APNIC Chief Scientist, Geoff Huston, presented on the global deployment of IPv6 at the 6th ICANN APAC-TWNIC Engagement Forum and 43rd TWNIC OPM held in Taipei from 22 to 24 April 2025.
5. This is unexpected
• Back in the early nineties when the Internet was just picking up
momentum NOBODY could conceive that a transition to IPv6
would take longer than five years - tops!
• A total timeframe to complete this transition from start to finish of
fifty years was unthinkable!
• But that is where we are
• Why?
6. Not everyone is feeling the
pressure to adopt IPv6
2020 2022 2024
%
of
Users
https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/XQ
Is this now a
steady state?
7. Networks are different from
each other
• Small to medium scale networks with low growth probably feel
little pressure to introduce IPv6 dual stack
• Existing customer requirements are being met with IPv4
• Low growth means little pressure to increase the address pools beyond
current levels
• Any expenditure to introduce dual stack becomes a cost without any
increased revenue to offset this cost
8. Networks are different from
each other
• Large scale networks with continued growth will see this
differently
• The way to alleviate the IPv4 scarcity pressure is to use Dual Stack and
rely on end client preference to prefer to use IPv6 (Happy Eyeballs)
• And place pressure on service provider platforms to adopt IPv6
9. What does “success” look like?
It’s likely that IPv4 will persist for many decades to come
• There is no significant functional difference between the two protocols
• Established IPv4 networks do not feel under any pressure to change to
Dual Stack if their network is providing an acceptable level of service and
functionality to their users
• And that means that a target of 100% IPv6 adoption is not likely in
every economy in the near to medium term
• In which case do we need to revise our definition of“success”for IPv6
adoption?
• Maybe 100% adoption is just too ambitious in this timeframe – Perhaps
we need to rethink what ”success”means
16. When can we declare “success”?
Clearly, across all of Africa, much of the Middle East,
Western Asia and Southern Europe, the Internet
infrastructure in incapable of sustaining further
growth without some effort to support integration of
dual stack platforms. In these geographies IPv6
adoption still demands further attention.
But in many other economies it may be that we have
already achieved “success” in this effort, and there is
little more to be gained by pushing the IPv6 adoption
message in these areas.
17. Why has the Transition effort
fragmented?
• We’ve been used to talking about “the Internet” as it it was a single
entity, where users and network service providers both operate
within the constraints of similar pressures and opportunities
• This is obviously not the case these days
• Network service providers are feeling increased pressure to
commoditize their service offerings
• Because the internal economy of the Internet is changing…
18. The network economy is changing
• Value has moved up the protocol stack from carriage to content
and service
media
network
transport
apps
Internal
Transport +
session security
$$$
media
network
transport
apps
$$$
19. So, who pays for the IPv6
transition?
• Networks need to make the investment to switch to a dual stack
mode that includes IPv6
• But neither the user base nor the content distribution world really
care
• And they are certainly not going to pay a premium to the network operator
for IPv6
• And in the application service world, IP addresses are not the
critical resource any more
• We’ve changed the “currency” of networks!
20. What does this mean?
• We no longer operate within a strict address-based network
architecture
• Clients no longer use a permanent unique public IP address to
communicate with servers
• Servers no longer use a permanent unique public IP address to
communicate with clients
• Address scarcity takes on a different dimension when you don’t
need public addresses to uniquely number every host and service
21. A Network of Names
• Today’s public Internet is largely a service delivery network using
CDNs to push content and service as close to the user as possible
• The multiplexing of multiple services onto underlying service
platforms is an application-level function tied largely to TLS and
service selection using SNI
• The DNS is now used to perform “closest match” service platform
selection, supplanting the role of routing
• Most large CDNs run a BGP routing table with an average AS Path Length
that is intended to converge to 1!
22. A new Internet Architecture
• We’ve moved from end-to-end peer networks to client/server
asymmetric networks
• We’ve replaced single platform servers-plus-network to replicated
servers-minus-network with CDNs
• Clients aren’t identified with a unique public IP address – clients
are inside NATs are uniquely identified only in a local context
• Individual services aren’t identified with a unique public IP
address – services are identified in the DNS
23. A new Internet Architecture
• We’ve moved from end-to-end peer networks to client/server
asymmetric networks
• We’ve replaced single platform servers-plus-network to replicated
servers-minus-network with CDNs
• Clients aren’t identified with a unique public IP address – clients
are inside NATs are uniquely identified only in a local context
• Individual services aren’t identified with a unique public IP
address – services are identified in the DNS
We’ve moved from address-based
networks to name-based services
24. What am I saying?
• The slow uptake of IPv6 is not because this industry is chronically
stupid or short sighted
• There is something else going on here…
• In our efforts to deliver bigger, faster, cheaper services we’ve moved our
attention away from the IP level of the protocol stack and today the
concentrated effort lies in services and applications
• In many economies network providers have now done what they can
with IPv6, and its now about user devices and their lifecycles. There is
adequate momentum to continue IPv6 deployment through coming
years!