IPv6 Matrix Exec Summary Dec 2011 Results - ICCA Pondicherry 31 Jan 2012

IPv6 Matrix Project - http://www.ipv6matrix.orgPage 1

IPv6 Matrix Project

Tracking IPv6 connectivity Worldwide

http://www.ipv6matrix.org

Dr. Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond – [email protected] 2011 Update for ICCA January 2012


We are running out of IP addresses

When we reach this point, it will be too late since

there will be no more “free” IPv4 addresses!

Real time data collected September 2011

http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/index.html


IPv6 Matrix Project

� ISOC England was awarded a Community Grants Programme award in November 2009

� Design and implementation of an “IPv6 Crawler,” software on a computer that crawls through the DNS at regular intervals in order to detect and test:� IPv6 DNS servers

� IPv6 compliant Web servers� IPv6 compliant SMTP mailers

� IPv6 compliant NTP servers.


Project Rationale

� Today, more than 95% of Internet traffic is generated by a small number of data sources – i.e. the world’s busiest Web Sites

� Without IPv6 accessible content, IPv6 has no chance of being used - ever.

� Take the 1 Million most popular Web site list from alexa.com as a starting point for the domains to be tested. Add more domains later.

� Test them for IPv6 connectivity

� This is equivalent to testing about 6.3 million hosts worldwide

� Use GeoIP database to estimate real host location


Project Teams

� London, UK:

� Project Management and support

� Hardware supply and installation

� Data Centre and IPv6 connectivity

� Nile University, Egypt:

� Software Programming


Crawler

CENTOS 5 Linux / updatedOperating

System

2 x hot-swappable redundant

535W.

PSU

146 Gb hardware SATA 2-disk

RAID (hot swappable)

HD Storage

4 Gb DDR2 SDRAMRAM

2 x Dual Core Intel(R)

Xeon(TM) CPU 3.60GHz

CPU

194.33.63.250 / 1 Gb/s (GIH

private address space)

IPv4 address

(eth1) /

speed

shell.ipv6matrix.orgName (eth1)

2a00:19e8:20:1::a2 / 100 Mb/sIPv6 address

(eth0) /

speed

212.124.204.162 / 100 Mb/sIPv4 address

(eth0) /

speed

turtle.ipv6matrix.org ;

crawler.ipv6matrix.org

turtle.ipv6matrix.com ;

crawler.ipv6matrix.com

turtle.ipv6matrix.net ;

crawler.ipv6matrix.net

Name (eth0)

HP DL360pModel

Crawler (back

end)


Web Server

Ubuntu 4.4 Linux / updatedOperating System

Single 500WPSU

2 x 1 Tb fast SATAHD Storage

4 Gb DDR2 SDRAMRAM

2 x Dual Core Intel(R) Xeon(TM)

CPU 3.40GHz

CPU

194.33.63.251 / 1 Gb/s (GIH

private address space)

IPv4 address

(eth1) /

speed

tusk.ipv6matrix.orgName (eth1)

2a00:19e8:20:1::aa / 100 Mb/sIPv6 address

(eth0) /

speed

212.124.204.170 / 100 Mb/sIPv4 address

(eth0) /

speed

elephant.ipv6matrix.org ;

www.ipv6matrix.org

elephant.ipv6matrix.com ;

www.ipv6matrix.com

elephant.ipv6matrix.net ;

www.ipv6matrix.net

Name (eth0)

HP DL140Model

Web Server

(front end)


Router

MN-16ESW 16 port / 100

Mb/s

Interface card /

speed

2 / 100 Mb/sEthernet Ports /

speed

64 MbDRAM

Advanced IP Services IOSOperating

System

CISCO 2811Model

Router


Local Network


Software flowchart


Web Site

Structure


www.ipv6matrix.org Web Site


What are we tracking?

� Host IPv6 penetration

� Using IPv4 Geo-location coordinates

� Includes generic TLD (gTLDs, .com, .net, .org) and country code ccTLDs

� Two types of information:

� Infrastructure: DNS + Web + E-mail + Time server (NTP)This tracks all of the infrastructure required to run IPv6 Web services

� Web sites only (actual content)This tracks the Web services themselves. Usually this percentage is lower than the figure for the infrastructure


What are we archiving?

� Everything that we are tracking on the previous page, plus:

� Testing of connectivity to the above services in case IPv6 addresses are advertised but no service runs on them

� Tracing of route from London Docklands to each one of these hosts both using IPv4 and IPv6 – and archiving all of this information in text format

� A lot more data, accessible from the Web site archive

� In April 2011, the size of this database in text format is approx 60Gb and continually increasing (the testing software runs 24/7)


Data Archives

Selecting Data Archives provides

a link to the detailed information

Table.

Click on “Search”, to go

directly to the Top Level Domain,

or scroll down to the desired

Top Level Domain.


Data Archives

� Example Data in Data Archives (stop

at date)

Click on the “+” to the left of the

Top Level Domain to gain

access the sub-menu containing

the dates of all the data runs,

and so on, to reveal results.

year-month-day__hour-min-sec


Data Archives - results

Click on the links to open a

new window containing

all of the detailed results

formatted in a table.


Data Archives - resultsBasic IPv4/IPv6 connectivity table

Domain penetration summary table

Geographical IP database

Type of IPv6 access (tunnels etc.)

Trace path, hop count, MTU IPv4 & IPv6

Ping count IPv4 and IPv6

Reverse IPv4 and IPv6

SOA for Nameserver

Service detection for SMTP, HTTP and HTTPs

TLS detection for SMTP


Detailed Data for .AEClicked on tcp80_WWW_ae: connection to http port


Using the filter

Use the filter to select by Top Level Domain, or by type of service tested.


Results

November-December 2011


Europe Data snapshot

July 20119.97%

14.74%

3.53%

2.29% 2.86%

1.56%

8.88%5.48%

2.02%

2.02%

5.58%

8.98%

4.47%

6.86%

5.44%

0.47% 0.60%

10.92%

2.99%

4.00%

0.88%

16.25%6.31%

5.98% 2.69% 8.07%

10.72%

5.68%

2.80% 4.06% 6.44%9.34%

7.91%

13.70%

4.75% 2.13%

2.71%

5.39%

6.72%

15.14%

9.82%

10.01%

6.14%11.09%

16.66%

6.30%

4.34%

0.64% 0.58%

11.83%

0.83%

4.04%

3.01%

20.36%18.54%

2.67%

IPv6 Host Penetration

Infrastructure

- DNS

- Web

- E-mail

- NTP

16.43%

2.41%

16.26%

2.33%

December 2011

Low Sample

Low accuracy


Europe Data snapshot

December 2011

12.01%

0.87%

0.28%

0.64% 1.85%

0.48%

1.68%7.15%

0.94%

0.47%

0.93%

2.07%

1.07%

0.26%

2.50%

0.32% 0.24%

0.41%

2.47%

0.19%

0.91%

4.08%8.16%

0.77% 1.32% 3.71%

0.34%

2.60%

0.71% 2.41% 7.45%1.68%

0.51%

2.19%

0.99% 1.17%

0.27%

0.94%

0.86%

1.00%

11.67%

4.00%

9.14%0.48%

4.15%

0.85%

1.59%

0.32% 0.29%

0.42%

0.95%

0.19%

1.71%

26.58%26.70%

1.30%


Web only

12.48%

0.63%

12.29%

0.65%

July 2011

Low Sample

Low accuracy


Infrastructure

- DNS or

- Web or

- E-mail or

- NTP


(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy

Country DNS+WEB+E-mail+NTP % change

July 2011 Dec 2011

Moldova (*) 20.36% 18.54% -1.82%

Switzerland 16.25% 16.66% 0.41%

Slovakia 16.43% 16.26% -0.17%

France 14.74% 15.14% 0.40%

Finland 8.98% 13.70% 4.72%

Ukraine 10.02% 11.83% 1.81%

Slovenia 10.93% 11.33% 0.40%

Poland 10.72% 11.09% 0.37%

Czech Republic 8.07% 10.01% 1.94%

Portugal 9.97% 9.82% -0.15%

Netherlands 8.88% 9.34% 0.46%

Denmark 6.86% 7.91% 1.05%

Bosnia and Herzegovina (*) 7.66% 7.51% -0.15%

Latvia 0.88% 6.72% 5.84%

Germany 5.48% 6.44% 0.96%

Austria 5.98% 6.30% 0.32%

Spain 6.31% 6.14% -0.17%

Croatia 5.68% 5.83% 0.15%

Norway 5.44% 5.68% 0.24%

Estonia 5.58% 5.39% -0.19%

Sweden 5.44% 4.75% -0.69%

Greece 3.91% 4.34% 0.43%

Belgium 2.86% 4.06% 1.20%

Lithuania 4.00% 4.04% 0.04%

Macedonia 4.04% 3.33% -0.71%

Luxembourg 3.21% 3.21%

Serbia (*) 3.09% 3.06% -0.03%

Ireland 2.29% 2.80% 0.51%

United Kingdom 3.53% 2.71% -0.82%

Italy 2.69% 2.67% -0.02%

Hungary 2.41% 2.33% -0.08%

Russia 2.02% 2.13% 0.11%

Iceland 1.56% 2.02% 0.46%

Belarus 2.99% 0.83% -2.16%

Romania 0.60% 0.58% -0.02%

Bulgaria 0.71% 0.50% -0.21%



Web only

(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy

Country WEB % change

July 2011 Dec 2011

Moldova (*) 26.58% 23.70% -2.88%

Slovakia 12.48% 12.29% -0.19%

Portugal 12.01% 11.67% -0.34%

Spain 8.16% 9.14% 0.98%

Germany 7.15% 7.45% 0.30%

Slovenia 3.96% 4.77% 0.81%

Macedonia 5.43% 4.23% -1.20%

Switzerland 4.08% 4.15% 0.07%

Czech Republic 3.71% 4.00% 0.29%

Norway 2.50% 2.60% 0.10%

Belgium 1.85% 2.41% 0.56%

Finland 2.07% 2.19% 0.12%

Netherlands 1.68% 1.68% 0.00%

Croatia 1.55% 1.63% 0.08%

Greece 1.71% 1.59% -0.12%

Italy 1.32% 1.30% -0.02%

Russia 0.94% 1.17% 0.23%

France 0.87% 1.00% 0.13%

Sweden 1.07% 0.99% -0.08%

Belarus 2.47% 0.95% -1.52%

Estonia 0.93% 0.94% 0.01%

Latvia 0.91% 0.86% -0.05%

Austria 0.77% 0.85% 0.08%

Ireland 0.64% 0.71% 0.07%

Hungary 0.63% 0.65% 0.02%

Denmark 0.26% 0.51% 0.25%

Poland 0.34% 0.48% 0.14%

Iceland 0.48% 0.47% -0.01%

Ukraine 0.41% 0.42% 0.01%

Romania 0.24% 0.29% 0.05%

United Kingdom 0.28% 0.27% -0.01%

Lithuania 0.19% 0.19% 0.00%

Bulgaria 0.31% 0.16% -0.15%

Bosnia and Herzegovina (*) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Serbia (*) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%


Europe Trends

� Many countries see a significant rise in infrastructure� Likely to be caused by a main hosting

provider, installing dual-stack Name-servers

� Slovakia & Portugal still leading with dual-stack Web sites

� Spain catching up.

� Country with largest number of dual stack Web sites in Europe: Germany

� IPv6 Day in June 2011 might have generated positive results


Asia Data snapshot

2.02%

0.18%

3.80%3.65%

2.85%

0.48%

0.22%

0.65%

15.89%

11.32%

3.03%5.90%

0.00%

1.69%

0.30%

3.58%

3.42% 0.10%

1.92%

1.23%

1.87%

2.21%

6.16%

2.21%

0.54%

2.13%

0.20%

2.38%

0.25%

1.83%

3.52%

0.10% 3.47%4.16%

2.76%

0.00%

0.64%

3.12%

0.50%

1.22%

1.84%11.94%

4.22%

12.90%

22.73%22.73%

December 2011

July 2011

Infrastructure

- DNS or

- Web or

- E-mail or

- NTP


Low Sample

Low accuracy

SG: 25.52%SG: 25.52%

HK: 2.61%


Asia Data snapshot

0.94%

0.16%

0.99%0.95%

1.83%

0.46%

0.14%

0.69%

4.29%

11.76%

3.03%1.03%

0.00%

0.23%

0.30%

4.46%

0.88% 0.11%

3.70%

1.23%

0.48%

1.44%

1.14%

0.38%

0.14%

1.17%

0.15%

1.49%

0.13%

0.28%

4.69%

0.11% 0.91%0.97%

1.77%

0.00%

0.65%

3.12%

0.38%

1.22%

3.57%11.21%

1.24%

3.49%

50.00%50.00%

December 2011

July 2011


Web only

Low Sample

Low accuracy

SG: 0.00%SG: 0.65%

HK: 0.71%



Infrastructure

- DNS or

- Web or

- E-mail or

- NTP

(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy


July 2011 Dec 2011

Singapore 25.52% 31.32% 5.80%

Armenia (*) 15.89% 12.90% -2.99%

Sri Lanka (*) 11.32% 11.94% 0.62%

Indonesia 5.90% 6.16% 0.26%

Malaysia 3.42% 4.22% 0.80%

New Zealand 3.65% 4.16% 0.51%

Philippines (*) 3.58% 3.52% -0.06%

Australia 3.80% 3.47% -0.33%

Oman (*) 3.03% 3.12% 0.09%

Saudi Arabia (*) 2.85% 2.76% -0.09%

Hong Kong 2.61%

Taiwan 2.21% 2.38% 0.17%

Thailand 1.87% 2.21% 0.34%

Russia 2.02% 2.13% 0.11%

Qatar (*) 1.92% 1.84% -0.08%

Japan 1.69% 1.83% 0.14%

Pakistan 1.23% 1.22% -0.01%

United Arab Emirates (*) 0.65% 0.64% -0.01%

India 0.22% 0.54% 0.32%

Iran 0.48% 0.50% 0.02%

South Korea 0.30% 0.25% -0.05%

China 0.18% 0.20% 0.02%

Vietnam (*) 0.10% 0.10% 0.00%

Kuwait (*) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%



Web only

(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy


July 2011 Dec 2011

Sri Lanka (*) 11.76% 11.21% -0.55%

Philippines (*) 4.46% 4.69% 0.23%

Qatar (*) 3.70% 3.57% -0.13%

Armenia (*) 4.29% 3.49% -0.80%

Oman (*) 3.03% 3.12% 0.09%

Saudi Arabia (*) 1.83% 1.77% -0.06%

Taiwan 1.44% 1.49% 0.05%

Malaysia 0.88% 1.24% 0.36%

Pakistan 1.23% 1.22% -0.01%

Russia 0.94% 1.17% 0.23%

Indonesia 1.03% 1.14% 0.11%

New Zealand 0.95% 0.97% 0.02%

Australia 0.99% 0.91% -0.08%

Hong Kong 0.71% 0.71%

United Arab Emirates (*) 0.69% 0.65% -0.04%

Singapore 0.00% 0.65% 0.65%

Thailand 0.48% 0.38% -0.10%

Iran 0.46% 0.38% -0.08%

Japan 0.23% 0.28% 0.05%

China 0.16% 0.15% -0.01%

India 0.14% 0.14% 0.00%

South Korea 0.30% 0.13% -0.17%

Vietnam (*) 0.11% 0.11% 0.00%

Kuwait (*) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%


Asia Trends

� Singapore still leading by far in infrastructure but trailing in dual-stack Web Site content

� China results abnormally very low – content not dual stacked or IPv6 behind firewall?

� India also low both in infrastructure and most popular Web sites with dual stack

� Less reliability of results due to smaller sample size in many countries of the region


Africa Data snapshot

36.24%

16.67%

6.64%

10.20%

0.84%0.96%

10.20%

7.42%

36.61%

9.52%

December 2011

July 2011

Infrastructure

- DNS or

- Web or

- E-mail or

- NTP


Low Sample

Low accuracy


Africa Data snapshot

0.00%

10.00%

2.63%

14.29%

0.33%0.41%

14.29%

2.78%

0.00%

10.00%

December 2011

July 2011


Web only

Low Sample

Low accuracy



Infrastructure

- DNS or

- Web or

- E-mail or

- NTP

(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy

The small number of hosts tested make the results

for most of Africa appear higher than they really are


July 2011 Dec 2011

Tunisia (*) 36.24% 36.61% 0.37%

Tanzania (*) 10.20% 10.20% 0.00%

Senegal (*) 16.67% 9.52% -7.15%

Kenya (*) 6.64% 7.42% 0.78%

South Africa 0.84% 0.96% 0.12%



Web only

(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy

The small number of hosts tested make the results

for most of Africa appear higher than they really are


July 2011 Dec 2011

Tanzania (*) 14.29% 14.29% 0.00%

Senegal (*) 10.00% 10.00% 0.00%

Kenya (*) 2.63% 2.78% 0.15%

South Africa 0.33% 0.41% 0.08%

Tunisia (*) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%


Africa Trends

� Very few countries with IPv6

connectivity

� Dual Stack Islands starting to appear

� Can be compared with the growth of

Internet connectivity in the nineties


Compare Historical data on

African Internet Connectivity

June 1994 May 1997

Source: Internetology - http://www.nsrc.org/codes/bymap/ntlgy/ntlgy.htm


North/South America

0.53%

2.32%0.93%

2.22%

4.79%

December 2011

Infrastructure

- DNS or

- Web or

- E-mail or

- NTP


Low Sample

Low accuracy

100.00%

4.05%

5.33%

0.48%

3.70%

PR: 7.14%

0.30%

3.57%

July 2011

2.42%

5.81%3.12%

PR: 6.25%

4.27%

100.00%

0.84%

2.45%

0.30%

1.93%

5.41%

0.49%

0.56%

0.56%0.57%

2.63%0.00%


North/South America

0.97%

1.36%0.29%

0.54%

0.19%


Low Sample

Low accuracy

0.00%

1.79%

5.11%

0.24%

1.80%

PR: 7.14%

Web only

0.34%

0.26%

PR: 6.25%

1.85%

1.34%

0.86%

0.00%

0.23%

6.38%

0.49%2.68%0.00%

2.44%

0.31%0.31%

July 2011

December 2011

0.54%0.56%


For (*) the small number of hosts tested make the results

in many countries appear higher than they really are


Infrastructure

- DNS or

- Web or

- E-mail or

- NTP

(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy


July 2011 Dec 2011

Guatemala (*) 100.00% 100.00% 0.00%

Puerto Rico (*) 6.25% 7.24% 0.99%

United States 4.79% 5.81% 1.02%

Uruguay (*) 5.33% 5.41% 0.08%

Venezuela (*) 4.27% 4.05% -0.22%

Ecuador (*) 2.45% 3.70% 1.25%

Cuba (*) 3.12% 3.57% 0.45%

Peru (*) 0.00% 2.63% 2.63%

Canada 2.22% 2.42% 0.20%

Brasil 1.93% 2.32% 0.39%

Panama (*) 0.84% 0.93% 0.09%

Chile 0.56% 0.57% 0.01%

Mexico 0.56% 0.53% -0.03%

Argentina 0.48% 0.49% 0.01%

Colombia (*) 0.30% 0.30% 0.00%


For (*) the small number of hosts tested make the results

in many countries appear higher than they really are


Web only

(*) Low Sample

Low accuracy


July 2011 Dec 2011

Puerto Rico (*) 6.25% 7.14% 0.89%

Ecuador (*) 1.80% 6.38% 4.58%

Uruguay (*) 2.68% 2.68% 0.00%

Peru (*) 0.00% 2.44% 2.44%

Venezuela (*) 1.79% 1.85% 0.06%

Brasil 1.34% 1.36% 0.02%

Mexico 0.97% 0.86% -0.11%

Chile 0.54% 0.56% 0.02%

Canada 0.34% 0.54% 0.20%

Colombia (*) 0.31% 0.31% 0.00%

Panama (*) 0.23% 0.29% 0.06%

Argentina 0.28% 0.24% -0.04%

United States 0.26% 0.19% -0.07%

Guatemala (*) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Cuba (*) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%


America Trends

� USA leads in infrastructure but low on dual Stack Web site.Results of IPv6 Day on infrastructure itself?

� Brazil leading in Latin America

� Low percentage of IPv6 Web Sites across the region shows little impact of IPv6 day (June 8)

� Elsewhere, data based on low number of Web sites, needs to be taken in moderation (the restricted number of hosting providers can make figures jump several percentage points)


Worldwide Trends

� We are seeing a slow growth in dual stack IPv4-IPv6 implementation

� The June 8th IPv6 Day appears to have had more impact in several European Countries than elsewhere

� A decrease in percentage in some countries, points to unstable peering agreements (the IPv6 network is less closely meshed than the IPv4 network)

� Bearing in mind the Asia Pacific Regional Internet Registry has run out of IPv4 addresses, it is alarming to see so few Web sites up and running IPv6 in that region, especially in countries where Internet growth is high, such as in India.


Problems / Possible Errors

� Lots of errors in the DNS – commas, no A, no AAAA record, looping MX, etc.

� Firewalls and security software:

� Blocking of network segments

� detecting denial of service attack (DoS) by error:

• Unusual UDP traffic. Trace-path / ping, SMTP, HTTP, Secure HTTP, NTP port testing.

� Internet snapshot from one location only

� Less accurate results with small input data size (small number of domains tested)

� Disputed accuracy of Geographical IP database


Example: fake IPv6 AAAA record

� Country specific results? /P2

� (examples from the report / finding

errors etc.)

Perform a search for ipv6 field starting with ::ffff

These “ipv6” addresses are AAAA records

which pretend to denote an IPv6 address,

but are actually IPv4 addresses.

There are plenty of examples of such mis-

configuration in the DNS.

Worse problems are caused by commas in domain

names, ie. www.domain,com as well as IP

addresses returning localhost 127.0.0.1 or ::1 etc.

Comma!


Machine readable output

Command directly to SQL database

http://www.ipv6matrix.org:4444/getTable?crawl=2010-07-18_12-24-48&tld=com&table=WWW_com

It is therefore possible to use an entirely new user interface with the back end database


Future work / funding required

� Add more domains to be tested

� Add more features to be tested

� Current front end Web Pages are only an example of possible analysis

� Develop new data visualisation

� Perform further analysis

� Perform historical/time analysis from archives

� Develop an engine to write automated reports

� Duplicate Crawler to other regions


World IPv6 Launch

� Major Internet service providers (ISPs), home networking

equipment manufacturers, and web companies around the world

are coming together to permanently enable IPv6 for their products and services.

� Target: 6 June 2012

� http://www.worldipv6launch.org


Thank you

CTMInternational

Contact: ISOC England – [email protected]

News & Politics

IPv6 Matrix Exec Summary Dec 2011 Results - ICCA Pondicherry 31 Jan 2012