Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Addressing: IPv4, IPv6, and Beyond CS 4251: Computer Networking II Nick Feamster Spring 2008.

There are copies: 1
Addressing: IPv4, IPv6, and Beyond CS 4251: Computer Networking II Nick Feamster Fall 2008.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Addressing: IPv4, IPv6, and Beyond CS 4251: Computer Networking II Nick Feamster Spring 2008."— Presentation transcript:

1 Addressing: IPv4, IPv6, and Beyond CS 4251: Computer Networking II Nick Feamster Spring 2008

2 IPv4 Addresses: Networks of Networks 32-bit number in dotted-quad notation – --- 1000001011001111 0000011100100100 Network (16 bits)Host (16 bits) 130207736 Problem: 2 32 addresses is a lot of table entries Solution: Routing based on network and host – is a 16-bit prefix with 2 16 IP addresses Topological Addressing

3 Pre-1994: Classful Addressing Network IDHost ID 816 Class A 32 0 Class B 10 Class C 110 Multicast Addresses Class D 1110 Reserved for experiments Class E 1111 24 /8 blocks (e.g., MIT has /16 blocks (e.g., Georgia Tech has /24 blocks (e.g., AT&T Labs has Simple Forwarding: Address range specifies network ID length

4 Problem: Routing Table Growth Growth rates exceeding advances in hardware and software capabilities Primarily due to Class C space exhaustion Exhaustion of routing table space was on the horizon Source: Geoff Huston

5 Routing Table Growth: Who Cares? On pace to run out of allocations entirely Memory –Routing tables –Forwarding tables Churn: More prefixes, more updates

6 Possible Solutions Get rid of global addresses –NAT Get more addresses –IPv6 Different aggregation strategy –Classless Interdomain routing

7 Classless Interdomain Routing (CIDR) IP Address: Mask: 0100000100001110 1111100000000000 11111111 1111110000000000 Use two 32-bit numbers to represent a network. Network number = IP address + Mask Example: BellSouth Prefix: Address no longer specifies network ID range. New forwarding trick: Longest Prefix Match

8 Benefits of CIDR Efficiency: Can allocate blocks of prefixes on a finer granularity Hierarchy: Prefixes can be aggregated into supernets. (Not always done. Typically not, in fact.) Customer 1 Customer 2 AT&TInternet

9 1994-1998: Linear Growth About 10,000 new entries per year In theory, less instability at the edges (why?) Source: Geoff Huston

10 Around 2000: Fast Growth Resumes Claim: remaining /8s will be exhausted within the next 5-10 years. T. Hain, A Pragmatic Report on IPv4 Address Space Consumption, Cisco IPJ, September 2005

11 Fast growth resumes Rapid growth in routing tables Dot-Bomb Hiccup Significant contributor: Multihoming Source: Geoff Huston

12 Multihoming Can Stymie Aggregation Stub AS gets IP address space from one of its providers One (or both) providers cannot aggregate the prefix AT&TVerizon Verizon does not own Must advertise the more-specific route. Mid-Atlantic Corporate Federal Credit Union (AS 30308)

13 The Address Allocation Process Allocation policies of RIRs affect pressure on IPv4 address space IANA AfriNICAPNICARINLACNICRIPE Georgia Tech

14 /8 Allocations from IANA MIT, Ford, Halliburton, Boeing, Merck Reclaiming space is difficult. A /8 is a bargaining chip!

15 Address Space Ownership % whois -h [Querying] [] OrgName: Georgia Institute of Technology OrgID: GIT Address: 258 Fourth St NW Address: Rich Building City: Atlanta StateProv: GA PostalCode: 30332 Country: US NetRange: - CIDR: NetName: GIT NetHandle: NET-130-207-0-0-1 Parent: NET-130-0-0-0-0 NetType: Direct Assignment NameServer: TROLL-GW.GATECH.EDU NameServer: GATECH.EDU Comment: RegDate: 1988-10-10 Updated: 2000-02-01 RTechHandle: ZG19-ARIN RTechName: Georgia Institute of TechnologyNetwork Services RTechPhone: +1-404-894-5508 RTechEmail: OrgTechHandle: NETWO653-ARIN OrgTechName: Network Operations OrgTechPhone: +1-404-894-4669 - Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) - Public record of address allocations - ISPs should update when delegating address space - Often out-of-date

16 IPv6 and Address Space Scarcity 128-bit addresses –Top 48-bits: Public Routing Topology (PRT) 3 bits for aggregation 13 bits for TLA (like tier-1 ISPs) 8 reserved bits 24 bits for NLA –16-bit Site Identifier: aggregation within an AS –64-bit Interface ID: 48-bit Ethernet + 16 more bits –Pure provider-based addressing Changing ISPs requires renumbering

17 Header Formats IPv4

18 Summary of Fields Version (4 bits) – only field to keep same position and name Class (8 bits) – new field Flow Label (20 bits) – new field Payload Length (16 bits) – length of data, slightly different from total length Next Header (8 bits) – type of the next header, new idea Hop Limit (8 bits) – was time-to-live, renamed Source address (128 bits) Destination address (128 bits)

19 IPv6: Claimed Benefits Larger address space Simplified header Deeper hierarchy and policies for network architecture flexibility Support for route aggregation Easier renumbering and multihoming Security (e.g., IPv6 Cryptographic Extensions)

20 IPv6 Flows Traffic can be labeled with particular flow identifier for which a sender can expect special handling (e.g., different priority level)

21 IPv6: Deployment Options IPv4 Tunnels Dual-stack Dedicated Links MPLS Routing Infrastructure Applications IPv6-to-IPv4 NAPT Dual-stack servers

22 IPv6 Deployment Status Big users: Germany (33%), EU (24%), Japan (16%), Australia (16%)

23 Transitioning: Dual-Stack Dual-Stack Approach: Some nodes can send both IPv4 and IPv6 packets –Dual-stack nodes must determine whether a node is IPv6-capable or not –When communicating with an IPv4 node, an IPv4 datagram must be used

24 Transitioning: IPv6 over IPv4 Tunnels One trick for mapping IPv6 addresses: embed the IPv4 address in low bits

25 Reality: 96 More Bits, No Magic No real thought given to operational transition IPv6 is not compatible with IPv4 on the wire –Variable-length addressing could have fixed this, but… Routing load wont necessarily be reduced –TE Model is the same –Address space fragmentation will still exist The space is not infinite: 64 bits to every LAN Not necessarily better security Routers dont fully support all IPv6 features in hardware

26 Another extension: Security (IPSec) Backwards compatible with IPv4 Transport mode: Can be deployed only at endpoints (no deployment at routers needed) –Encrypted IP payload encapsulated within an additional, ordinary IP datagram Provides –Encryption of datagram –Data Integrity –Origin authentication

27 Architectural Discontents Lack of features –End-to-end QoS, host control over routing, end-to- end multicast,… Lack of protection and accountability –Denial-of-service (DoS) Architecture is brittle

28 Architectural Brittleness Hosts are tied to IP addresses –Mobility and multi-homing pose problems Services are tied to hosts –A service is more than just one host: replication, migration, composition Packets might require processing at intermediaries before reaching destination –Middleboxes (NATs, firewalls, …)

29 Internet Naming is Host-Centric Two global namespaces: DNS and IP addresses These namespaces are host-centric –IP addresses: network location of host –DNS names: domain of host –Both closely tied to an underlying structure –Motivated by host-centric applications

30 Trouble with Host-Centric Names Host-centric names are fragile –If a name is based on mutable properties of its referent, it is fragile –Example: If Joes Web page moves to, Web links to his page break Fragile names constrain movement –IP addresses are not stable host names –DNS URLs are not stable data names

31 Solution: Name Services and Hosts Separately Service identifiers (SIDs) are host-independent data names End-point identifiers (EIDs) are location- independent host names Protocols bind to names, and resolve them –Apps should use SIDs as data handles –Transport connections should bind to EIDs

32 The Naming Layers User-level descriptors (e.g., search) App session App-specific search/lookup returns SID Transport Resolves SID to EID Opens transport conns IP Resolves EID to IP Bind to EID Use SID as handle IP hdrEIDTCPSID… IP Transport App session Application

33 SIDs and EIDs should be Flat Flat names impose no structure on entities –Structured names stable only if name structure matches natural structure of entities –Can be resolved scalably using, e.g., DHTs Flat names can be used to name anything –Once you have a large flat namespace, you never need other global handles

34 Resolution Service Flat Names: Flexible Migration <A HREF= http://f012012/pub.pdf >here is a paper <A HREF= http://f012012/pub.pdf >here is a paper HTTP GET: /docs/pub.pdf /docs/ HTTP GET: /~user/pubs/pub.pdf (,80, /docs/) (,80, /~user/pubs/) /~user/pubs/ SID abstracts all object reachability information Objects: any granularity (files, directories) Benefit: Links (referrers) dont break Domain H Domain Y

Download ppt "Addressing: IPv4, IPv6, and Beyond CS 4251: Computer Networking II Nick Feamster Spring 2008."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google