IPv6 Network Deployment Monitoring and Analysis

1.1. Current IPv6 Deployment Status

In today's digital age, the deployment of IPv6 has become a core driving force for network development. With the continuous expansion of network scale and the emergence of new applications, the extensive address space, enhanced security, and improved network performance of IPv6 have made it a key element in network evolution. How to better deploy and promote IPv6 networks has become a widely concerned issue.¶

As of 2023, significant strides have been made in the global deployment of IPv6. According to the statistics from the 'Global IPv6 Development Report 2024', in 2023 the deployment of IPv6 networks significantly accelerated, breaking through the 30% mark in global coverage for the first time. Among leading countries, the IPv6 coverage rate has reached or approached 70%, and the percentage of IPv6 mobile traffic has surpassed that of IPv4.¶

[RFC9386] presents the state of IPv6 network deployment in 2022, and its Section 5 lists common challenges, such as transition mechanisms, network management and operation, performance, and customer experience. 'ETSI-GR-IPE-001' also discusses the existing gaps in IPv6-related use cases.¶

1.2. Current Approaches to Monitoring IPv6 Deployment

Several tools and platforms monitor IPv6 deployment, such as:¶

• Internet Society Pulse: Curating information about levels of IPv6 adoption in countries and networks around the world.¶

• Akamai IPv6 Adoption Visualization: Reviewing IPv6 adoption trends at a country or network level.¶

• APNIC IPv6 Measurement: Providing an interactive map that users can click on to see the IPv6 deployment rate in a particular country.¶

• Cloudflare IPv6 Adoption Trends: Offering insights into IPv6 adoption across the Internet.¶

• Cisco 6lab IPv6: Displaying IPv6 prefix data.¶

• Regional or National Monitoring Platforms: Examples include the NZ IPv6, the RIPE NCC IPv6 Statistics, and the USG IPv6 & DNSSEC External Service Deployment Status, among others.¶

While valuable for high-level trend analysis, these tools exhibit significant limitations for operational purposes.¶

2.1. Fragmented Monitoring Coverage

Monitoring points are predominantly concentrated in backbone networks [RFC7707], lacking fine-grained visibility into user terminals, access networks, and application endpoints.¶

2.2. Single-Dimensional Evaluation

Assessments primarily rely on basic metrics like connection availability [RFC9099] and address allocation rates, lacking a holistic view of service continuity, transmission quality, network element readiness, and active connection states.¶

2.3. Lack of Cross-Domain Correlation

Data silos exist between different network domains (e.g., fixed, mobile, core, application), preventing end-to-end path analysis and fault correlation [RFC9312].¶

2.4. Insufficient In-Depth Analysis

Incomplete IPv6 transformation in private applications and content delivery chains (e.g., secondary/tertiary links, multimedia content) remains difficult to detect, as deep monitoring capabilities for these scenarios are lacking.¶

2.5. Limited Dynamic Prediction

Current models struggle to quantify the impact of external factors (e.g., policy changes, user behavior, market dynamics) on IPv6 evolution, limiting proactive planning.¶

3.1. IPv6 Network End-to-End Monitoring and Analysis System Architecture

The system architecture is divided into three layers from top to bottom (shown in Figure 1): the Data Collection Layer, the Intelligent Analysis Layer, and the Visualization Layer.¶

+==================================================================+
|                         Visualization Layer                      |
+==================================================================+
        |                |                |                |
+==================================================================+
|                     Intelligent Analysis Layer                   |
+==================================================================+
        |                |                |                |
+==================================================================+
|                       Data Collection Layer                      |
+==================================================================+
        |                |                |                |
+----------------+  +----------------+  +----------------+  +----------------+
| Home Broadband |  |    Mobile      |  |   IP Bearer    |  |   Application  |
|    Network     |  |    Network     |  |    Network     |  |                |
+----------------+  +----------------+  +----------------+  +----------------+

3.2. Indicator System

Based on a standardized indicator system, conduct IPv6 support monitoring and analysis for each professional domain, breaking down monitoring metrics into specific services and network segments.¶

• Readiness Indicators¶

  • Network Element Readiness: IPv6 Readiness of Network Equipment, End-User Devices, and Security Devices.¶

  • Application Readiness: IPv6 Support Rate of Website Applications and Business Systems.¶

  • Infrastructure Readiness: IPv6 Readiness of Fixed Internet, Mobile Internet, Private Lines, and Data Center Network (DCN) Infrastructure.¶

  • Network Readiness:¶

    • IPv6 Network Coverage of Backbone Networks, Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs), Internet Data Centers (IDCs), and Private Lines.¶

    • End-to-End IPv6 Network Performance of Backbone Networks, Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs), Internet Data Centers (IDCs), Private Lines, and Access Networks.¶

  • Cloud Readiness: IPv6 Readiness of Content Delivery Networks (CDNs), Cloud Services, Cloud Platforms, and DNS Servers.¶

• Operational Metrics¶

  • IPv6 Traffic: IPv6 Traffic Share in Cross-Border, Inter-Domain, Intra-Domain, Fixed Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs), Mobile Core Networks, Internet Data Centers (IDCs), Private Lines, and Applications.¶

  • Active IPv6 Connections: Active IPv6 Connection Share in Fixed Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs), Mobile Core Networks, Internet Data Centers (IDCs), Private Lines, and Applications.¶

• Quality Metrics¶

  • DNS Resolution Performance¶

  • End-to-End Latency¶

  • Packet Loss Ratio¶

• Policy Compliance Indicators¶

4.1. IPv6 Monitoring and Analysis on the User Side

Monitor and analyze data from fixed and mobile network user sides, including: IPv6 support monitoring and IPv6 traffic quality analysis. Support end-to-end data analysis at the intelligent analysis layer.¶

4.2. IPv6 Support and Application Access Quality Monitoring for Application Systems

Through application monitoring points, monitor and analyze the IPv6 support of application systems, including: website and APP monitoring, IPv6 application access quality evaluation, and DNS resolution capability monitoring.¶

TBD.¶

5.1. User Network Quality Issue Localization

• Scenario: User A experiences lag during cloud gaming at home.¶

• Challenge: Isolating the cause requires correlating performance data across multiple segments (N1: terminal to ONT; N2: ONT to BRAS; N3: BRAS to application), but domains are independently managed.¶

+-----------------+        +--------------+        +----------------+        +--------------+
| Terminal device |--------|     ONT      |--------|      BRAS      |--------|     APP      |
+-----------------+        +--------------+        +----------------+        +--------------+
        |                          |                         |                         |
        |<--------- N1 ----------> |                         |                         |
        |                          |<--------- N2 ---------->|                         |
        |                          |                         |<--------- N3 ---------->|

• Solution: The system detected end-to-end quality degradation. Using segmented analysis, it pinpointed abnormal latency in the N3 segment. Correlation with CDN logs revealed a content source switch from a local IDC to a remote cross-province node.¶

• Conclusion: Quality degradation was caused by CDN remote scheduling and N3 inter-network link congestion.¶

• Action: Adjusting CDN scheduling strategy resolved the issue.¶

• Effectiveness: This approach reduced the average fault localization time for similar issues from hours to minutes.¶

5.2. Home terminals and routers Traffic Analysis

• Solution: The System detected below-average IPv6 traffic share in a demo community.¶

• Investigation: Correlation with terminal data showed a high proportion of bridge-mode optical network terminals (ONTs) and older routers supporting only IPv4/NAT.¶

• Root Cause: Legacy routers forced IPv6 traffic to fall back to IPv4.¶

• Action: Targeted replacement of bridge-mode ONTs with router-mode ONTs and upgrading old routers.¶

• Effectiveness: After implementation, the community's IPv6 traffic share increased from 15% to 45% within two weeks.¶

6.1. Phased Deployment Strategy

1. Phase 1: Prioritize monitoring of key nodes in the core and metro networks to quickly obtain basic IPv6 traffic visibility.¶

2. Phase 2: Extend to user-side terminal data collection and application-side active probing to establish end-to-end monitoring capabilities.¶

3. Phase 3: Enhance intelligent analysis models to achieve automated root cause localization and predictive analytics.¶

6.2. Organizational Collaboration Model

• Establish cross-departmental (fixed, mobile, data center) joint teams to ensure data sharing and process integration.¶

• Define data responsibility for each domain and establish data quality governance mechanisms.¶

6.3. Technical Selection Recommendations

• Prioritize network devices supporting standard interfaces (e.g., NETCONF/YANG, Telemetry) to reduce integration complexity.¶

• Adopt modular architecture design to facilitate future function expansion and multi-vendor device access.¶

9.1. Normative References

[RFC8200]

Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.

9.2. Informative References

[RFC7707]

Gont, F. and T. Chown, "Network Reconnaissance in IPv6 Networks", RFC 7707, DOI 10.17487/RFC7707, March 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7707>.

[RFC9099]

Vyncke, É., Chittimaneni, K., Kaeo, M., and E. Rey, "Operational Security Considerations for IPv6 Networks", RFC 9099, DOI 10.17487/RFC9099, August 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9099>.

[RFC9312]

Kühlewind, M. and B. Trammell, "Manageability of the QUIC Transport Protocol", RFC 9312, DOI 10.17487/RFC9312, September 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9312>.

[RFC9386]

Fioccola, G., Volpato, P., Palet Martinez, J., Mishra, G., and C. Xie, "IPv6 Deployment Status", RFC 9386, DOI 10.17487/RFC9386, April 2023, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9386>.