backtop


Print 21 comment(s) - last by EricMartello.. on Mar 15 at 4:24 PM

China's state ISP rolls out next generation standard

The ever-present desire for censorship may be the carrot, but for whatever reason China has a head start on adopting IPv6.  Even as the U.S. moves sluggishly towards the next generation internet address protocol, 3TNet -- China's state-provided broadband internet and public video service -- has made the switch.

The upside of IPv6 is one that's likely highly desirable in China -- more space.  IPv4, the previous standard, only allows 4.3 billion unique web addresses.  With over a billion people, China may surpass that total in domestic pages alone.

IPv6 is also expected to beef up security.  Using a technology called Source Address Validation Architecture (SAVA), IPv6 networks establish a relationship based on multiple trusted interactions across a network.  This can help beat so-called "IP spoofing" attacks, and advances the current version of IPv6 over less secure earlier versions.

A U.S. Navy sponsored report made public this week, authored by the New England Complex Systems Institute, listed identity trust and the lack of addressing space as the two biggest shortcomings of the widespread and successful IPv4.

China internet
Running out of room, China has turned to IPv6 for more space and security.
[Image Source: Digital Trends]

That's not to say IPv6 doesn't have its potential problems as well.  While the new protocol increases addressing space by 80 trillion or so, some fear it provides too fine grain identification, eliminating anonymity on sensitive locations like private networks.  There's also fear that the technology's ability to uniquely identify traffic sources could be overstated by the layman (as people could still hack into your device and do mischief on your precise IP).

Ultimately China may be eager to de-anonymize its citizens as well.  The nation has long fought to control its citizens' internet activities; now it has a far finer form of tracking.  However, it may not be immediately available to bump its domestic surveillance capabilities, as the extra information requires extra data mining and new analysis algorithms to store and process into useful results.

Ethernet Cables
[Image Source: Boot Click]

For now, Chinese citizens are mostly enjoying the benefits of IPv6 alone -- more space and more security.  Donald Riley, an information systems specialist at the University of Maryland, who also chairs the Chinese American Network Symposium, says that China is far ahead of the U.S. in IPv6 deployment.  In an interview with New Scientist, he comments on 3TNet, "China has a national internet backbone in place that operates under IPv6 as the native network protocol. We have nothing like that in the US."

China is also leading the U.S. in some other high tech ventures, such as deploying high speed rail.

Sources: RSTA [abstract], New Scientist



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

NAT
By Ammohunt on 3/11/2013 7:20:21 PM , Rating: 2
With NAT the need to switch to IPV6 is diminished. If IPV6 wasn't so complex the uptake would be higher by organizations and tech enthusiasts. Personally I see little benefit at this point for organizations or individuals to switch.




RE: NAT
By Reclaimer77 on 3/11/2013 7:54:14 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah and we thought getting our CCNA was hard lol? Just wait if IPV6 goes mainstream!


RE: NAT
By Skywalker123 on 3/11/13, Rating: -1
RE: NAT
By dgingerich on 3/11/2013 9:21:43 PM , Rating: 5
Actually, ipv6 is easier in many ways and equal in many ways compared to ipv4. The addresses are just longer. I've been working on it for a while, praying we'd get our butts moving to it. There's just too many lazy network admins out there.


RE: NAT
By poi2 on 3/11/2013 11:49:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"With NAT the need to switch to IPV6 is diminished"

Ouch, that is a "complex-language" indeed.

~ Let me translate that for the employers :
_ "You need to hire IPV6 - not lazy - Admin"


RE: NAT
By hpglow on 3/12/2013 12:43:58 AM , Rating: 3
NAT is exaclty why there is no excuse to not having IPV6 enabled on the internet. At this point from our modem on could be IPV4 and the broad internet could be based on IPV6. I've been out of college for 4 years and this was a hot topic then. It just needs to get done. NAT was a stop-gap solution from the start. The fact that we are discussing this in the first place is inane like it is some kind of new revolutionary solution to the address shortage. The problem arose mid 90's! Not last week. So we have had to use this workaround for almost 20 years so far. Connected devices aren't reducing in number over the years, therefore we need more address space.

Following this logic we should call up all the device makers and tell them 2GB of ram is enough forever because we don't want to bother with 64-bit memory addressing. Or why even stop there we could just run our computers with 64KB / 1MB / 16MB (depending on pinout) of ram because that was 16-bit and simpler and easier, why try and move forward?.. Let's just keep it simple.


RE: NAT
By vol7ron on 3/12/2013 1:15:02 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. NAT is a patch for backward compatibility and shouldn't be an argument for the reverse, especially since it has it's own limitations.


RE: NAT
By Ammohunt on 3/12/2013 3:09:17 PM , Rating: 2
But NAT is not viewed that way in large and small organizations its viewed as SOP. There is no cost benefit for companies to switching to IPv6 and in most cases the opposite is true for companies running less than modern switching equipment that doesn't support both IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously couple that with training and simple things like application compatibility and you have a gigantic expense with zero ROI(other that being the cool kid early adopter). I don't see anyone or and standards body successfully selling IPv6.


RE: NAT
By Milliamp on 3/12/2013 12:51:56 AM , Rating: 2
Actually because the migration strategy is mostly dual stack we need to move quickly.

Dual stack requires use of both IPv6 and IPv4 through a transition period. What that means is we can't wait till after we are out of IPv4 addresses before we start using IPv6.

People are just kind of sitting around not doing much of anything because everyone assumes we can just start handing out IPv6 addresses after we run out of IPv4 addresses with no issues and that isn't true.


RE: NAT
By vol7ron on 3/12/2013 1:16:55 AM , Rating: 2
Well most consumer products will more than likely be okay, and large businesses are probably up to speed. It's the small businesses that have been hovering on dated technology to keep costs low that more-than-likely need to upgrade.

Most major ISPs don't have a problem and they make sure rented equipment stays up to date.


RE: NAT
By Uncle on 3/13/2013 12:42:16 AM , Rating: 2
"If IPV6 wasn't so complex" There you go again telling the whole world why the US hasn't adopted IPV6 and the Chinese have, its so embarrassing.


RE: NAT
By EricMartello on 3/15/2013 4:24:48 PM , Rating: 1
IPv6 just looks more complicated because it's longer. The actual scheme is pretty easy to understand. Instead of "." they use ":" and instead of 4 groups of 3 decimal (0-255) we have 8 groups of 4 hex (0000-FFFF)...the concept is essentially the same thing.

The nice thing is that IPv6 addresses can be abbreviated using a "::" to indicate that the groups in that spot would be all zero values. Instead of using 127.0.0.1 you can just write ::1 for the local loopback.

An IPv6 address that is written out as:

0A28:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0001

Can be written short like this:

A28::1


"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki