IP addresses are about to run out. Will the world end?
According to one IPv6 provider, we are now just days away from the IPv4 ARPAgeddon, or IPocalypse [not to be confused with the iPocalypse].With IPv4 providing only 4.3 billion addresses, we all knew that the end of the reckless and fancy-free Internet era was coming -- we just didn't know when. The death knell has started to ring. Asia is on its knees plaintively pleading for its fix of IP addresses. Smartphones, the fastest growing market, will soon be unable to connect to the Internet. You might turn on your desktop PC, only to be told that you need to wait for an IP address to become available.
In short, it's now high time to consider our options.
A sticky situation
The problem lies in lackluster support for IPv4's replacement: IPv6. Sure, network adapters in desktops and laptops have supported IPv6 for a long time. Windows and Linux have supported it since the days of Windows 98, and even Mac finally supports it with OS X.The biggest growth sector, however -- smartphones -- is another story entirely. Android, iPhone and Symbian support IPv6, but only over Wi-Fi. It's not their fault, though: mobile operators don't support IPv6. 3G over IPv6 has been tested, but it still hasn't been rolled out to consumers. In all likelihood, we will have to wait until the roll-out of 4G before IPv6 is used for mobile data -- and with some 300 million smartphones expected to be activated in 2011, that might be too late.
PC users have the same problem: your computer might support IPv6, but the number of ISPs that support IPv6 is pitiful.
Expensive solutions
What can we do about it, then? Not a whole lot. It's down to ISPs, mobile operators and backhaulers to exchange their IPv4 hardware for the IPv6 equivalent. To be fair, a lot of the Internet's backbone is ready to handle IPv6 -- and heavy hitters like Google are already on board -- but unfortunately, it all comes down to the last mile conundrum. Running an IPv6 link between America and Europe simply requires a couple of big IPv6 routers, but running it to your front door or to every 3G pylon in the country is difficult and expensive work.Then, if that wasn't bad enough, ISPs would need to send each of their customers an IPv6 modem, the cost of which would be astronomical.
In other words, due to classic market factors we're probably going to run out of IP addresses. An IPocalypse, however, thanks to some reserved blocks of addresses, is unlikely. The U.S. military isn't going to find itself locked out of its own defense system, for example. If we're not careful, though, public IP addresses may actually become a tradeable commodity.
One day soon, you might wake up to find your IP address re-assigned to someone more important, or someone with more money. Better yet, you won't be able to get online to find out your ISP's customer services telephone number -- and you won't be able to make any calls with your disconnected smartphone, anyway.













Comments
18
Subscribe to commentsDrew GreenJan 27th 2011 1:48PM
My f'ing cell phone DOESN'T need a public IPv4 address. The fact that mine and everyone else's does is the reason that we ran out of IP addresses. NAT is a good thing, despite people that claim otherwise. Had it been used properly and public addresses not been given away all willy-nilly, this wouldn't be an issue. IPv6 is the future, but also a lot more confusing than IPv4 and the transition is way behind where it should be.
Sebastian AnthonyJan 27th 2011 1:56PM
@Drew Green Yep, very true! And I believe NAT is already used on some mobile networks.
As far as I know, it only delays the problem though (and I think it introduces some other issues, but it's been a few years since I studied networks in great detail :)
KarbowiakJan 27th 2011 2:01PM
What a bunch of fear mongering..
Most if not all DSL and Cable modems can be upgraded to support IPv6, same goes for cellphones - im even pretty sure that iOS and Android both support IPv6 via the cellphone network as well as over WiFi.
And as for the fear of your phone not being able to get online, im sure cellphone companies will figure out how to use NAT, eventho NAT is a terrible thing that should never have been invented (But then again - we should also have used IPv6 from the beginning...)
And as for Confusing, confusing where?.. 211.222.144.144 vs 2001:16d8:2:8dd::
They are equally "hard" to remember, but i mean - why would you ever want to remember an IPv4 or IPv6 address? ever heard of DNS?..
Oh and you forget, theres still several /8s left (7 according to tunnelbroker.net) But i agree, IPv6 cant come soon enough
Drew GreenJan 27th 2011 4:21PM
@Karbowiak While DNS is of course the preferred method for contacting a system, sometimes you need to know the IP address when troubleshooting.
kojo87Jan 27th 2011 4:26PM
@Karbowiak
its not fear mongering. its just looking at the worst possible scenario if there isn't a major expensive overhaul of existing networks. why would the service providers want to spend all that money when they could just start charging for IP addresses? call it cynical if you want but ISPs aren't out to do you any favors. go look at your ancient Motorola Surfboard that your ISP charges you monthly for. sure doesn't seem to me that they are interested in providing the most current technology to their customers. (i replaced my Surfboard with a Cisco cable modem i bought, even though Charter tried to talk me out of it, and my internet was 50% faster.) look at all of the net neutrality stuff going on and you'll see what i mean. they just want as much of your money as they can get.
hopefully i'm completely wrong and this all gets sorted out very quickly but i don't have high hopes.
I Just Had to Say ItJan 27th 2011 7:28PM
You must construct additional 3G pylons!
Sebastian AnthonyJan 27th 2011 7:28PM
@I Just Had to Say It The best thing is... I actually almost made the same joke, but decided not to during the last revision of the post :P
MxxConJan 27th 2011 11:41PM
Last mile isn't really that big of a problem.
I don't know about the current state of DSL systems, but Cable and FTTH will have no problems.
Virtually all cable networks are now running Docsis2 or Docsis3 protocols and those are IP6 compliant.
I don't know specs of FTTH but it's recent enough that I'm sure creators of that protocol foresaw the upcoming issue and implemented full IP6 support as well.
Regardless of how soon IP6 will come, IP4 is not going anywhere in the foreseeable super-distant future so we will still be facing IP4 shortage.
Sebastian AnthonyJan 28th 2011 5:27AM
@MxxCon I suspect what will happen is that metropolitan areas will move over to IPv6 (via the newer technologies, as you say), leaving enough IPv4 addresses for rural areas. IPv6 works fine in conjunction with IPv4, it just needs some bridging.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of consumer gear that supports IPv6, though. Also, it varies from country to country, but I suspect that most DSLAMs are not set up to receive IPv6 traffic. We still mostly use DSL in England, for example.
F-ZeroJan 28th 2011 2:23AM
Astronomical costs? No Problem!
we'll just pass them onto the consumer
at least that's what I'd predict will happen
Sebastian AnthonyJan 28th 2011 5:24AM
@F-Zero Almost certainly, yeah :(
AjinkyaJan 28th 2011 6:03AM
Is this apply to ISP that give users Dynamic IP ?
AjinkyaJan 28th 2011 6:04AM
Does it apply to ISP that gives Dynamic IP to its users ?
Im asking cus e.g. My IP Range 111.111.16.17 and so on.
Sebastian AnthonyJan 28th 2011 6:14AM
@Ajinkya Yep, it applies to everyone. Dynamic IP addresses stretch things out a bit, but ultimately we will have more than 4.3 billion devices online at the same time -- and then we're in trouble :)
Martin H. HamstadFeb 7th 2011 3:10PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but when they originally handed out the IP adresses, "they" thought it was an infite supply, so a group of big companies all got their own number as the MSB number. Said in another way, an IP address is xxx.yyy.zzz.nnn where each of these numbers are max 255, and 64 (63?) companies like IBM, Microsft got their own xxx.
Wouldnt it be a shortlived solution to have these companies give up some of their IP adresses, after all they control 1/4 of them?
Sebastian AnthonyFeb 7th 2011 3:15PM
@Martin H. Hamstad I am pretty sure that they've already returned most of them. Jurisdiction of the address allocation was given to the RIRs (ARIN, RIPE, etc.) I don't think AT&T owns an entire A-block any more, but I could be wrong.
Martin H. HamstadFeb 8th 2011 8:53AM
According to this article it looks like U are right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks
Funny to see that Eli Lily & company had its own A-block :)
Martin H. HamstadFeb 7th 2011 3:33PM
Just testing my new password :)