Heinz-Werner Schuelting - IPV6 Piloting IPv6 Public Authorities workshop IPV6 Conference - Tuesday Dec 14th 2010 Ghent, Belgium

1. IPV6 Piloting Dr. Heinz-Werner Schuelting Deutschland-Online Infrastruktur (DOI) 14. Dezember 2010 Ghent

3. Nation wide secure MPLS-Network

4. Secure eMail

5. Public Key Infrastructure

6. Basic Services: DNS, DNSsec, TSIG,

7. Status IPv6 Readiness

8. Transport: IPv4/IPv6 Dual Stack (10/2009)

9. Network protection devices (6/2010, now in test)

10. Encryption devices (9/2010, now in test)

14. Services (eMail, DNS, network protection, encryption devices)

15. PKI

16. Crypto Management

17. IPv6 Tunnels

19. access to central registers over several different networks

20. multiple NATting > missing or incorrect DNS resolutions

21. "hard-wired" IP addresses

22. lack of transparency > separate authorization process

23. Europe wide sTESTA based data exchange

24. Solution / Show case

25. Use of unique global IPv6 addresses at involved parties

27. Transport Authority / Pension Authority

28. Public Service Centers

29. Municipalities

30. Transition Plan

31. IPv6 and IPv4 have to run in parallel

33. Germany must reduce gas emissions by up to 90% in the long term

34. This can be done by monitoring and controlling large numbers of devices

35. Solution / Show case

36. Ipv6 enabling of metering applications

37. Show case: Complex energy user like a school, a hospital

38. Possible Stakeholders

39. Thermal Engineering GmbH Quedlinburg (SME)

40. University Magdeburg (F&E)

42. No experience with IPv6 in administrations of small municipalities

43. Large number of specific applications with users in different IPv4 networks

44. Solution / Showcase

45. Step 1: IPv6 enabling of centrally hosted applications with dual stack access

46. Step 2: IPv6 enabling of a small administration unit

48. KDVZ Citkomm (public service provider)

49. Small municipality

50. Software development Company (SME)

51. Transition Plan

52. IPv6 and IPv4 have to run in parallel

54. guidelines for use of optional fields defined in some RFCs

55. a matrix matching requirements and policies to certain IPv6 functions

56. next step could be IPv6 software requirements

57. Proposal:

58. getting support from EU COM to spread this in Europe

59. to be integrated into the pilot (mapped against results from the experiments)

61. Examples: mobility, security, use of vast numbers of addresses

63. Requirements to products (> profile) and configurations should be derived

64. Public administrations and SEMs throughout the EU should benefit from the results

66. Costs and benefits have to be analyzed

67. Cost of the migration should become transparent

68. Costs must be monitored

69. Thank you for your attention!HeinzWerner.Schuelting@bmi.bund.de