VoIP Toolkit

IPv6 isn't just about more addresses

Bob Frankston Special to ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 11 Aug 2003 12:20 BST

It comes as no surprise that the United States is shrugging off the world's IP address shortage. And well it should. If the address shortage were a correct characterisation of the problem, I'd lament the insularity of the US, which also opted out of the metric system.

The real problem is that an address gives systems (desktops, servers, handhelds, phones, etc.) the public presence necessary to be a full participant on the Internet -- it allows one to be reached or "addressed" by others. Internet service providers (ISPs) provide only a small number (often one) of addresses and sometimes no public addresses. Just browsing the Internet isn't the same as participating. Addresses are also necessary for devices such as printers, phones (VoIP), PDAs, etc.

Before home networking, the dial-up user was usually a person with a dumb terminal connecting to a large system. By late 1990s, we were interconnecting our home networks to the Internet, but still retained this simplistic model where, upon connection, you were issued only one IP address. Even though the basic model had changed, the idea that the IP address was a precious limited resource was accepted and tolerated because we could work around the problem as long as we were browsing. In fact, we still have ISPs who do not allow their customers to participate by creating their own services even if it is a Webcam or a device as simple as the family Web server.

Even though the basic design principle of the Internet gives everyone the ability to participate, people accept their second-class role because we are used to having a distinction between service providers (such as the post office, the phone company, the cable company) and consumers. One current example is AOL's attempt to solve its spam problem by only allowing one to connect from "authorised" providers as if we were in the 1900s and the governments owned or controlled all telecommunications (including the post office).

What was revolutionary about the Internet is that it changed this fundamental relationship and moved the definition of services to the edge of the network. The Internet Protocol (IP) doesn't even assume reliable delivery and eschews expensive constructs, such as circuits. One could run IP atop of any network, including unreliable "junk" networks. The reason for a transition from the earlier protocols of the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) to the Internet was simply to avoid the expense of the extra services. The transition was feasible because, in those days, ARPA could just shut off the old network.