Hacking remains a huge problem for businesses. As noted by MarketWatch, more than 175 data breaches have already happened this year, and in 2015 approximately 105 million adults in the United States had their personal information stolen. For companies, the stakes are huge: Compromised systems not only damage the bottom line but can severely impact public opinion.
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.
It probably is because we are so good at doing that in our industry. We start with over-promising and under-delivering and then in following years we fix it. So why would 5G be different? Our admirable technology companies are telling us that 5G will be 100x faster than 4G and that it will have 50x lower latency. But my more independent technology colleagues tell me 'it all depends'.
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.
Comcast enhanced the value position of its broadband subscriptions by increasing the monthly data allowance to 1 Terrabyte (1000 Gigabytes). See Comcast Announcement. As an independent, unsponsored researcher, I can say "Thank You Comcast" without adverse consequences and only a bit of irony. This company does much to displease, but an expanded data allowance offers a winning proposition.
Everyone is familiar with broadband 'speed test' applications. When you have an ISP service quality problem, it is common to grab one of these tools to see if you are getting the service you feel you are entitled to get. Whenever you upgrade your broadband, the first thing you might do is to run a speed test. Then you can show off to your mates how superior your blazing fast service is compared to their pitiful product.
One of the discussions I am currently having with my international colleagues is about the global trend towards urbanisation and the resulting shift of political, economic and financial powers from centralised states and federal structures to mega-city or mega-urban region centres. Some of my American colleagues expressed the fear that this would further marginalise rural communication.
In October 2012, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee issued a joint statement warning American companies that were doing business with the large Chinese telecommunications companies Huawei and ZTE to "use another vendor." The bipartisan statement explains that the Intelligence Committee's Report, "highlights the interconnectivity of U.S. critical infrastructure systems and warns of the heightened threat of cyber espionage and predatory disruption or destruction of U.S. networks if telecommunications networks are built by companies with known ties to the Chinese state, a country known to aggressively steal valuable trade secrets and other sensitive data from American companies."
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.