Dr. Latif Ladid
holds the following positions: President, IPv6 FORUM
Chair, European IPv6 Task Force
www.ipv6.eu , Emeritus
Trustee, Internet Society
www.isoc.org , Board
Member IPv6 Ready & Enabled Logos Program and Board
Member World Summit Award
Ladid is a Senior Researcher at the University of Luxembourg
“Security & Trust” (SnT)
on multiple European Commission Next Generation Technologies
is also a Member of 3GPP PCG (www.3gpp.org), 3GPP2 PCG
(www.3gpp2.org), Vice Chair, IEEE ComSoc TCIIN , Member
of UN Strategy Council, member of IEC Executive Committee
and member of the Future Internet Forum EU Member States,
Prime Time to The Big
Shift to the IPv6 Internet
transition to IPv6 did not happen over the past decade
with the objectives of achieving a smooth and low-cost
Internet sustainability through incremental refresh
of technology. The reasons can be traced back to the
mixed messages sent to industry: hard-to-justify ROI;
address depletion confusion and the lack of market demand.
IPv6 is a worldwide and large-scale plumbing exercise.
Only engineers should fix it and offer IPv6 as an extended
service to sustain the Internet growth and continuity.
Now, it's abundantly clear that the address space has
evaporated in front of our eyes, putting an end to the
growth of the Internet. The address space has melt down
in February 2011 at IANA level and by end of 2012 at
Registry level in Asia and Europe/Middle East. The transition
is not well prepared and there will be winners and losers.
Pioneers will benefit from the head start. Followers
cannot predict what will happen to them. This is the
first time the Internet will get a face lift and probably
the last one for decades to come. The lessons learnt
from this are that it takes a lot of patience and passion
to bring this transition to fruition.
The Internet community
has mistakenly focused on the IPv4 address depletion
as the problem to be resolved by IPv6 for the ISPs
for connectivity to web sites and forgotten to address
the many issues that will affect the adoption of
IPv6 by the enterprise and the critical infrastructure
that are brought in by a transition from an established
protocol (IPv4) to a new protocol (IPv6)
The transition in
the enterprise should be focused on a “secure transition”
and a “secure integration” of IPv6. The only viable
secure transition is the “secure Dual-stack” transition.
All other transition mechanisms are not secure and
will even drill in new vulnerabilities in the critical
infrastructure networks to name the important one.
The transition to
IPv6 has to be done in the first phase to sustain
not only technology parity between IPv4 features
but also business models parity.
The current deployment
of IPv6 is done with IPv4 network management tools.
This is a fallacy as IPv6 is a new protocol with
totally different functions and features. It should
be deployed with new management tools designed to
cater for IPv6 features not just mimicking IPv4
and NAT. In the second phase, IPv6 should be deployed
with its built-in functionalities (multicast, mobility,
end to end...)
The security in IPv6
is again not deployed, similarly to IPv4. Security
is mandated in IPv6 but still no security house
or solutions start with secure functionality.
IPv6 Privacy Address
is deployed only by Microsoft. All other vendors
have not yet realised the randomizing features of
the MAC address.
The cost of deploying
IPv6 is from now on a costly fork-lift upgrade for
those that have not taken the early step of deployment.
The cost of not doing anything is even higher.
What is at stake is
the “modernisation of the networks” to cater and
be securely ready for all new emerging Internet
based solutions like Internet of Things, Smart Grids,
Cloud Computing, Smart homes and Buildings, Smart
Cities, Mobile networks such LTE and Safety networks
to replace aging TETRA, Mobile social networks beyond
Facebook and Twitter, Mobile Internet cars, Mobile
Military networks, Smart Agriculture and Food chains,
Smart manufacturing, Mobile Smart Banking, … a Smarter
Dr. Ahmed E. Kamal
E. Kamal is a professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
at Iowa State University in the USA. He received a B.Sc.
(distinction with honors) and an M.Sc. both from Cairo
University, Egypt, and an M.A.Sc. and a Ph.D. both from
the University of Toronto, Canada, all in Electrical
Engineering . He is Fellow of the IEEE and a senior
member of the Association of Computing Machinery. He
is also an IEEE Communications Society Distinguished
Lecturer for 2013 and 2014.
research interests include cognitive radio networks,
optical networks, wireless sensor networks, and performance
evaluation. He received the 1993 IEE Hartree Premium
for papers published in Computers and Control in IEE
Proceedings, and the best paper award of the IEEE Globecom
2008 Symposium on Ad Hoc and Sensors Networks Symposium.
was the chair or co-chair of the Technical Program Committees
of a number of IEEE sponsored conferences including
the Optical Networks and Systems Symposia of the IEEE
Globecom 2007, and the IEEE Globecom 2010, and is the
co-chair of the IEEE Globecom Cognitive Radio and Networks
Symposium in 2012. He is also the lead chair of the
IEEE Globecom Cognitive Radio and Networks Symposium
in 2014. He is on the editorial boards of the IEEE Communications
Surveys and Tutorials, the Computer Networks journal,
and the Optical Switching and Networking journal.
Multicasting in Cognitive
radio networks (CRNs) have emerged as a promising, yet
challenging, solution to enhance spectrum utilization,
thanks to the technology of Software Defined Radios.
A well-known property of CRNs is the potential heterogeneity
in channel availability among secondary users. Multicasting,
which is used by a growing number of applications, may
suffer from significant throughput degradation when
used in CRNs because of this property. This is because
a source may need to transmit the multicast data over
multiple channels to guarantee delivery to all neighboring
talk will introduce strategies to reduce the effect
of the channel heterogeneity property on the multicast
throughput in cognitive radio wireless mesh networks
(CR-WMNs), hence enhancing the multicasting throughput.
These strategies circumvent the effect of channel heterogeneity
by implementing cooperation between nodes. This cooperation
is composed of two main activities: first, allowing
multicast receivers to assist the source in delivering
the data, and second, allowing the transmission of network
coded packets so that multicast receivers belonging
to different multicast groups can decode and extract
their data concurrently. We present a framework for
implementing this cooperative strategy, within cells
in CR-WMNs, and also between cells. Optimal and heuristic
packet transmission scheduling approaches will be introduced
for implementing the proposed assistance strategy. Performance
results show that the proposed cooperative paradigm
achieves a considerable reduction in the total multicast
time, which in turn increases the system throughput.