The Internet is undergoing an evolutionary transformation resulting from the explosive growth of things that are interconnected. From single purpose sensors through wearable technologies to sophisticated computing devices, we are creating, exchanging, and consuming more data at rates that would have been inconceivable just a decade ago. The market suggests the average consumer believes this is the best world possible. As technologists, we have a responsibility to consider if we are building an Internet that is in the best interest of the user.
Large-scale IPv6 deployments suggest that IPv6 is at least a technical success, the technology works. Time to visit the other important question: does it work commercially. Does IPv6 really come with a positive business case? We are about to find out, if you help us... The Internet technical community has spent about two decades making IPv6 work on a technical level. We have developed the protocol, modified and expanded a few others; we set up the registry system and distributed the addresses.
Four years ago today, thousands of websites, including Facebook, Google and Yahoo, and hundreds of networks permanently enabled IPv6 in what was called "World IPv6 Launch". One year before, on June 6, 2011, there had been a 24-hour test in "World IPv6 Day" but by June 6, 2012, IPv6 was enabled permanently for the participating sites and networks. One of the many IPv6 statistics sites many of us have watched since that time has been Google's statistics.
If you are located in Africa or the Asia Pacific region, this coming Tuesday, May 31, is the application deadline for an excellent series of grants related to Internet infrastructure, development, security and education. I just wrote about the Internet Society Cybersecurity Grant for up to $56,000 AUD (roughly $40K USD) in the Asia Pacific region... but it is part of a larger set of grants that all have a deadline of May 31.
Those of us who have been working on IPv6 for over 15 years know what it means to be an advocate for an infrastructure technology that cannot be easily tied to new revenue or short-term risks. It is a battle on an icy uphill slope with head winds and a gallery of skeptics who call themselves realists and cheer your every bruise. This has often made us cheer any news of a new IPv6 deployment, as a means to keep faith. However in doing so, it sometimes made us overlook the substance of that news...
Is the global, open Internet moving away from a network of networks that is universally accessible to a series of networks fragmented along policy, technical or economic lines? As some governments pass laws related to data localization and restriction of cross-border data flows, what will the impact be? What about the increasing use of DNS and content filtering? What other factors have the potential for causing fragmentation?
Yesterday Apple declared that as of June 1 all iOS apps submitted to the AppStore MUST support IPv6-only networking. Back at their June 2015 WWDC event, Apple announced that all iOS 9 applications must support IPv6 - the news this week is reinforcing that requirement... As Apple continues to point out, the vast majority of application developers will not need to do anything to support IPv6.
Do you live in the Asia-Pacific region and are interested in accelerating the deployment of key technologies such as IPv6, DNSSEC, TLS or secure routing mechanisms? If so, my Internet Society colleagues involved with the Deploy360 Programme are seeking a "Technical Engagement Manager" based somewhere in the AP region. Find out more information about the position, the requirements and the process for applying.
I've already shared my thoughts following a session of the IPv4 Sunset Working Group at IETF 95 that considered whether to declare IPv4 an "Historic" specification. Of course, as one would expect for a meeting of a Standards Development Organization (SDO), that wasn't the only standards process discussion through the week. Another session, this time in the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group, considered the related topic of whether to make the IPv6 specification a full Internet Standard. Let's look at that proposal.
It has often been claimed that IPv6 and the Internet of Things are strongly aligned, to the extent that claims are made they are mutually reliant. An Internet of Things needs the massively expanded protocol address space that only IPv6 can provide, while IPv6 needs to identify a compelling use case to provide a substantive foundation to justify the additional expenditures associated with a widespread deployment of this new protocol that only the Internet of Things can provide.