Designing, Constructing, and Operating an IPv6 Network at SC23: A case study in implementing the IPv6 protocol on a heterogenous network that supports the SC23 conference
Article No.: 24, Pages 1 - 8
Abstract
IPv6 is the current version of IP, the protocol that is used to route traffic across internet connections. This standard was originally developed as a new approach to mitigate concerns about address exhaustion and allow for near infinite scalability. While this protocol has gained significant support in mobile and broadband networks, as well as being the default for networks in emerging economies, it has yet to be fully adopted as a standard deployment model. Complications include legacy devices unable to support the proposed changes, as well as potential challenges that exist between devices that may not be able to fully implement current standards or configuration norms.
The SCinet volunteers who deliver advanced networking to support the SC Conference set an ambitious goal of deploying an IPv6-only network at SC23. While the necessary technology is widely available and understood, the implications of deployment to support more than 15,000 users, each with multiple devices of different operating environments and ages, presents a unique technology and policy challenge. This paper will highlight the effort put into designing, implementing, and operating this innovative IPv6-only environment.
References
[1]
S. Deering, R. Hinden. 2017. RFC 8200: Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification. RFC Editor, USA.
[2]
J. Postel. 1981. RFC 791: Internet Protocol. RFC Editor, USA.
[3]
Google. 2024. IPv6 Statistics. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
[4]
The International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage, and Analysis. 2024. SCinet. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://sc24.supercomputing.org/scinet/
[5]
SDSC - UC San Diego. 2003. SDSC Networking Experts Contribute to Success of SCinet at SC2003. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://www.sdsc.edu/News%20Items/PR121503b.html
[6]
S. Deering, R. Hinden. 2006. RFC 4291: IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture. RFC Editor, USA.
[7]
S. Thomson, C Huitema, V. Ksinant, M. Souissi. 2003. RFC 3596: DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6. RFC Editor, USA.
[8]
T. Mrugalski, M. Siodelski, B. Volz, A. Yourtchenko, M. Richardson, S. Jiang, T. Lemon, T. Winters. 2018. RFC 8415: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6). RFC Editor, USA.
[9]
G. Chen, Z. Cao, C. Xie D. Binet. 2014. RFC: 7269: NAT64 Deployment Options and Experience. RFC Editor, USA.
[10]
M. Bagnulo, P. Matthews, I. van Beijnum. 2011. RFC 6146: Stateful NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers. RFC Editor, USA.
[11]
L. Colitti, J. Linkova, M. Richardson, T. Mrugalski. 2020. RFC 8925: IPv6-Only Preferred Option for DHCPv4. RFC Editor, USA.
[12]
Amazon Web Services. 2023. New – AWS Public IPv4 Address Charge + Public IP Insights. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address-charge-public-ip-insights/
[13]
Cloudflare Blog. 2023. Welcome to Birthday Week 2023. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://blog.cloudflare.com/welcome-to-birthday-week-2023/
[14]
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 2024. Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Policy. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://www.ferc.gov/internet-protocol-version-6-ipv6-policy
[15]
The White House. 2020. M-21-07 Completing the Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6). Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-07.pdf
[16]
The International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage, and Analysis. 2023. SCinet Brings IPv6 to the Blue Bear and SC23. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://sc23.supercomputing.org/2023/08/scinet-brings-ipv6-to-the-blue-bear-and-sc23/
[17]
Amogh Dhamdhere, Matthew Luckie, Bradley Huffaker, kc claffy, Ahmed Elmokashfi, and Emile Aben. 2012. Measuring the deployment of IPv6: topology, routing and performance. In Proceedings of the 2012 Internet Measurement Conference (IMC '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1145/2398776.2398832
[18]
G. Fioccola, P. Volpato, J. Palet Martinez, G. Mishra, C. Xie. 2023. RFC 9386: IPv6 Deployment Status. RFC Editor, USA
[19]
Jakub Czyz, Mark Allman, Jing Zhang, Scott Iekel-Johnson, Eric Osterweil, and Michael Bailey. 2014. Measuring IPv6 adoption. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM conference on SIGCOMM (SIGCOMM '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1145/2619239.2626295
[20]
kc claffy. 2011. Tracking IPv6 evolution: data we have and data we need. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 41, 3 (July 2011), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1145/2002250.2002258
[21]
Elliott Karpilovsky, Alexandre Gerber, Dan Pei, Jennifer Rexford, and Aman Shaikh. 2009. Quantifying the Extent of IPv6 Deployment. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Passive and Active Network Measurement (PAM '09). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 13–22.
[22]
Sho Fujimura and Masaru Okumura. 2023. IPv6 and Network Security Deployment Use Cases. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGUCCS Annual Conference (SIGUCCS '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 53–57. https://doi.org/10.1145/3539811.3579580
[23]
Ciprian Popoviciu, Eric Levy-Abegnoli, and Patrick Grossetete. 2006. Deploying IPv6 Networks (1st. ed.). Cisco Press.
[24]
Jianping Wu, Jessie Hui Wang, and Jiahai Yang. 2011. CNGI-CERNET2: an IPv6 deployment in China. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 41, 2 (April 2011), 48–52. https://doi.org/10.1145/1971162.1971170
[25]
APNIC. 2024. Deploy IPv6. Retrieved March 4, 2024 from https://www.apnic.net/community/ipv6/deploy-ipv6/
[26]
Thomas A. Limoncelli and Vinton G. Cerf. 2011. Successful Strategies for IPv6 Rollouts. Really.: Knowing where to begin is half the battle. Queue 9, 3 (March 2011), 20. https://doi.org/10.1145/1952746.1959015
[27]
Adeel Ahmed and Salman Asadullah. 2009. Deploying IPv6 in Broadband Access Networks. Wiley Publishing.
[28]
Y. Tian, "Traffic Engineering in Partially Deployed Segment Routing Over IPv6 Network With Deep Reinforcement Learning," in IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 1573-1586, Aug. 2020.
[29]
F. Guo, C. Liu, S. Hao, C. Bao and X. Li, "ADIW: A Solution on General Deployment in IPv6-only WLANs," 2021 IEEE 4th Advanced Information Management, Communicates, Electronic and Automation Control Conference (IMCEC), Chongqing, China, 2021, pp. 915-922.
[30]
Pujol, E., Richter, P., Feldmann, A. (2017). Understanding the Share of IPv6 Traffic in a Dual-Stack ISP. In: Kaafar, M., Uhlig, S., Amann, J. (eds) Passive and Active Measurement. PAM 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10176. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54328-4_1
[31]
J. Jeong, S. Park, L. Beloeil, S. Madanapalli. 2017. RFC 8106: IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration. RFC Editor, USA.
[32]
J. H. Saltzer, D. P. Reed, and D. D. Clark. 1984. End-to-end arguments in system design. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 2, 4 (Nov. 1984), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1145/357401.357402
[33]
J. Postel. 1981. RFC 792: Internet Control Message Protocol. RFC Editor, USA.
[34]
D. Plummer. 1982. RFC 826: An Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol or Converting Network Protocol Addresses to 48.bit Ethernet Address for Transmission on Ethernet Hardware. RFC Editor, USA.
[35]
Palo Alto Networks. 2024. NAT64. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/pan-os/9-1/pan-os-admin/networking/nat64
[36]
The International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage, and Analysis. 2022. SCinet History. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://sc22.supercomputing.org/scinet/scinet-history/
[37]
S. Deering, R. Hinden. 1995. RFC 1883: Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification. RFC Editor, USA.
[38]
S. Deering, R. Hinden. 1998. RFC 2460: Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification. RFC Editor, USA.
[39]
SIDN Fund. 2022. Governments everywhere make IPv6 mandatory. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://www.sidn.nl/en/news-and-blogs/governments-everywhere-make-ipv6-mandatory
[40]
E. Nordmark. 2000. RFC 2765: Stateless IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm (SIIT). RFC Editor, USA.
[41]
X. Li, C. Bao, F. Baker. 2011. RFC 6145: IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm. RFC Editor, USA.
[42]
C. Bao, X. Li, F. Baker, T. Anderson, R. Linpro, F. Gont. 2016. RFC 7915: IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm. RFC Editor, USA.
[43]
ACQUISITION.GOV. An official website of the General Services Administration. FAR 11.002 Policy. Retrieved May 15, 2024 from https://www.acquisition.gov/far/11.002?searchTerms=ipv6
[44]
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. BIND9. Retrieved May 15, 2024 from https://www.isc.org/bind/
[45]
The International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage, and Analysis. 2024. SCinet Architecture. Retrieved May 15, 2024 from https://sc23.supercomputing.org/scinet/scinet-technology/
[46]
IETF Datatracker, Selectively Isolating Hosts to Prevent Potential Neighbor Discovery Issues and Simplify First-hops. Retrieved May 2, 2024 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nd-considerations/
[47]
Fortinet. 2024. Ping of Death. Retrieved June 10, 2024 from https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/ping-of-death
[48]
T. Narten, E. Nordmark, W. Simpson, H. Soliman. 2007. RFC 4861: Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6). RFC Editor, USA.
Index Terms
- Designing, Constructing, and Operating an IPv6 Network at SC23: A case study in implementing the IPv6 protocol on a heterogenous network that supports the SC23 conference
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
SIP mobility and IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack supports in 3G IP multimedia subsystem: Research Articles
Mobile IPIn the Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS), session initiation protocol (SIP) and IPv6 are the default protocols for IP multimedia core network subsystem (IMS). However, a user equipment (UE) may not be allowed to roam or hand off from ...
A Performance Study on REAchability Protocol in Large Scale IPv6 Networks
ICCNT '10: Proceedings of the 2010 Second International Conference on Computer and Network TechnologyShim6 is a host-centric multihoming solution for IPv6 networks which has been chosen by the IETF as a multihoming solution for the future Internet. Shim6 employs REAchability Protocol (REAP) for failure detection and recovery. REAP enables multi-...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
July 2024
608 pages
ISBN:9798400704192
DOI:10.1145/3626203
Copyright © 2024 ACM.
Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of the United States government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 17 July 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
- U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science
- US Department of Energy, Office of Science
Conference
PEARC '24: Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing
July 21 - 25, 2024
RI, Providence, USA
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 133 of 202 submissions, 66%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 403Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)403
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)69
Reflects downloads up to 20 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format