Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Comittee of the Regions - Advancing the Internet : action plan for the deployment of Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) in Europe
Date: 2008-05-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Internet, information technology, new technology, radio telecommunications, research and development, transmission network

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 27.5.2008 
COM(2008) 313 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

ADVANCING THE INTERNET 
Action Plan for the deployment of Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) in Europe 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

ADVANCING THE INTERNET 
Action Plan for the deployment of Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) in Europe 

1. 

OBJECTIVE 

It is the objective of this Action Plan to support the widespread introduction of the 
next version of the Internet Protocol (IPv6) because 

•  Timely implementation of IPv6 is required as the pool of IP addresses provided by 

the current protocol version 4 is being depleted 

•  IPv6  with  its  huge  address  space  provides  a  platform for  innovation  in  IP  based 

services and applications 

2. 

RATIONALE FOR ACTION 

2.1. 

Preparing for the growth in Internet usage and for future innovation 

One  common  element  of  the  Internet  architecture  is  the  “Internet  Protocol”  (IP) 
which in essence gives any device or good connecting to the Internet a number, an 
address,  so  that  it  can  communicate  with  other  devices  and/or  goods.  This  address 
should generally be unique, to ensure global connectivity. The current version, IPv4, 
already provides for more than 4 billion such addresses.1 Even this, however, will not 
be enough to keep pace with the continuing growth of the Internet. Being aware of 
this  long-term  problem  the  Internet  community  developed  an  upgraded  protocol, 
IPv6, which has been gradually deployed since the late 90s.2 

In a previous Communication on IPv63 the European Commission made the case for 
the  early  adoption  of  this  protocol  in  Europe.  This  Communication  has  been 
successful  in  establishing  IPv6  Task  Forces4,  enabling  IPv6  on  research  networks, 
supporting standards, and setting-up training actions. Following the Communication 
more than 30 European R&D projects related to IPv6 were financed. Europe has now 
a large pool of experts with experience in IPv6 deployment. Yet despite the progress 
made, adoption of the new protocol has remained slow while the issue of future IP 
address scarcity is becoming more urgent. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

IPv4  is  specified  in  RFC  791,  1981.  RFC  stands  for  “Request  for  Comments”  See  the  “Internet 
Engineering Task Force” (IETF); http://www.ietf.org 
RFC 2460, 1998. http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/OLD/ipv6-charter.html and 
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/6man-charter.html 
COM(2002) 96 “Next Generation Internet – priorities for action in migrating to the new Internet 
protocol IPv6”. ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/ict/docs/ipv6-communication_en.pdf 
such as http://www.ipv6tf.org 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.2.  Maintaining Europe's competitiveness 

It  is  now  time  to  reinforce  the  actions  taken.  Otherwise  there  is  a  risk  that  many 
actors will not be prepared in time to keep pace with an accelerating deployment of 
IPv6.  Taking  no  action  could  also  lead  to  a  further  delay  of  IPv6  adoption  with 
disadvantages for all users and a weaker competitive position of Europe’s industry.  

This  Communication  analyses  the  present-day  situation  and  sets  out  a  number  of 
actions to achieve widespread IPv6 implementation in Europe by 2010.  

2.3. 

Contributing to the Lisbon Strategy 

This  Action  Plan  is  part  of  the  Lisbon  Strategy  as  implemented  in  the  i2010 
initiative5.  It  will  contribute  to  the  assessment  of  the  performance  of  the  EU  in  the 
Internet economy and its readiness to face future challenges foreseen for the Spring 
Council in 2009. 

3. 

THE CURRENT SITUATION 

3.1. 

Increasing  scarcity  of  IPv4  addresses:  a  difficulty  for  users,  an  obstacle  to 
innovation 

Initially all Internet addresses are effectively held by the “Internet Assigned Numbers 
Authority”  (IANA)6  and  then  large  blocks  of  addresses  are  allocated  to  the  five 
Regional Internet Registries (RIRs)7 which in turn allocate them in smaller blocks to 
those  who  need  them,  including  Internet  Service  Providers  (ISPs).  The  allocation, 
from IANA to RIR to ISP, is carried out on the basis of demonstrated need: there is 
no pre-allocation. 

The address space of IPv4 has been used up to a considerable extent. At the end of 
January 2008 about 16% was left in the IANA pool, i.e. approximately 700 million 
IPv4  addresses.  There  are  widely  quoted  and  regularly  updated  estimates  which 
forecast the exhaustion of the unallocated IANA pool somewhere between 2010 and 
2011.8 New end-users will still be able to get addresses from their ISP for some time 
after these dates but with increasing difficulty. 

Even  when  IPv4  addresses  can  no  longer  be  allocated  by  IANA  or  the  RIRs  the 
Internet will not stop working: the addresses already assigned can and most probably 
will be used for a significant time to come. Yet the growth and also the capacity for 
innovation in IP-based networks would be hindered without an appropriate solution. 
How to deal with this transition is currently the subject of discussion in the Internet 

5 
6 

7 

8 

COM(2005) 229 final “i2010 – A European Information Society for growth and employment” 
IANA is a function currently fulfilled by ICANN: Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and 
Numbers; http://www.icann.org/general/iana-contract-17mar03.htm 
AfriNIC (for Africa), APNIC (for the Asia/Pacific region), ARIN (North America and the Caribbean), 
LACNIC (Latin America) and RIPE NCC (Europe, the Middle East and parts of central Asia). 
http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/index.html 
http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/ipv4-pool-combined-view.pdf 
For an earlier estimate which contains a description of the analytical background: 
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_8-3/ipv4.html 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
community  in  general,  and  within  and  amongst  the  RIR  communities  in  particular. 
All RIRs have recently issued public statements and have urged the adoption of IPv6. 

3.2. 

IPv4 is only a short term solution leading to more complexity 

Concerns about the future scarcity of IP addresses are not a recent phenomenon. In 
the  early  days  of  the  Internet,  before  the  establishment  of  the  RIRs  and  before  the 
take-off of the World-Wide Web, addresses were assigned rather generously. There 
was  a  danger  of  running  out  of  addresses  very  quickly.  Therefore  changes  in 
allocation policy and in technology were introduced which allowed allocation to be 
more aligned to actual need. 

One  key  IPv4  technology  has  been  “Network  Address  Translation”  (NAT)9.  NATs 
connect  a  private  (home  or  corporate)  network which  uses  private  addresses  to  the 
public Internet where public IP addresses are required. Private addresses come from 
a particular part of the address space reserved for that purpose. The NAT device acts 
as  a  form  of  gateway  between  the  private  network  and  the  public  Internet  by 
translating the private addresses into public addresses. This method therefore reduces 
consumption  of  IPv4  addresses.  However  the  usage  of  NATs  has  two  main 
drawbacks, namely: 

•  It  hinders  direct  device-to-device  communication:  intermediate  systems  are 
required to allow devices or goods with private addresses to communicate across 
the public Internet. 

•  It  adds  a  layer  of  complexity  in  that  there  are  effectively  two  distinct  classes  of 
computers:  those  with  a  public  address  and  those  with  a  private  address.  This 
often increases costs for the design and maintenance of networks as well as for the 
development of applications. 

Some  other  measures  could  extend  the  availability  of  IPv4  addresses.  A  market  to 
trade IPv4 addresses might emerge which would offer incentives to organisations to 
sell  addresses  they  are  not  using.  However  IP  addresses  are  not  strictly  property. 
They  need  to  be  globally  acceptable  to  be  globally  routable  which  a  seller  cannot 
always  guarantee.  In  addition  they  could  become  a  highly  priced  resource.  So  far 
RIRs have been sceptical about the emergence of such a secondary market. 

Another option consists of trying to actively reclaim those already-allocated address 
blocks  that  are  under-utilised.  However,  there  is  no  apparent  mechanism  for 
enforcing  the  return  of  such  addresses.  The  possible  cost  of  it  has  to  be  balanced 
against the additional lifetime this would bring to the IANA pool. 10 

Though such measures may provide some interim respite, sooner or later the demand 
for IP addresses will be too large to be satisfied by the global IPv4 space. Efforts to 
stay with IPv4 too long risk increasing unnecessary complexity and fragmentation of 
the global Internet. A timely introduction of IPv6 is thus the better strategy. 

9 
10 

RFC 2663, 1994 
The release of a block of the size currently allocated by IANA to an RIR would only delay the end-date 
by about three weeks. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.3. 

IPv6: the best way forward 

IPv6 provides a straightforward and long term solution to the address space problem. 
The number of addresses defined by the IPv6 protocol is huge11. IPv6 allows every 
citizen, every network operator (including those moving to all IP-“Next Generation 
Networks”),  and  every  organisation  in  the  world  to  have  as  many  IP  addresses  as 
they need to connect every conceivable device or good directly to the global Internet. 

IPv6 was also designed to facilitate features which were felt to be missing in IPv4. 
Those features included quality of service, auto-configuration, security, and mobility. 
In  the  meantime,  however,  most  of  those  features  have  been  engineered  in  and 
around  the  original  v4  protocol.  It  is  the  large  address  space  that  makes  IPv6 
attractive for future applications as this will simplify their design compared to IPv4. 

The  benefits  of  IPv6  are,  therefore,  most  obviously  apparent  whenever  a  large 
number  of  devices  or  goods  need  to  be  easily  networked,  and  made  potentially 
visible and directly reachable over the Internet. A study funded by the Commission 
demonstrated this potential for a number of market sectors12 such as home networks, 
building  management,  mobile  communication,  defence  and  security  sector,  and  car 
industry. 

Prompt  and  efficient  adoption  of  IPv6  offers  Europe  potential  for  innovation  and 
leadership  in  advancing  the  Internet.  Other  regions,  in  particular  the  Asian  region, 
have  already  taken  a  strong  interest  in  IPv6.  For  instance  the  Japanese  consumer 
electronics  industry  increasingly  develops  IP  enabled  products  and  exclusively  for 
IPv6.  The  European  industry  should  therefore  be  ready  to  meet  future  demand  for 
IPv6-based services, applications, and devices and so secure a competitive advantage 
in world markets. 

To conclude, the key advantage of IPv6 over IPv4 is the huge, more easily managed 
address space. This solves the future problem of address availability now and for a 
long  time  to  come.  It  provides  a  basis  for  innovation  -  developing  and  deploying 
services  and  applications  which  may  be  too  complicated  or  too  costly  in  an  IPv4 
environment.  It  also  empowers  users,  allowing  them  to  have  their  own  network 
connected to the Internet. 

3.4.  What needs to be done? 

IPv6  is  not  directly  interoperable  with  IPv4.  IPv6  and  IPv4  devices  can  only 
communicate  with  each  other  using  application  specific  gateways.  They  do  not 
provide a general future-proof solution for transparent interoperability. 

However IPv6 can be enabled in parallel with IPv4 on the same device and on the 
same physical network. There will be a transition phase (expected to last for 10, 20 
or  even  more  years)  when  IPv4  and  IPv6  will  co-exist  on  the  same  machines 
(technically  often  referred  to  as  “dual  stack”)  and  be  transmitted  over  the  same 
network links. In addition other standards and technologies (technically referred to as 

11 
12 

The number is 3.4 times 1038. 
“Impact of IPv6 on Vertical Markets”, October 2007. 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ipv6/docs/short-report_en.pdf 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
"tunnelling") allow IPv6 packets to be transmitted using IPv4 addressing and routing 
mechanisms  and  ultimately  vice  versa.13  This  provides  the  technical  basis  for  the 
step-by-step introduction of IPv6. 

Because  of  the  universal  character  of  the  Internet  Protocol,  deployment  of  IPv6 
requires  the  attention  of  many  actors  worldwide.  The  relevant  stakeholders  in  this 
process are: 

•  Internet organisations (such as ICANN, RIRs, and IETF), which need to manage 
common IPv6 resources and services (allocate IPv6 addresses, operate domain 
name system (DNS) servers, etc), and continue to develop needed standards and 
specifications. 
As of  May 2008 the regional distribution of allocated IPv6 addresses is 
concentrated on Europe (RIPE 49%) with Asia and North America growing fast 
(APNIC: 24%, ARIN: 20%).14 Less than half of those addresses are currently 
being announced on the public Internet (i.e. visible in the default-free routing 
table). 
In the DNS the root and top-level name servers are increasingly becoming IPv6 
enabled. For instance, the gradual introduction of IPv6 connectivity to .eu name 
servers will begin in 2008. 

•  ISPs, which need over time to offer IPv6 connectivity and IPv6 based services to 

customers. 
There  is  evidence  that  less  than  half  of  the  ISPs  offer  some  kind  of  IPv6 
interconnectivity. Only a few ISPs have a standard offer for IPv6 customer access 
service (mainly for business users) and provide IPv6 addresses.15 The percentage 
of “Autonomous Systems” (typically ISPs and large end-users) that operate IPv6 
is estimated at 2.5%.16 
Accordingly, IPv6 traffic seems to be relatively low. Typically the IPv6/v4 ratio is 
less than 0.1% at Internet Exchange Points (of which about one in five supports 
IPv6).17  However,  this  omits  direct  ISP  to  ISP  traffic  and  IPv6  which  is 
“tunnelled”  and  so  appears  at  first  glance  to  be  still  IPv4.  Recent  measurements 
suggest that this kind of traffic IPv6 which is "tunnelled" is growing. 

•  Infrastructure vendors (such as network equipment, operating systems, network 
application software), which need to integrate IPv6 capability into their products. 
Many  equipment  and  software  vendors  have  upgraded  their  products  to  include 
IPv6.18 However there are still issues with certain functions and performance, and 

13 
14 
15 

16 
17 

18 

See RFCs 2893, 3056, 4214, 4380 
http://www.ripe.net/rs/ipv6/stats/index.html 
http://www.sixxs.net/faq/connectivity/?faq=ipv6transit 
http://www.sixxs.net/faq/connectivity/?faq=native 
http://bgp.he.net/ipv6-progress-report.cgi 
Traffic analysis at Amsterdam Internet Exchange reveals for the first 10 months 2007 average daily IP 
traffic of 177 Gbs; of which IPv6 traffic is 47 Mbs, i.e. 0.03%. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-
55/presentations/steenman-ipv6.pdf 
http://www.ipv6-to-standard.org/ 
There is also a programme of the IPv6 Forum which defines an optional IPv6 Ready Logo. 
http://www.ipv6ready.org/pdf/IPv6_Ready_Logo_White_Paper_Final.pdf 
http://www.ipv6ready.org/logo_db/approved_list_p2.php 
http://www.ipv6ready.org/logo_db/approved_list.php 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
vendor support equivalent to IPv4 
The  installed  equipment  base  of  consumers,  such  as  small  routers  and  home 
modems to access the Internet, still by and large do not yet support IPv6. 

•  Content and service providers (such as websites, instant messaging, e-mail, file-
sharing,  voice  over  IP),  which  need  to  be  reachable  by  enabling  IPv6  on  their 
servers. 
Worldwide there are only very few IPv6 websites. Almost none of the global top 
sites offer an IPv6 version. The de-facto non-existence of IPv6 reachable content 
and services on the Internet is a major obstacle in the take-up of the new protocol. 

•  Business  and consumer application vendors (such as business software, smart 
cards,  peer-to-peer  software,  transport  systems,  sensor  networks),  which  need  to 
ensure that their solutions are IPv6 compatible and increasingly need to develop 
products  and  offer 
features. 
Today there are few if any current applications that are exclusively built on IPv6. 
One  expectation  has  been  that  proliferation  of  IP  as  the  dominant  network 
protocol  would  drive  IPv6  into  new  areas  such  as  logistics  and  traffic 
management, mobile communication, and environment monitoring which has not 
taken place to any significant degree yet. 

take  advantage  of 

services 

IPv6 

that 

•  End-users (consumers, companies, academia, and public administrations), which 
need to purchase IPv6 capable products and services and to enable IPv6 on their 
own networks or home Internet access.  
Many home end-users, without being aware of it, operate IPv6 capable equipment 
and  yet  as  a  result  of  missing  applications  without  necessarily  making  use  of  it. 
Companies  and  public  administrations  are  cautious  to  make  changes  to  a 
functioning  network  without  a  clear  need.  Therefore  there  is  not  much  user 
deployment in private networks visible.  
Among the early adopters have been universities and research institutions. All EU 
national  research  and  education  networks  also  operate  on  IPv6.  The  European 
Géant  network19  is  IPv6  enabled,  whereby  approximately  1%  of  its  traffic  is 
native IPv6. 

How  much  and  which  efforts  are  required  to  adopt  IPv6  differ  amongst  actors  and 
depend  on  each  individual  case.  Therefore  it  is  practically  impossible  to  reliably 
estimate the aggregated costs to introduce IPv6 globally.20 Experience and learning 
from projects have shown that costs can be kept under control when deployment is 
gradual  and  planned  ahead.  It  is  recommended  introducing  IPv6  step-by-step, 
possibly in connection with hardware and software upgrades, organisational changes, 
and  training  measures  (at  first  glance  unrelated  to  IPv6).  This  requires  a  general 
awareness within the organisation in order not to miss those synergies. The costs will 
be significantly higher when IPv6 is introduced as a separate project and under time 
constraints. 

19 

20 

Géant is the pan-European communication network connecting 30 million research and education users 
across Europe and beyond. http://www.geant.net/ 
One study has made an attempt and estimated the transition costs for the US economy over a period of 
25 years at about 25 billion (2003 constant) US Dollar but it raises a number of methodological 
questions: http://www.nist.gov/director/prog-ofc/report05-2.pdf 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Introduction of IPv6 will take place alongside the existing IPv4 networks. Standards 
and  technology  allow  for  a  steady  incremental  adoption  of  IPv6  by  the  various 
stakeholders  which  will  help  to  keep  costs  under  control.  Users  can  use  IPv6 
applications  and  generate  IPv6  traffic  without  waiting  for  their  ISP  to  offer  IPv6 
connectivity.  ISPs  can  increase  their  IPv6  capability  and  offer  this  in  line  with 
perceived demand.  

3.5. 

The need for policy driving at European level 

Today,  for  most  stakeholders  the  advantages  of  adopting  IPv6  are  not  immediately 
visible. The benefits are long-term and also depend on other stakeholder’s decisions 
on when and how to implement IPv6. 

The more users work with IPv6 the more attractive it becomes for others to do the 
same. As the number of users increases more products and services will be offered at 
lower prices and better quality. The collective knowledge about IPv6 operation and 
management  will  also  increase.  The  result  will  be  an  eco-system  of  suppliers  and 
service  providers  re-enforcing  each  other,  boosting  confidence,  and  accelerating 
deployment. However similar market forces apply to IPv4 where this eco-system has 
been  in  place  for  many  years  resulting  in  a  large  legacy  of  appliances  and 
applications. 

A  collective  movement  to  implement  IPv6  is  difficult  to  trigger  as  stakeholders 
cannot easily take into account others' decisions. There is no single authority to steer 
IPv6 introduction or to establish a co-ordinated master plan. Thus roll-out of IPv6 is 
largely a decentralised and market driven process on a global scale. In this situation 
many stakeholders have taken a “wait and see” position on IPv6 or opted for a “safe 
and known” IPv4 solution. The cumulative result has been the described delay in the 
widespread adoption of IPv6. This is a situation where appropriate policy measures 
could  give  a  market  stimulus  by  encouraging  people  and  organisations  to  consider 
moving  ahead  positively.  Those  measures  will  be  more  effective  when  taken 
collectively at European level. 

4. 

ACTIONS: IPV6 TO BECOME WIDELY IMPLEMENTED IN EUROPE BY 2010 

Europe should set itself the objective to widely implement IPv6 by 2010. Concretely 
speaking at least 25% of users should be able to connect to the IPv6 Internet and to 
access  their  most  important  content  and  service  providers  without  noticing  a  major 
difference compared to IPv4. 

4.1. 

Actions to stimulate IPv6 accessibility to content, services, and applications 

•  The Commission will work with Member States to enable IPv6 on public sector 
websites and eGovernment services. To this end common deployment objectives 
should  be  agreed.  The  use  of  available  instruments  such  as  the  i2010 
eGovernment Action Plan and the IDABC Programme21 will be envisaged. For its 

21 

Interoperable  Delivery  of  European  eGovernment  Services  to  public  Administrations  Programme. 
http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/en/document/5101/3 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
part  the  Commission  will  make  the  "Europa"  and  "CORDIS"  websites  IPv6 
accessible by 2010. 

•  The Commission calls upon content and service providers to make their offer IPv6 
accessible  by  2010,  amongst  them  the  top  100  European  web  sites.  It  intends  to 
facilitate this co-operation through “Thematic Networks” involving vendors, ISPs, 
and content and service providers, as part of the Competitiveness and Innovation 
Programme (CIP). 

•  The  Commission  calls  upon  industrial  stakeholders  that  are  now  embracing  IP 
technology  in  their  core  business  to  consider  IPv6  as  their  primary  platform  for 
developing  applications  or  appliances  (such  as  sensors,  cameras  etc).  In  this 
context  the  Commission  envisages  supporting  the  testing  and  validation  of  IPv6 
related applications in trials, funded as part of the CIP beginning in 2009. 

•  The  Commission  has  provided  financial  aid  through  standardisation  support 
actions to improve interoperability of networks. In this context, the Commission is 
willing  to  support  standardisation  actions  on  protocols  running  over  IPv6 
networks  (e.g.  SIP  –  Session  Initiation  Protocol).  Furthermore,  the  Commission 
calls  on  the  European  Standardisation  Organisations  to  develop  best  practices 
manuals on the deployment of internet IPv6-enabled services. 

•  The  Commission  will  encourage  research  projects  funded  by  Framework 
Programme  7and  facing  a  choice  of  computer  network  protocol,  to  utilise  IPv6 
whenever possible. 

4.2. 

Actions to generate demand for IPv6 connectivity and products through public 
procurement 

In a public consultation22 the use of public procurement was identified as an efficient 
way  to  speed  up  the  transition  to  IPv6.  For  example  in  2005,  the  US  Government 
directed all federal government agencies to migrate their core backbone networks to 
IPv6 by mid 200823. 

•  The Commission encourages Member States to prepare for IPv6 within their own 
networks and when renewing their external network services contracts ensure that 
these  also  include  provisions  for  IPv6  connectivity,  and  that  all  equipment 
procured is IPv6 capable. The Commission will bring together IT managers from 
Member States to exchange experience and to monitor progress. 

•  The Commission will equally specify IPv6 capabilities as a core requirement for 
the continuous renewal cycle of its own network equipment and services. It will 
carry out timely and appropriate internal trials and projects to prepare for IPv6. 

22 

23 

Public  Consultation  held  in  February  2006  ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/ict/docs/ipv6-public-
consultation-report_en.pdf 
OMB Memorandum 05-22, “Transition Planning for Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6),” 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-22.pdf, 2 August 2005 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
4.3. 

Actions to ensure timely preparation for IPv6 deployment  

The  transition  to  IPv6  will  take  some  time  and  will  require  operating  a  dual 
IPv4/IPv6 network, bringing up specific issues to be resolved. All actors will need to 
prepare  themselves  for  developing  and  deploying  IPv6  compliant  solutions;  the 
sooner the better. Organisations should not wait for their ISPs to provide native IPv6 
connectivity but should begin to enable the protocol on their own network. 

•  The  Commission  will  undertake  targeted  awareness  campaigns  to  various  user 
groups. Such actions are best conducted in public-private partnerships and in co-
operation with Member States. 

•  The Commission intends to support "specific support actions" (within Framework 

Programme 7) to disseminate practical deployment knowledge. 

•  The  Commission  encourages  ISPs  to  provide  full  IPv6  connectivity  to  their 
customers by 2010 and where applicable to upgrade the equipment they supply to 
consumers. 

•  The  Commission  invites  Member  States  to  support  the  inclusion  of  IPv6 
technology  knowledge  in  relevant  retraining  curricula  and  in  computer  and 
network engineering courses of universities etc. The Commission will launch an 
accompanying study and intends to organize a conference in 2009.  

4.4. 

Actions to tackle security and privacy issues  

Security issues in IPv6 are not better or worse than in IPv4, they are just different. In 
a  dual  IPv4/v6  environment  security  issues  could  become  complex  to  deal  with  in 
terms of implementation and configuration.24 

The Court of Justice has recognised that an IP address may be considered as personal 
data falling within the scope of the Data Protection directives25. Some concerns have 
been  expressed  about  IPv6  and  privacy,  in  particular  by  the  Article  29  Data 
Protection Working Party.26 One particular concern has been taken up in a standard. 
However  the  situation  needs  to  be  monitored  when  it  comes  to  configuration  and 
actual implementation. 

•  The  Commission  will  disseminate  best  practices  and  will  work  with  vendors  to 
provide  full  IPv6  functionality.  Where  necessary  the  Commission  will  call  upon 
the expertise of the European Network and Information Security Agency, ENISA, 
to support these efforts. 

24 
25 

26 

http://www.ipv6forum.com/dl/white/NAv6TF_Security_Report.pdf 
Case  C-275/06,  Promusicae  vs.  Telefonica,  judgment  of  29  January  2008,  paragraph  45.  Directives 
95/46/EC and 2002/58/EC. 
Opinion 2/2002 on the use of unique identifiers in telecommunication terminal equipments: the example 
of IPV6. http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/fsj/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2002/wp58_en.pdf. The problem 
was that for ease of configuration parts of an IPv6 address came from the interface identifier (the 
Ethernet MAC address). The solution was to allow machines to generate part of the address at random, 
see RFC 4941. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  The Commission will monitor the privacy and security implications of widespread 
IPv6 deployment, in particular through consultation with stakeholders such as data 
protection authorities or law enforcement. 

5. 

EXECUTION OF THE ACTION PLAN 

This Action Plan is scheduled to be executed over the next 3 years. The Commission 
will monitor the adoption  of IPv6; in particular it will carry out an implementation 
test to measure the degree of IPv6 availability and functionality for users in Europe. 

The Commission will continue to follow the activities of the Internet organisations, 
such  as  the  ongoing  debate  about  IPv4  distribution  policies  within  the  registries 
communities, and where necessary make contributions. 

The  Commission  will  regularly  report  progress  to  the  i2010  High  Level  Group.  It 
will  also  make  available  progress  reports  on  its  Website  and  by  other  appropriate 
means. 

In 2010 the Commission will conduct a review to decide if any follow-up actions are 
required.  

EN 

11 

   EN