ATTACHED

The Motivation for the Change in TCP/IP and the Internet and Its Future



The Motivation for the Change in TCP/IP and the Internet and Its Future

1. Introduction

It is well realized that the lifetime of the IPv4 address space is limited. The day when no more 32-bit IP network addresses are left may, and most certainly will, arrive. Since the new IPv6/IPng architecture solves the address space problem in an effective way, at least for some time, the need for deployment to the new version is real(Abouzeid, 2000). Because of the huge size and coverage of the Internet, it is impossible to expect a fast, centrally coordinated cutover. To make the whole transition concept feasible, the coexistence of both IPv4 and IPv6 must be arranged in a practical and simple way. It is also important to encourage the transition process to overcome the resistance on the field (Abouzeid, 2000). The transition is definitely a costly issue for large organizations and as long as IPv4 is not its back against the wall, the temptation to stay with the old technology is strong. For smooth, stepwise and independent transition a set of techniques have been specified. They implement mechanisms for true internetworking, coexistence, easy address mapping and name service migration, for example. In addition to these, hopefully temporary transition phase techniques, the final benefits of a pure IPv6 environment must be encouraging enough for the users to intially trigger the whole process of migration (Kherani, 2002). The IETF specifications for IPv6 contain a lot of information concerning the transition issues. Most of the documents are presented in form of RFCs, and some material is available as Internet Drafts. This area is under extensive evaluation and engineering work. However the information currently available pretty well reflects the most significant subjects of IPv4 to IPv6 transition.

2. Requirements for smooth transition

The actual transition process from IPv4 to IPv6 can be compared to the migration processes of smaller scale that take place all the time. Operating system and software development environment version changes are good examples of such migration. The main constraints set for the IPng transition should be generally the same as in any smaller scale migration. However, for the global Internet community the fulfillment of the constraints is much more important, and few shortcuts can be tolerated (Kherani, 2002).

2.1. Minimizing the resistance

The general attitude of large organizations to IPng is assumed to be disfavor. This subject is discussed in a memo made in the Boeing Company . The viewpoints of the IETF and industry are different, which may lead to significant resistance in adopting the new technology. Industry sees the world from the business point of view. Computing is a tool for doing business; the techniques used are never a primary factor (Sikdar, 2001, 139-154). Where internet engineering people concentrate on the shining state-of-the-art technology and new capabilities of IPng, a large corporate user is concerned about the flexibility of the transition, compatibility with old systems and predictable cost of migration ...