Cited By
View all- Hilal FSattler PVermeulen KGasser O(2024)A First Look At IPv6 Hypergiant InfrastructureProceedings of the ACM on Networking10.1145/36563002:CoNEXT2(1-25)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2024
Fiat Lux: Illuminating IPv6 Apportionment with Different Datasets
Authors: 
Amanda Hsu, Frank Li, Paul PearceAuthors Info & Claims
Amanda Hsu, Frank Li, Paul PearceAuthors Info & ClaimsArticle No.: 21, Pages 1 - 24
Abstract
IPv6 adoption continues to grow, making up more than 40% of client traffic to Google globally. While the ubiquity of the IPv4 address space makes it comparably easier to understand, the vast and less studied IPv6 address space motivates a variety of works detailing methodology to collect and analyze IPv6 properties, many of which use knowledge from specific data sources as a lens for answering research questions. Despite such work, questions remain on basic properties such as the appropriate prefix size for different research tasks.
Our work fills this knowledge gap by presenting an analysis of the apportionment of the IPv6 address space from the ground-up, using data and knowledge from numerous data sources simultaneously, aimed at identifying how to leverage IPv6 address information for a variety of research tasks. Utilizing WHOIS data from RIRs, routing data, and hitlists, we highlight fundamental differences in apportionment sizes and structural properties depending on data source and examination method. We focus on the different perspectives each dataset offers and the disjoint, heterogeneous nature of these datasets when taken together. We additionally leverage a graph-based analysis method for these datasets that allows us to draw conclusions regarding when and how to intersect the datasets and their utility. The differences in each dataset's perspective is not due to dataset problems but rather stems from a variety of differing structural and deployment behaviors across RIRs and IPv6 providers alike. In light of these inconsistencies, we discuss network address partitioning, best practices, and considerations for future IPv6 measurement and analysis projects.
References
[1]
AFRINIC. Afrinic public ftp server, 2022. https://ftp.afrinic.net/stats/afrinic/.
[2]
Afrinic bulk whois data. https://afrinic.net/support/whois/bulk.
[3]
Policy to change the ipv6 hd ratio from 0.8 to 0.94. https://afrinic.net/policy-to-change-the-ipv6-hd-ratio-from-0--8-to-0--94-afpub-2007-v6-002#: :text=The%20HD%2DRatio%20presently%20defined,the%20HD%20ratio%20of%200.80.
[4]
APNIC. Apnic internet number resource policies, 2021. https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources,https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources.
[5]
APNIC. Apnic public ftp server, 2022. https://ftp.apnic.net/stats/apnic/.
[6]
Apnic bulk whois data. https://www.apnic.net/manage-ip/using-whois/bulk-access/.
[7]
ARIN. Number resource policy manual, 2021. https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/.
[8]
ARIN. Arin public ftp server, 2022. https://ftp.arin.net/pub/stats/arin/.
[9]
Arin bulk whois data. https://www.arin.net/reference/research/bulkwhois/.
[10]
Ark ipv4 routed /24 topology. https://catalog.caida.org/details/dataset/ark_ipv4_traceroute.
[11]
Beverly, R., Durairajan, R., Plonka, D., and Rohrer, J. P. In the IP of the beholder: Strategies for active ipv6 topology discovery. In Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference 2018, IMC 2018, Boston, MA, USA, October 31 - November 02, 2018 (2018), ACM, pp. 308--321.
[12]
The caida ucsd ipv6 dns names dataset - 12/19/2021. https://www.caida.org/catalog/datasets/ipv6_dnsnames_dataset/.
[13]
The caida ucsd ipv6 topology dataset - 12/19/2021. https://www.caida.org/catalog/datasets/ipv6_allpref_topology_dataset/.
[14]
Cho, K., Mitsuya, K., and Kato, A. Traffic data repository at the wide project.
[15]
Czyz, J., Allman, M., Zhang, J., Iekel-Johnson, S., Osterweil, E., and Bailey, M. Measuring ipv6 adoption. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 44, 4 (aug 2014), 87--98.
[16]
Durumeric, Z., Adrian, D., Mirian, A., Bailey, M., and Halderman, J. A. A search engine backed by internet-wide scanning. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (New York, NY, USA, 2015), CCS '15, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 542--553.
[17]
Durumeric, Z., Wustrow, E., and Halderman, J. A. Zmap: Fast internet-wide scanning and its security applications. In Proceedings of the 22nd USENIX Conference on Security (USA, 2013), SEC'13, USENIX Association, p. 605--620.
[18]
Farsight. Dnsdb, 2021. https://www.farsightsecurity.com/solutions/dnsdb/.
[19]
Foremski, P., Plonka, D., and Berger, A. Entropy/ip: Uncovering structure in ipv6 addresses. In Proceedings of the 2016 Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2016), IMC '16, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 167--181.
[20]
Gasser, O., Scheitle, Q., Foremski, P., Lone, Q., Korczy'ski, M., Strowes, S. D., Hendriks, L., and Carle, G. Clusters in the expanse: Understanding and unbiasing ipv6 hitlists. In Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference 2018 (New York, NY, USA, 2018), IMC '18, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 364--378.
[21]
Gasser, O., Scheitle, Q., Gebhard, S., and Carle, G. Scanning the ipv6 internet: Towards a comprehensive hitlist. In Traffic Monitoring and Analysis - 8th International Workshop, TMA 2016, Louvain la Neuve, Belgium, April 7--8, 2016 (2016), A. Botta, R. Sadre, and F. E. Bustamante, Eds., IFIP.
[22]
Google. Ipv6 statistics, 2021. https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html.
[23]
Heidemann, J., Pradkin, Y., Govindan, R., Papadopoulos, C., Bartlett, G., and Bannister, J. Census and survey of the visible internet. In Proceedings of the ACM Internet Measurement Conference (Vouliagmeni, Greece, Oct. 2008), ACM, pp. 169--182.
[24]
Ark ipv4 routed /24 topology. https://www.iana.org/numbers.
[25]
Izhikevich, L., Akiwate, G., Berger, B., Drakontaidis, S., Ascheman, A., Pearce, P., Adrian, D., and Durumeric, Z. Zdns: A fast dns toolkit for internet measurement. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2022), IMC '22, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 33--43.
[26]
Izhikevich, L., Teixeira, R., and Durumeric, Z. Predicting ipv4 services across all ports. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2022 Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2022), SIGCOMM '22, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 503--515.
[27]
Karpilovsky, E., Gerber, A., Pei, D., Rexford, J., and Shaikh, A. Quantifying the extent of ipv6 deployment. In Passive and Active Measurement Conference (PAM) (04 2009), pp. 13--22.
[28]
LACNIC. Policy manual, 2020. https://www.lacnic.net/680/2/lacnic/.
[29]
LACNIC. Lacnic public ftp server, 2022. https://ftp.lacnic.net/pub/stats/lacnic/.
[30]
Lacnic bulk whois data. https://www.lacnic.net/2472/2/lacnic/request-bulk-whois-access.
[31]
Li, F., and Freeman, D. Towards a user-level understanding of ipv6 behavior. In Proceedings of the ACM Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2020), IMC '20, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 428--442.
[32]
The majestic million. https://majestic.com/reports/majestic-million.
[33]
Murdock, A., Li, F., Bramsen, P., Durumeric, Z., and Paxson, V. Target generation for internet-wide ipv6 scanning. In Proceedings of the 2017 Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2017), IMC '17, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 242--253.
[34]
Nemmi, E. N., Sassi, F., La Morgia, M., Testart, C., Mei, A., and Dainotti, A. The parallel lives of autonomous systems: Asn allocations vs. bgp. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2021), IMC '21, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 593--611.
[35]
of Oregon, U. Routeviews project, 2021. http://www.routeviews.org/routeviews.
[36]
Padmanabhan, R., Rula, J. P., Richter, P., Strowes, S. D., and Dainotti, A. Dynamips: Analyzing address assignment practices in ipv4 and ipv6. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Emerging Networking EXperiments and Technologies (New York, NY, USA, 2020), CoNEXT '20, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 55--70.
[37]
Plonka, D., and Berger, A. Temporal and spatial classification of active ipv6 addresses. In Proceedings of the 2015 Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2015), IMC '15, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 509--522.
[38]
Rapid7 forward dns. https://opendata.rapid7.com/sonar.fdns_v2/.
[39]
Rfc 1715. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1715.
[40]
Rfc 3194. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3194.
[41]
Rfc 4692. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4692.
[42]
RIPE. Ripe public ftp server, 2022. https://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/.
[43]
Ripe atlas dataset. https://data-store.ripe.net/datasets/atlas-daily-dumps/.
[44]
RIPE-NCC. Ipv6 address allocation and assignment policy, 2020. https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-738.
[45]
RIPE-NCC. Routing information service (ris, 2022. https://www.ripe.net/analyse/internet-measurements/routing-information-service-ris.
[46]
Best current operational practice for operators: Ipv6 prefix assignment for end-users - persistent vs non-persistent, and what size to choose. https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690.
[47]
Rohrer, J. P., LaFever, B., and Beverly, R. Empirical study of router ipv6 interface address distributions. IEEE Internet Computing 20, 4 (jul 2016), 36--45.
[48]
Rye, E., Beverly, R., and Claffy, K. C. Follow the scent: Defeating ipv6 prefix rotation privacy. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2021), IMC '21, Association for Computing Machinery, p. 739--752.
[49]
Sediqi, K. Z., Prehn, L., and Gasser, O. Hyper-specific prefixes. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 52, 2 (apr 2022), 20--34.
[50]
Strowes, S. Visibility of ipv4 and ipv6 prefix lengths in 2019, 2019. https://labs.ripe.net/author/stephen_strowes/visibility-of-ipv4-and-ipv6-prefix-lengths-in-2019/.
[51]
Ullrich, J., Kieseberg, P., Krombholz, K., and Weippl, E. On Reconnaissance with IPv6: A Pattern-Based Scanning Approach. In 2015 10th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (Toulouse, France, Aug. 2015), IEEE, pp. 186--192.
[52]
Cisco umbrella popularity list. http://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/umbrella-static/index.html.
[53]
Wei, J. Why is a /48 the recommended minimum prefix size for routing?, 2020. https://blog.apnic.net/2020/06/01/why-is-a-48-the-recommended-minimum-prefix-size-for-routing/.
[54]
Zirngibl, J., Steger, L., Sattler, P., Gasser, O., and Carle, G. Rusty clusters? dusting an ipv6 research foundation. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Internet Measurement Conference (New York, NY, USA, 2022), IMC '22, Association for Computing Machinery, p. n/a.
Index Terms
- Fiat Lux: Illuminating IPv6 Apportionment with Different Datasets
Recommendations
Fiat Lux: Illuminating IPv6 Apportionment with Different Datasets
SIGMETRICS '23: Abstract Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer SystemsIPv6 adoption continues to grow, making up more than 40% of client traffic to Google globally. While the ubiquity of the IPv4 address space makes it comparably easier to understand, the vast and less studied IPv6 address space motivates a variety of ...
Fiat Lux: Illuminating IPv6 Apportionment with Different Datasets
SIGMETRICS '23IPv6 adoption continues to grow, making up more than 40% of client traffic to Google globally. While the ubiquity of the IPv4 address space makes it comparably easier to understand, the vast and less studied IPv6 address space motivates a variety of ...
An experimental evaluation of IP4-IPV6 IVI translation
While IPv6 deployment in the Internet continues to grow slowly at present, the imminent exhaustion of IPv4 addresses will encourage its increased use over the next several years. However, due to the predominance of IPv4 in the Internet, the transition ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 02 March 2023
Published in POMACS Volume 7, Issue 1
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Funding Sources
- National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP)
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 444Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)303
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)48
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Hilal FSattler PVermeulen KGasser O(2024)A First Look At IPv6 Hypergiant InfrastructureProceedings of the ACM on Networking10.1145/36563002:CoNEXT2(1-25)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2024
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in