Asia running out of IP-address room

ZDnet.com ^ | May 28, 2003, 9:29 AM PT | John Lui

[glorgau]

China, Korea and Japan are running out of time.

Governments and academics from the three countries are teaming up, putting aside troubled histories to avert a common disaster.

The issue: Asia's well of available IP (Internet Protocol) addresses is running dry rapidly. Without an IP address--a 32-bit string of numbers--a 3G phone, PC or handheld has no identity and cannot send or receive data.

When that final address is used up in a couple of years, the online world will grind to a halt. And perhaps, so will the economies of the three North Asian nations.

The shrinking pool

Asia's plight is especially dire because the region was assigned fewer addresses under the current IPv4 (version 4) scheme, drawn up over 20 years ago.

Renee Gamble, a program manager with market research firm IDC and specializing in IP and broadband issues, cited a few stark numbers.

With IPv4, China has only 22 million IP addresses for its population of 1.3 billion people. Last year, it had about 17 million Internet subscribers, and the figure will hit 62.5 million in 2007. Japan and Korea will also run out of addresses soon, she said.

What's worse, this doesn't include the coming wave of 3G phones and smart, data-enabled home devices, which will all need an address.

The U.S. and Europe are sitting pretty for now, because these regions grabbed most IP addresses. The Americans, for example, own 70 percent of all addresses, she said.

Authorities in North Asia are counting on a new addressing scheme called IPv6 to save the day, and it may be Asia that will lead the world in adopting it, she said.

An Asian problem
IPv6 uses a 128-bit number as so the range of allowable addresses is virtually limitless, said Gamble.

But beyond just allowing networks in Asia to grow, IPv6 has other benefits, she said.

With IPv4, a lot of address re-use occurs. A device picks up a new unused address from a shared pool each time it logs on. But because of IPv6's vast pool, each mobile phone and handheld can have its own permanent address, opening up new application possibilities. "IPv6 provides far superior performance, scalability, manageability and security than its predecessor," she said.

China and Japan will invest millions to develop IPv6. For example, June last year, both governments pledged US$32 million into network construction and testing, system development, application technology development and standardization, she said.

Elsewhere, the Nikkei Electronics news service has reported that Japanese firm Hitachi will become an Internet service provider (ISP) in China later this year. It will be the first in the country--and probably the world--to use only IPv6 addresses for customers.

It will rely on Hitachi's own IPv6-enabled network equipment, pointing to how the need to upgrade to IPv6 is being seen as an opportunity for Asian equipment makers.

However, Gamble said that non-Asian makers such as Nortel, Cisco, Nokia and others have supported IPv6 in their products for some years.

"Most vendors have worked to ensure their products have interoperability between IPv6 and IPv4 and because migration and deployment of IPv6 networks across the globe will be gradual, the two standards will coexist for many years to come."

"Also, solutions have been developed to allow IPv6 tunneling over existing IPv4 infrastructure, for example," she said.

A two-track Internet?

Still, there may come a time when there will be a dual-track Internet, separated by the Pacific Ocean.

"It is likely that a situation will emerge whereby Asia moves much more rapidly towards IPv6 while North America lags," she said. However, she added that around the world, as domain servers, switches and routers--the nuts and bolts of networks--get replaced over time; the Internet will become one flavor again.

But in the meantime, Asia may have to go it alone.

"Any wide scale migration to IPv6 in North America is still some years away," she said.

[glorgau]

Just a heads up. For the vast majority of people this won't matter, but it is yet another reminder that the U.S. won't neccessarily remain on top if it doesn't keep on running.

[July 4th]

Couldn't the cell phone providers get around this problem with some form of NAT? Granted, users wouldn't have the benefit of a static IP, but at least the disaster that this article speaks of wouldn't occur. It's not like everyone needs to have their own IP to use the internet.

[keithtoo]

I was in Asia once.

All the IP's over there looked alike to me. I couldn't tell one from the other, even the IP's I had only recently addressed.

I dont know how they tell each other apart.

[Paul C. Jesup]

What about using dynamic IP addresses.

[jpl]

Oh no, they're running out of opportunities to send out spam and viruses. How will the internet ever manage to survive?

[Gunslingr3]

Couldn't the cell phone providers get around this problem with some form of NAT?

I immediately wondered the same thing. If this was from Rueters or AP I wouldn't expect the author to know, but if this is from ZDnet couldn't the editor at least explain why NAT can't be utilized to handle this?

[Ramius]

I agree. The widespread use of natted public IP space has made IPv6 rollout pretty much moot. I don't see why it wouldn't solve the problem in asia just like it did here.

My company used to own 11 class-c addresses. I've given up all but two of them. Don't need them anymore.

10.0.0.0 does wonders. :-)

[Paleo Conservative]

y wide scale migration to IPv6 in North America is still some years away," she said.

But it would be way cool. You could have IP addresses for your lawn sprinkler system and be able to control the operatation of the sprinker system across the internet. For that matter your coffe maker might have it's own IP address.

[ancient_geezer]

For that matter your coffe maker might have it's own IP address.

At least until some kidder scripter got ahold of the address and nuked your morning coffee :0(

I can see it all now in the morning headlines:

Prez Gets Up On the Wrong Side of Bed after Whitehouse Coffee Pot Gets Hacked, Cancels Tax Relief Bill in Fit of Desperation.

[omega4412]

IP addresses of spammers and open relays should be revoked. Reassign the spamiferous Korean IP addresses to ISPs who will take better care of them.

[Paleo Conservative]

Reassign the spamiferous Korean IP addresses to ISPs who will take better care of them.

South Korean or North Korean?

[Symbiant]

NAT is extremely useful in that it allows many users (or devices) to access the 'net through a single public ( = unique) IP address. So far as communication is initiated from inside, there's no problem. Services such as email and instant messaging even make 2-way communication easy; mail servers act rather like transfer warehouses for messages, with each client checking messages when they want them, whereas IM services maintain a session initiated by the client to facilitate 2-way communication between clients. In fact, the only time you really need a public IP address is when someone needs to initiate a connection from the internet to YOU.

Imagine, for instance, that you host a web site from your machine, or want to have a group of friends join you for a multiplayer game. For this to work others must be able to connect to you, must be able to find you on the internet; i.e. you must have a public IP address. (Private addresses are non-routable because they are not unique.)

Even this is easily overcome by the growth of available services on the 'net. Web hosting providers serve many domains (called "virtual domains") from a single IP address. For example, joeuser.com, janedoe.com and jimsmith.com could all be served from a single server with a single IP address -- along with a few hundred other sites, limited only by the capacity of the hardware. Games can be hosted on servers with public IP addresses, or matchmaking services can use sessions (as IM services use sessions) to connect gamers for gameplay.

So, the problem isn't really as much of a problem as it seems at first glance. On the other hand, there are many entities (particularly the companies that wish to target your sprinkler, refrigerator and toaster) who would dearly love to have a unique, public IP address for every device and appliance. Like phone nubmers and email addresses, they are consumer access points.

[pyx]

In fact, the only time you really need a public IP address is when someone needs to initiate a connection from the internet to YOU.

To add to your comments;
Only a SINGLE IP address is needed because PORT FORWARDING commands allow redirection from external addresses to internal address space.
For example; an external network request for access to a secure internal server can be easily accomplished with a single firewall rule that simply redirects the request to a separate internal server. The INTERNAL server appears to be located at the SINGLE IP address, but in fact it has a completely different IP address and MAY BE an internal machine.

[FourPeas]

Oh no, they're running out of opportunities to send out spam and viruses.

Ain't that the truth.

[omega4412]

South Korean. A lot of spam is relayed through South Korean school networks. The network people seem unwilling to block the relaying.

[Recon by Fire]

Just a heads up. For the vast majority of people this won't matter, but it is yet another reminder that the U.S. won't neccessarily remain on top if it doesn't keep on running.

Call Al Gore, he might be able to help....:>)

[Malsua]

IPV6 would be great.

It's not really necessary as many others have stated.

Even with IPV4, it's possible to identify every piece of equipment in the world. Just because something is behind a NAT doesn't mean it's address isn't unique. All IPs that get anything from the net are unique. It's just that when you use a Nat, your first 4 digits are the same. 199.200.121.20 might be the same, but the NAT sends out your resolved IP as 199.200.121.20:10.2.121.50 (over simplification but that's the gist of it)

When a response comes back to the router, it routes the last resolved bits back to your computer. With sufficient logs, you can peg any transmission to any computer anywhere...of course that's the main accountability issue.
Blind relays don't log. IP spoofing for syn attacks will always be a tough bear to smack. IPV6 would at least allow for every device to have a unique address and that'd be one step closer to verification for every packet on the net. Security has a long way to go :(

-Mal