IPv6 growth is slowing and no one knows why. Let's see if El Reg can address what's going on

Get it? Address? As in, oh never mind


Analysis Stop us if you've heard this one before: the rollout of IPv6 is going slower than expected.

In fact, nearly seven years after the eternally optimistic World IPv6 Launch launched, we are still only at just over a quarter availability of the new internet protocol.

But if that wasn't bad enough, the latest news is that even that unimpressive level of growth is slowing and may even been tailing off.

In the lead-up to regional internet registries literally running out of IPv4 blocks, it seems that quite a few big companies – including tech giants and ISPs – decided to go all-in on IPv6. And that led to a relatively fast growth in the availability of IPv6 – up from virtually nothing to around 15 per cent in mid-2017.

But as those address blocks really have run out, it appears as though the larger corporate world has moved IPv6 adoption in their minds from "important" to "nice to have." After all, their systems still work and users aren't complaining about not being able to get online (thanks increasingly to the work of engineers making the most out of what IPv4 they have).

As one avid IPv6 watcher – chief scientist of regional internet registry APNIC, Geoff Huston – has identified, the last four months of stats show a significant slowdown of IPv6 adoption.

The question is: why?

And Huston has done some analysis based on a number of different theories to see if he can figure it out - and, by extension, see what can be done to get IPv6 adoption moving again.

APNIC's IPv6 adoption graph

IPv6 adoption is slowing and may be tailing off. Pic: APNIC ... Click to enlarge

Driving seat

Here are some plausible theories:

  • Rich countries and corporations are more likely to shift to IPv6 because they have the capital to do so and are looking ahead
  • Companies undergoing rapid growth are more likely to go IPv6 because it's the future and they need to build out into a larger address space.
  • Running out of IPv4 address will force companies – and countries – to shift to IPv6
  • Competition will be an effective driver: if others in your market are going into IPv6, you need to keep pace with them for future competitiveness

Unfortunately, after pulling the stats and putting them into easily understandable graphs, Huston reaches the conclusion that each theory is weak at best.

He summarizes: "You don’t have to be rich, but it helps. You don’t have to be growing rapidly, but at times rapid growth provides sufficient grounds to make the move. You don’t have to be desperately short of IPv4 addresses, but again it may help. You can do it by yourself, but it can help when your competitors do it as well."

Or, in other words, one of the world's foremost experts in IP addresses has no idea what drives and does not drive IPv6 adoption, is unable to find a good correlation anywhere that would help understand or predict adoption, and is alarmed to find that such adoption is slowing – and doesn't know why.

We have a theory drawn from another field that may help explain the growth – and slowdown – in IPv6 adoption: influencers and champions.

Human element

If you remove the technical requirement to move from IPv4 to IPv6 – because, the truth is, you can currently do whatever you want with IPv4 – you also remove the financial driver – which is what would typically drive an issue rapidly up the organizational chain. That leaves the human component.

An upset woman with an empty wallet

OK, this time it's for real: The last available IPv4 address block has gone

READ MORE

We are willing to bet that at corporations with large IPv6 uptake there was either an individual or group that felt strongly about the issue and were in a position to persuade those at the top.

It's not hard to imagine why Google and Facebook have high adoption rates – because engineers have a strong voice and are listened to because the company was built by engineers and the companies are reliant on staying a step ahead on internet technology. LinkedIn is another good example.

But – as Huston notes – what are we to make of T-Mobile USA which has a massive 94 per cent adoption when Comcast has just 73 per cent; and what about BSkyB with its 93 per cent, where NTT in Japan has just 28 per cent?

"I suspect that this is a reflection of the difference between mobile ISPs and fixed infrastructure of mixed ISPs, and even the dual stack technology used by the mobile ISP," Huston posits. T-Mobile USA, for example, went all in on IPv6 and has added technology to be able to provide IPv4 services (a similar approach adopted by the big tech giants).

"It is likely that the lower numbers reflect an ISP that has integrated a number of different consumer products into a single autonomous system, and only some of the products have integrated IPv6 support as yet, or the numbers reflect a combination of customer equipment capability overlaid on the ISP’s network IPv6 capabilities," he argues.

Again though we see human persuasion at work here: someone persuaded T-Mobile USA that rather than go with IPv4 equipment, they should make the jump to IPv6 and then back port to IPv4.

T-Mobile USA is known for having a CEO who is focused on shaking up the mobile market and has gone out of his way to identify and promote small gaps in that market as a way of building up customers. In other words, the company is not only open-minded but is actively seeking an edge in the market.

Risk

Comcast on the other hand, while it continues in some respects to sit at the forefront of technology – such as its push on DOCSIS 3.1 – it is one of the big beasts and clearly doesn't see IPv6 as a risk to its market power or much of a help in expanding.

The same is likely true for most ISPs: they have their market and find more value in pushing non-technical marketing messages to get and retain customers. While there is some evidence that IPv6 can result in faster website load times, the issues and complexity around shifting to the new protocol are masking them.

Internet users continue to decide on their ISP based on three main factors: availability, price and speed/bandwidth. The existence of IPv6 is largely non-existent in the consumer's mind when it comes to making that decision. And it's difficult to see when it ever will be.

So, with IPv6 adoption costing money and chewing up resources with no clear, quantifiable benefit beyond it being the right thing to do, it shouldn't be much of a surprise that a big chunk of the internet isn't persuaded why they should shift.

If you take that assumption, a tail off in IPv6 adoption would make sense – those that have decided to shift to IPv6 have increasingly done so. Those that couldn't care less aren't going to do anything until they have no other choice; and the remainder will put it on the back burner until and unless it becomes important.

The bigger questions to ask at this point – nearly 20 years after it was first introduced as a draft standard – may be:

  • What benefit does an IPv6 company actually derive from its more technologically advanced position? And
  • Does it really matter if we live in a 25 percent IPv6 / 75 per cent IPv4 world?

It's hard to imagine a singular event causing everyone to suddenly rush to IPv6 so we are likely to see it becoming one of those issues where it relies on a new CTO and ageing existing technology to drive a revamp.

Maybe we should start viewing IPv6 as we do an operating system update. But an update that is incompatible with the last one. Companies like Microsoft and Apple have typically gone out of their way to make sure that the next operating system is largely compatible with the last.

And, of course, they have lots of other ways to drive adoption to the latest edition – withdrawing technical support, adding new bells and whistles, requiring greater processing power and so slowing down older versions.

None of that is true with internet protocols. Which means that IPv4 is the equivalent of submarines running Windows XP. So long as it still works, there is going to be significant resistance to moving. ®


Other stories you might like

  • Electron-to-joule conversion formulae? Cute. Welcome to the school of hard knocks

    Shake, rattle and roll is incompatible with your PABX

    On Call There are some things they don't teach you in college, as a Register reader explains in this week's instalment of tales from the On Call coalface.

    Our reader, safely Regomised as "Col", headed up the technical support team of a PABX telecom provider and installer back in the early 1990s. PABX, or Private Automatic Branch eXchange, was the telephony backbone of many an office. A failure could be both contract and career-limiting.

    Col, however, was a professional and well versed in the ins and outs of such systems. Work was brisk and so, he told us, "I took on a university grad with all the spunk and vigour that comes with it. He knew the electron-to-joule conversion formulae et al."

    Continue reading
  • Korea's NAVER Cloud outlines global ambitions, aim to become Asia's third-biggest provider

    Alibaba is number two in much of the region, but is a bit on the nose right now

    Korean web giant NAVER has outlined its ambition to bring its cloud to the world, and to become the third-largest cloud provider in the Asia-Pacific region.

    NAVER started life as a Korean web portal, added search, won the lion's share of the market, and has kept it ever since. South Korea remains one of the very few nations in which Google does not dominate the search market.

    As NAVER grew it came to resemble Google in many ways – both in terms of the services it offers and its tendency to use its muscle to favour its own properties. NAVER also used its scale to start a cloud business: the NAVER Cloud Platform. It runs the Platform in its home market, plus Japan, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Presences in Taiwan, Vietnam and Thailand are imminent.

    Continue reading
  • Build it fast and they will come? Yeah, but they’ll only stay if you build it right

    Here’s where to start

    Sponsored Developers have never had so much choice. Every week there’s a new framework, API, or cloud service that promises to help deliver software to market faster than ever. And it’s not just tooling. Agile, continuous integration, and DevOps techniques have made teams more efficient, too. But speed brings with it increased expectations. Pressure from customers and colleagues, alongside the burden of staying current with new tooling, can lead to mistakes.

    Whether it’s a showstopping bug that slips through into production or an edge case that lies in wait for years, pressure to deliver is driving some teams to pile up technical debt and mismatched stakeholder expectations.

    What’s the solution? Well, it’s to do what we’ve always done: build on what came before. In the absence of unlimited time and budget, a low-code platform gives both experienced and new developers a suite of tools to accelerate their development. Automation in just the right places lets teams bring their unique value where it really matters, while all the standard building blocks are taken care of.

    Continue reading
  • Royal Navy will be getting autonomous machines – for donkey work humans can't be bothered with

    No robot killers 'in my lifetime' says admiral

    DSEI 2021 The British armed forces will be using robots as part of future warfare – but mostly for the "dull, dangerous and dirty" parts of military life, senior officers have said.

    At London's Defence and Security Equipment International arms fair, two senior officers in charge of digitisation and automation said the near future will be more Wall-E than Terminator – but fully automated war machines are no longer just the stuff of sci-fi.

    Brigadier John Read, the Royal Navy's deputy director of maritime capability, said in a speech the military "must automate" itself so it can "take advantage of advances in robotics, AI and machine learning."

    Continue reading
  • WTF? Microsoft makes fixing deadly OMIGOD flaws on Azure your job

    Clouds usually fix this sort of thing before bugs go public. This time it's best to assume you need to do this yourself

    Microsoft Azure users running Linux VMs in the IT giant's Azure cloud need to take action to protect themselves against the four "OMIGOD" bugs in the Open Management Infrastructure (OMI) framework, because Microsoft hasn't raced to do it for them.

    As The Register outlined in our report on this month's Patch Tuesday release, Microsoft included fixes for flaws security outfit Wiz spotted in Redmond's open-source OMI agents. Wiz named the four flaws OMIGOD because they are astonishing.

    The least severe of the flaws is rated 7/10 on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The worst is rated critical at 9.8/10.

    Continue reading
  • Businesses put robots to work when human workers are hard to find, argue econo-boffins

    The lure of shiny new tech isn't a motivator, although in the USA bots are used to cut costs

    Researchers have found that business adoption of robots and other forms of automation is largely driven by labor shortages.

    A study, authored by boffins from MIT and Boston University, will be published in a forthcoming print edition of The Review of Economic Studies. The authors, Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo, have both studied automation, robots and the workforce in depth, publishing numerous papers together and separately.

    "Our findings suggest that quite a bit of investment in robotics is not driven by the fact that this is the next 'amazing frontier,' but because some countries have shortages of labor, especially middle-aged labor that would be necessary for blue-collar work,” said Acemoglu in a canned statement.

    Continue reading
  • After eight years, SPEC delivers a new virtualisation benchmark

    Jumps from single-server tests to four hosts – but only for vSphere and RHV

    The Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC) has released its first new virtualisation benchmark in eight years.

    The new SPECvirt Datacenter 2021 benchmark succeeds SPEC VIRT_SC 2013. The latter was designed to help users understand performance in the heady days of server consolidation, so required just one host. The new benchmark requires four hosts – a recognition of modern datacentre realities.

    The new tests are designed to test the combined performance of hypervisors and servers. For now, only two hypervisors are supported: VMware’s vSphere (versions 6.x and 7.x) and Red Hat Virtualisation (version 4.x). David Schmidt, chair of the SPEC Virtualization Committee, told The Register that Red Hat and VMware are paid up members of the committee, hence their inclusion. But the new benchmark can be used by other hypervisors if their vendors create an SDK. He opined that Microsoft, vendor of the Hyper-V hypervisor that has around 20 per cent market share, didn’t come to play because it’s busy working on other SPEC projects.

    Continue reading
  • Forget that Loon's balloon burst, we just fired 700TB of laser broadband between two cities, says Google

    Up to 20Gbps link sustained over the Congo in comms experiment

    Engineers at Google’s technology moonshot lab X say they used lasers to beam 700TB of internet traffic between two cities separated by the Congo River.

    The capitals of the Republic of the Congo and the Democratic Republic of Congo, Brazzaville and Kinshasa, respectively, are only 4.8 km (about three miles) apart. The denizens of Kinshasa have to pay five times more than their neighbors in Brazzaville for broadband connectivity, though. That's apparently because the fiber backbone to Kinshasa has to route more than 400 km (250 miles) around the river – no one wanted to put the cable through it.

    There's a shorter route for data to take between the cities. Instead of transmitting the information as light through networks of cables, it can be directly beamed over the river by laser.

    Continue reading
  • Apple's M1 MacBook screens are stunning – stunningly fragile and defective, that is, lawsuits allege

    Latest laptops prone to cracking, distortions, owners complain

    Aggrieved MacBook owners in two separate lawsuits claim Apple's latest laptops with its M1 chips have defective screens that break easily and malfunction.

    The complaints, both filed on Wednesday in a federal district court in San Jose, California, are each seeking class certification in the hope that the law firms involved will get a judicial blessing to represent the presumed large group of affected customers and, if victorious, to share any settlement.

    Each of the filings contends Apple's 2020-2021 MacBook line – consisting of the M1-based MacBook Air and M1-based 13" MacBook Pro – have screens that frequently fail. They say Apple knew about the alleged defect or should have known, based on its own extensive internal testing, reports from technicians, and feedback from customers.

    Continue reading
  • Microsoft's Azure Virtual Desktop now works without Active Directory – but there are caveats

    General availability of Azure AD-joined VMs

    Microsoft has declared general availability for Azure Virtual Desktop with the VMs joined to Azure AD rather than Active Directory, but the initial release has many limitations.

    Azure Virtual Desktop (AVD), once called Windows Virtual Desktop, is Microsoft's first-party VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) solution.

    Although cloud-hosted, Azure Virtual Desktop is (or was) based on Microsoft's Remote Desktop Services tech which required domain-joined PCs and therefore a connection to full Windows Active Directory (AD), either in the form of on-premises AD over a VPN, or via Azure Active Directory Domain Services (AAD DS) which is a Microsoft-managed AD server automatically linked to Azure AD. In the case that on-premises AD is used, AD Connect is also required, introducing further complexity.

    Continue reading
  • It's bizarre we're at a point where reports are written on how human rights trump AI rights

    But that's what UN group has done

    The protection of human rights should be front and centre of any decision to implement AI-based systems regardless of whether they're used as corporate tools such as recruitment or in areas such as law enforcement.

    And unless sufficient safeguards are in place to protect human rights, there should be a moratorium on the sale of AI systems and those that fail to meet international human rights laws should be banned.

    Those are just some of the conclusions from the Geneva-based Human Rights Council (HRC) in a report for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021