorrent DHT
DHTcrawler
give me peers
22
DHTcrawler
i can reach peer 25fc at 130.149.1.2:6881peer 492c at 190.2.0.1:6881…
Crawling the BitTorrent DHT
22
DHTcrawler
i can reach peer 25fc at 130.149.1.2:6881peer 492c at 190.2.0.1:6881…
NAT
i can reach peer id a82d at 10.53.37.4:6881…
a82d
Crawling the BitTorrent DHT
22
DHTcrawler
i can reach peer 25fc at 130.149.1.2:6881peer 492c at 190.2.0.1:6881…
NAT
i can reach peer id a82d at 10.53.37.4:6881…
a82d
A B
130.149.1.1:6881 a82d10.53.37.4:6881
Crawling the BitTorrent DHT
A
B
23
BitTorrent Peer Leakage Graph
In this AS: no CGN detected
In this AS: CGN detected
24
Tested with BitTorrent/Netalyzr: 1,791 Eyeball ASes
How widespread is Carrier-Grade NAT Deployment?
25
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
% eyeball ASes covered
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 5 10 15 20 25
% eyeball ASes CGN−positive
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 20 40 60 80
100
% cellular ASes CGN−positive
(a) eyeball ASescoverage
(b) eyeball ASesC
GN
-positive(c) cellular ASesC
GN
-positive
‣CGN-positive: 17.1%
‣ particularly in the European and Asia-Pacific Region
Eyeball Networks (Non-Cellular)
Tested with BitTorrent/Netalyzr: 1,791 Eyeball ASes
How widespread is Carrier-Grade NAT Deployment?
25
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
% eyeball ASes covered
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 5 10 15 20 25
% eyeball ASes CGN−positive
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 20 40 60 80
100
% cellular ASes CGN−positive
(a) eyeball ASescoverage
(b) eyeball ASesC
GN
-positive(c) cellular ASesC
GN
-positive
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
% eyeball ASes covered
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 5 10 15 20 25
% eyeball ASes CGN−positive
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 20 40 60 80
100
% cellular ASes CGN−positive
(a) eyeball ASescoverage
(b) eyeball ASesC
GN
-positive(c) cellular ASesC
GN
-positive
‣CGN-positive: 94%
‣ CGN is the norm for cellular
‣CGN-positive: 17.1%
‣ particularly in the European and Asia-Pacific Region
Eyeball Networks (Non-Cellular)
Cellular Networks
Tested with BitTorrent/Netalyzr: 1,791 Eyeball ASes
How widespread is Carrier-Grade NAT Deployment?
25
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
% eyeball ASes covered
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 5 10 15 20 25
% eyeball ASes CGN−positive
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 20 40 60 80
100
% cellular ASes CGN−positive
(a) eyeball ASescoverage
(b) eyeball ASesC
GN
-positive(c) cellular ASesC
GN
-positive
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
% eyeball ASes covered
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 5 10 15 20 25
% eyeball ASes CGN−positive
AFRINICAPNIC
ARINLACNIC
RIPE
0 20 40 60 80
100
% cellular ASes CGN−positive
(a) eyeball ASescoverage
(b) eyeball ASesC
GN
-positive(c) cellular ASesC
GN
-positive
‣CGN-positive: 94%
‣ CGN is the norm for cellular
‣CGN-positive: 17.1%
‣ particularly in the European and Asia-Pacific Region
Eyeball Networks (Non-Cellular)
Cellular Networks
Tested with BitTorrent/Netalyzr: 1,791 Eyeball ASes
How widespread is Carrier-Grade NAT Deployment?
CGN is reality for the majority of Internet Users25
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
private IP1
public IPprivate IP2
private IP3
Internet
NAThome
26
private IP1
public IPprivate IP2
private IP3
Internet
1) Directionality
NAThome
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
26
Internetinternal IP ranges
external IP ranges
1) Directionality
NATCarrier-Grade
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
26
Internetinternal IP ranges
external IP ranges
1) Directionality
NATCarrier-Grade
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
26
IPint, portint IPext, portext
Internetinternal IP ranges
1) Directionality2) Limits/Quotas on flows per subscriber3) Restrictiveness of NAT mappings, timeouts
NATCarrier-Grade
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
26
external IP ranges
IPint, portint IPext, portext
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
Deployment Issues‣ Exhaustion of internal IPv4 address space‣ Attribution, host reputation
27
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
Deployment Issues‣ Exhaustion of internal IPv4 address space‣ Attribution, host reputation
Impact on End Users
‣ Down to 512 ports/subscriber (128 subscribers/IP)
‣ CGN mappings often more restrictive than CPE devices
‣ Restricts (or rules out) peer-to-peer connectivity
27
What’s the Impact of Carrier-Grade NATs?
Deployment Issues‣ Exhaustion of internal IPv4 address space‣ Attribution, host reputation
Impact on End Users
CGN means very different things for different ISPsCGNs limit “how much Internet” subscribers receive
27
‣ Down to 512 ports/subscriber (128 subscribers/IP)
‣ CGN mappings often more restrictive than CPE devices
‣ Restricts (or rules out) peer-to-peer connectivity
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT
ACM IMC ’16 (IRTF ANRP Award)
Transition to IPv6
ContributionFirst broad and systematic study
of CGN deployment in the Internet and properties.
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Findings‣CGNs are very broadly
deployed (majority of users).
‣CGNs directly limit end-users’ connectivity and resources.
‣CGN deployment issues (internal space, attribution,..).
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
ACM IMC ’16 (Best Paper Award)IEEE JSAC ‘16
ContributionMulti-perspective analysis of
address activity, churn, addressing, and utilization.
Findings‣Strong potential for utilization
increase.‣Knobs to adjust: Governance
& Addressing mechanisms.‣Exhaustion effects, stagnation
of routed & active addresses.
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT
ACM IMC ’16 (IRTF ANRP Award)
Transition to IPv6
ContributionFirst broad and systematic study
of CGN deployment in the Internet and properties.
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Findings‣CGNs are very broadly
deployed (majority of users).
‣CGNs directly limit end-users’ connectivity and resources.
‣CGN deployment issues (internal space, attribution,..).
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
ACM IMC ’16 (Best Paper Award)IEEE JSAC ‘16
ContributionMulti-perspective analysis of
address activity, churn, addressing, and utilization.
Findings‣Strong potential for utilization
increase.‣Knobs to adjust: Governance
& Addressing mechanisms.‣Exhaustion effects, stagnation
of routed & active addresses.
Strategy (iii): Transition to IPv6
‣ IPv6 (est. 1998) comes with 128-bit IP addresses
‣ Long-term solution to the IPv4 scarcity problem
‣ Enormous Task: Replacing the central Internet Protocol
28
(iii) CPE
(i) OS(ii) applications
Home network Dual-stack ISP Service providers
IPv4 traffic
IPv6 traffic
(iv) ISP connectivity (v) service availability
Inte
rnet
Strategy (iii): Transition to IPv6
‣ IPv6 (est. 1998) comes with 128-bit IP addresses
‣ Long-term solution to the IPv4 scarcity problem
‣ Enormous Task: Replacing the central Internet Protocol
28
(iii) CPE
(i) OS(ii) applications
Home network Dual-stack ISP Service providers
IPv4 traffic
IPv6 traffic
(iv) ISP connectivity (v) service availability
Inte
rnet
‣ As of 2017:‣ A minority of Internet hosts speak IPv6‣ Majority of Internet traffic carried over IPv4
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT
ACM IMC ’16 (IRTF ANRP Award)
ContributionFirst broad and systematic study
of CGN deployment in the Internet and properties.
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Findings‣CGNs are very broadly
deployed (majority of users).
‣CGNs directly limit end-users’ connectivity and resources.
‣CGN deployment issues (internal space, attribution,..).
Transition to IPv6
ACM IMC ’14, PAM ’15, PAM ‘17
ContributionAnalysis of IPv4/IPv6
connectivity, traffic components, and interplay.
Findings‣ IPv6 connectivity increases,
yet lags behind IPv4.
‣Traffic over IPv6 lags behind connectivity.
‣Barriers for IPv6 traffic (devices, software, networks).
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
ACM IMC ’16 (Best Paper Award)IEEE JSAC ‘16
ContributionMulti-perspective analysis of
address activity, churn, addressing, and utilization.
Findings‣Strong potential for utilization
increase.‣Knobs to adjust: Governance
& Addressing mechanisms.‣Exhaustion effects, stagnation
of routed & active addresses.
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT
ACM IMC ’16 (IRTF ANRP Award)
ContributionFirst broad and systematic study
of CGN deployment in the Internet and properties.
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Findings‣CGNs are very broadly
deployed (majority of users).
‣CGNs directly limit end-users’ connectivity and resources.
‣CGN deployment issues (internal space, attribution,..).
Transition to IPv6
ACM IMC ’14, PAM ’15, PAM ‘17
ContributionAnalysis of IPv4/IPv6
connectivity, traffic components, and interplay.
Findings‣ IPv6 connectivity increases,
yet lags behind IPv4.
‣Traffic over IPv6 lags behind connectivity.
‣Barriers for IPv6 traffic (devices, software, networks).
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
ACM IMC ’16 (Best Paper Award)IEEE JSAC ‘16
ContributionMulti-perspective analysis of
address activity, churn, addressing, and utilization.
Findings‣Strong potential for utilization
increase.‣Knobs to adjust: Governance
& Addressing mechanisms.‣Exhaustion effects, stagnation
of routed & active addresses.
IPv4 Exhaustion: An Unprecedented Problem
‣ IPv4 addresses are truly global virtual resources
‣ No central authority, independent decisions
29
IPv4 Exhaustion: An Unprecedented Problem
‣ IPv4 addresses are truly global virtual resources
‣ No central authority, independent decisions
29
‣ Looming IPv4 exhaustion was recognized early (~1990)
‣ Yet, IPv4 supplies lasted until ~2011
IPv4 Exhaustion: An Unprecedented Problem
‣ IPv4 addresses are truly global virtual resources
‣ No central authority, independent decisions
29
‣ Looming IPv4 exhaustion was recognized early (~1990)
‣ Yet, IPv4 supplies lasted until ~2011
‣ Today: Economic pressure due to IPv4 scarcity!
‣ Growing IPv4 address markets
‣ Widespread Carrier-Grade NAT deployment
‣ Increasing Dual-Stack IPv4/IPv6 deployment
ACM CCR ’15 (Best of CCR)
Use IPv4 space more efficiently
ACM IMC ’16 (Best Paper Award)IEEE JSAC ‘16
Multiplex IPv4:Carrier-Grade NAT
ACM IMC ’16 (IRTF ANRP Award)
Transition to IPv6
ACM IMC ’14, PAM ’15, PAM ‘17
ContributionMulti-perspective analysis of
address activity, churn, addressing, and utilization.
ContributionFirst broad and systematic study
of CGN deployment in the Internet and properties.
ContributionAnalysis of IPv4/IPv6
connectivity, traffic components, and interplay.
Findings‣ IPv6 connectivity increases,
yet lags behind IPv4.
‣Traffic over IPv6 lags behind connectivity.
‣Barriers for IPv6 traffic (devices, software, networks).
Systematic Framing of IPv4 Exhaustion
mitigation strategies
Findings‣Strong potential for utilization
increase.‣Knobs to adjust: Governance
& Addressing mechanisms.‣Exhaustion effects, stagnation
of routed & active addresses.
Findings‣CGNs are very broadly
deployed (majority of users).
‣CGNs directly limit end-users’ connectivity and resources.
‣CGN deployment issues (internal space, attribution,..).