An Internet Transition Plan
draft-jcurran-v6transitionplan-03

INTERNET-DRAFT                                         John Curran
Expires: November 1, 2008                             May 19, 2008
Intended status: Informational
                              

                     An Internet Transition Plan
                  draft-jcurran-v6transitionplan-03

Status of this Memo

  By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
  applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
  have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
  aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

  Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
  Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
  other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
  Drafts.

  Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
  and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
  time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
  material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

  The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
  http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

  The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
  http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

  This Internet-Draft will expire on November 1, 2008.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

Abstract

  This memo provides one possible plan for transitioning the Internet 
  from a predominantly IPv4-based connectivity model to a predominantly 
  IPv6-based connectivity model.

Requirements Language

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
  document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
  RFC 2119 defines the use of these key words to help make the intent 
  of standards track documents as clear as possible.  While not a 
  standards track document, the same key words are used in this 
  document only for sake of clarity in describing the proposed 
  transition plan.


J. Curran                Expires  November 1, 2008             [Page 2]

Internet-Draft          An Internet Transition Plan            May 2008

Table of Contents

  1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
  2.  A Phased Transition Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
  2.1   Preparation Stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
  2.2   Transition  Stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
  2.3   Post-Transition Stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
  3.  Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
  4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
  5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
  6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
  7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
    7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
    7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
  Appendix A.  Change History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
  Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements  . . . . . . . . . . 8

1. Introduction

  This memo provides one possible plan for transitioning the Internet 
  from a predominantly IPv4-based connectivity model to a predominantly 
  IPv6-based connectivity model. 

  Other transition plans are possible and this purely informational
  document does not create an obligation on any party to undertake any 
  of the actions specified herein, and the use of requirements language
  per RFC 2119 is only for the purpose of clearly describing the 
  proposed transition plan in unambiguous terms.

  The motivation for an Internet-wide transition plan is to facilitate
  coordination of expectations among innumerable, highly decentralized
  entities during a period of significant change, thus reducing risk to 
  the defining Internet property of universal connectivity.

  The purpose of specifying this particular transition plan is to allow 
  for overall assessment of the challenges of accomplishing the desired 
  transition and to continue the discussion of Internet-wide transition 
  plans in general.  

2. A Phased Transition Model 

  It is not reasonable to specify the changes that each and every system
  connected to the Internet must undergo in order to achieve the desired
  transition, as the number of connected systems precludes creating one 
  plan that contains such a level of detail.  Further, while there are
  common scenarios that may be specified for transitioning individual
  networks (refer to [RFC3750] [RFC4057] and [CAMPUS]), the specific
  timeline and mechanisms utilized for a given network will be unique.
  Despite these challenges, it is necessary to coordinate expectations
  on an overall basis so that Internet-wide connectivity is maintained 
  throughout the transition. 


J. Curran                Expires  November 1, 2008             [Page 3]
 
Internet-Draft          An Internet Transition Plan            May 2008

  This document specifies a three phase transition plan that includes
  preparation, transition, and post-transition phases, and delineates
  the necessary activities within each phase based on the role that an
  organization plays in the provision and use of Internet services. 

  An important distinction made in this transition plan is identifying
  the explicit requirement for existing end-site organizations to add
  IPv6-based connectivity to their public-facing servers during a 
  transition phase.  An accelerated adoption of IPv6 for public-facing 
  servers enables new organizations in the post-transition phase to be 
  connected to the Internet only via IPv6 and still have access to a
  substantial representative base of publicly available servers. 

  For nearly every organization, the task of IPv6-enabling their public
  facing servers is far easier than undertaking an organization-wide
  adoption of IPv6. Still, the requirement for existing Internet
  connected organizations to add IPv6 connectivity (even to a small
  number of systems) will be a significant hurdle and require a level
  of effort which may not be achievable given the lack of compelling
  additional benefits to these organizations [RFC1669]. This transition
  plan presumes that "connectivity is its own reward" [RFC1958] and 
  that there still exists a sufficient level of cooperation among 
  Internet participants to make this evolution possible. 

  The three proposed phases are: Preparation Phase, Transition Phase, 
  and Post-Transition Phase.  The timeline for the phases has been set
  to allow entry to the Post-Transition Phase prior to the projected 
  IPv4 address pool exhaustion date [IPUSAGE].

2.1  Preparation Phase - Present to December 2009

  In the Preparation Phase, Service Providers pilot test their 
  IPv6 network services, and end-site organizations prepare to 
  provide Internet facing services via IPv6-based connectivity 
  while continuing to provide Internet-facing services via IPv4 
  connectivity.

  During the Preparation Phase, the following principles apply:

  2.1.1 Service Providers SHOULD offer pilot IPv6-based Internet 
       Service to their Internet customers.  IPv6-based Internet 
       Service MAY be provided via IPv6 transition mechanisms 
       (such as those described in [RFC4213] for example) or 
       via native IPv6 network service.
  2.1.2 Organizations SHOULD arrange for IPv6-based Internet 
       connectivity for any Internet-facing servers (e.g. web, 
       email, and domain name servers).  Internet-facing IPv6 
       servers in this phase SHOULD use separate service names 
       per [RFC4472] to avoid impact to production IPv4-based 
       services unless the organization supports production 
       IPv6 connectivity.
  2.1.3 Organizations MAY provide IPv6-based Internet connectivity 
       to internal user communities.


J. Curran                Expires  November 1, 2008             [Page 4]

Internet-Draft          An Internet Transition Plan            May 2008

2.2  Transition Phase - January 2010 to December 2011

  In the Transition Phase, Service Providers offer production 
  IPv6 and IPv4 services to their Internet customers. End-site
  organizations provide Internet-facing services in a production 
  manner via IPv6-based connectivity in addition to IPv4-based 
  connectivity.

  During the Transition Phase, the following principles apply:

  2.2.1 Service Providers MUST offer IPv6-based Internet Service to 
       their Internet customers. IPv6-based Internet Service SHOULD 
       be via native IPv6 network service but MAY be via IPv6 
       transition mechanisms if necessary.  
  2.2.2 Organizations MUST arrange for IPv6-based Internet 
       connectivity for any Internet-facing servers (e.g. web, 
       email, and domain name servers).  Internet-facing IPv6 
       servers SHOULD be treated as production by the organization, 
       and SHOULD be treated as production by other Internet 
       organizations.
  2.2.3 Organizations SHOULD provide IPv6-based Internet connectivity
       to their internal user communities, and provide IPv6 internal
       supporting servers (e.g. DNS, DHCP). IPv6-based Internet 
       connectivity MAY be via native IPv6 network service or MAY 
       be via IPv6 transition mechanisms.  

2.3 Post-Transition Phase - January 2012 to the Future

  In the Post-Transition Phase, End-site organizations provide all 
  Internet-facing services via IPv6-based connectivity, thus allowing 
  for new Internet customers connected solely by IPv6.

  During the Post-Transition Phase, the following principles apply:

  2.3.1 Service Providers MUST offer IPv6-based Internet Service to 
       their Internet customers. IPv6-based Internet Service SHOULD 
       be via native IPv6 network service.  
  2.3.2 Organizations MUST arrange for IPv6-based Internet connectivity 
       for any Internet-facing servers (e.g. web, email, and domain  
       name servers).  Internet-facing IPv6 servers MUST be treated
       as production by the organization, and SHOULD be treated as 
       production by other Internet organizations.
  2.3.3 Organizations SHOULD provide IPv6-based Internet connectivity to 
       internal user communities, and provide IPv6 internal supporting 
       infrastructure (e.g. routers, DNS, DHCP, etc).  IPv6-based 
       Internet connectivity SHOULD be via native IPv6 network service 
       or MAY be via IPv6 transition mechanisms.
  2.3.4 Service Providers MAY continue to offer IPv4-based Internet 
       connectivity to their Internet customers.  Organizations MAY 
       continue to use IPv4-based Internet connectivity.  


J. Curran                Expires  November 1, 2008             [Page 5]

Internet-Draft          An Internet Transition Plan            May 2008

3. Summary

  In order to facilitate full Internet-wide connectivity during the 
  transition from IPv4-based connectivity to IPv6-based connectivity, 
  a transition plan which provides clear guidance to organizations 
  regarding expectations is necessary.  As the specific expectations 
  change over time, and vary greatly by organization, a phased approach 
  is specified in this document, with the timeline for each phase set 
  with the intention of allowing enough time for the necessary planning 
  and deployment steps which each organization much undertake.  This 
  Internet Transition Plan provides for transition to predominantly 
  IPv6-connectivity by January 2012 which, with careful management, may 
  meet the overall requirements of allowing the Internet to scale as 
  specified in "The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol" 
  [RFC1752].
  
4. Security Considerations

  This memo describes the transition of the Internet from IPv4-based 
  connectivity to predominantly IPv6-based connectivity.  This change
  inherently has security implications due to the widespread deployment
  of a new version of the Internet Protocol but these are beyond the 
  scope of this document and are covered in [RFC4942].  This document 
  raises no new security issues itself.

5. IANA Considerations

  While no new name or identifier space is created by this document, 
  the policies for management of Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4)
  address space may not provide for IPv4 availability through the 
  Transition Phase as intended by this plan.  The IANA should work with 
  all parties to develop policies per [RFC2050] which allow continued
  general availability of IPv4 address resources sufficiently long for 
  any transition plan that receives widespread community support.

6. Acknowledgments

  This document would not have been possible without the abundant 
  suggestions made by members of the Internet community at large,
  but specific thanks go to Fred Baker, Jim Bound, Scott Bradner, 
  Bob Braden, Randy Bush, David Divins, Geoff Huston, Chris Morrow, 
  Jordi Palet Ken Shores, James Woodyatt, and the members of the 
  IETF V6 Operations Working Group for their review and insightful
  suggestions for improvement. 


J. Curran                Expires  November 1, 2008             [Page 6]

Internet-Draft          An Internet Transition Plan            May 2008

7. References

7.1. Normative References

  [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

  [RFC4213]  Nordmark, E. and R. Gilligan, "Basic Transition
             Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 4213,
             October 2005.

  [RFC4472]  Durand, A., Ihren, J., and P. Savola, "Operational
             Considerations and Issues with IPv6 DNS", RFC 4472,
             April 2006.

  [RFC1752]  Bradner, S., Mankin, A.," The Recommendation for the 
             IP Next Generation Protocol", RFC 1752, Feburary 1995.
 
7.2. Informative References

  [RFC1958]  Carpenter, B., "Architectural Principles of the Internet", 
             RFC 1958, June 1996.

  [RFC1669]  Curran, J., "Market Viability as a IPng Criteria",
             RFC 1669, August 1994.

  [IPUSAGE]  IPv4 Address Report,February 2008, by Geoff Huston.  
             <http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/index.html>

  [RFC4057]  Bound, J., Ed., "IPv6 Enterprise Network Scenarios", 
             RFC 4057, June 2005.

  [RFC3750]  Huitema, C., Austein, R., Satapati, S., and R. van der Pol,
             "Unmanaged Networks IPv6 Transition Scenarios", RFC 3750, 
             April 2004.

  [CAMPUS]   Chown, T., "IPv6 Campus Transition Scenario Description and
             Analysis", (Work in Progress), March 2007.

  [RFC2050]  Hubbard, K., Kosters, M., Conrad, D., Karrenberg, D., and
             J. Postel, "Internet Registry IP Allocation Guidelines",
             BCP 12, RFC 2050, November 1996.

  [RFC4942]  Davies, E., "IPv6 Transition/Coexistence Security
             Considerations", September 2007.


J. Curran                Expires  November 1, 2008              [Page 7]

Internet-Draft          An Internet Transition Plan        February 2008

Appendix A.  Change History

 Changes from -02 version to -03 version:

 o  Revise Introduction to provide additional motivation language.

 o  Revise Introduction and requirements language preface to better
    clarify use of RFC 2119 style terminology.

 o  Clarify need for IPv6-capable infrastructure rather than simply
    servers in final phase.

 o  Correct misc typos and capitlization errors.

 o  Updated Acknowledgements section appropriately.

 Changes from -01 version to -02 version:

 o  Clarification of pilot nature of IPv6 services prior to 
    start of Transition Phase.
 
 o  Strengthen use of native IPv6 in Post-Transition Phase.

 Changes from -00 version to -01 version:

 o  Expanded discussion of phased transition model.

 o  Extended Preparation phase by one year to reflect overwhelming 
    community concern about the state of IPv6 readiness.

 o  Clarified use of IPv6 services in Preparation phase to advise
    caution with respect to DNS interactions per RFC 4472.

 o  Removed last sentence of Post-Transition phase regarding removal 
    of IPv4-based connectivity. Removal of IPv4 is considered out of 
    the scope of this document.

 o  Updated Introduction to clarify use of RFC 2119 terminology 
    despite inherently non-standards nature of this document.

 o  Corrected misc typographic errors.

 o  Updated acknowledgments section.

Author's Address

  John Curran
  99 Otis Street
  Cambridge, MA USA 20190

  Email: jcurran@istaff.org


J. Curran                Expires  November 1, 2008              [Page 8]

Internet-Draft          An Internet Transition Plan        February 2008

Full Copyright Statement

  Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

  This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
  contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
  retain all their rights.

  This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
  OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
  THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
  OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
  THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
  WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

  The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
  Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
  pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
  this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
  might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
  made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
  on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
  found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

  Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
  assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
  attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
  such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
  specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
  http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

  The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
  copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
  rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
  this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
  ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgment

  Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
  Administrative Support Activity (IASA).