skip to main content
10.1145/2987443.2987461acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Reasons Dynamic Addresses Change

Published:14 November 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Applications often use IP addresses as end host identifiers based on the assumption that IP addresses do not change frequently, even when dynamically assigned. The validity of this assumption depends upon the duration of time that an IP address continues to be assigned to the same end host, and this duration in turn, depends upon the various causes that can induce the currently assigned IP address to change. In this work, we identify different causes that can lead to an address change and analyze their effect in ISPs around the world using data gathered from 3,038 RIPE Atlas probes hosted across 929 ASes and 156 countries across all 12 months of 2015. Our observations reveal information about ISP practices, outages, and dynamic address prefixes. For example, we found 20 ISPs around the world that periodically reassign addresses after a fixed period, typically a multiple of 24 hours. We also found that address changes are correlated with network and power outages occurring at customer premises equipment (CPE) devices. Furthermore, almost half of the address changes we observed on the same CPE were to an entirely different BGP-routed prefix.

References

  1. Dennis Andriesse, Christian Rossow, and Herbert Bos. Reliable recon in adversarial peer-to-peer botnets. In IMC, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Oded Argon, Anat Bremler-Barr, Osnat Mokryn, Dvir Schirman, Yuval Shavitt, and Udi Weinsberg. On the dynamics of IP address allocation and availability of end-hosts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1011.2324, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. About RIPE Atlas: FAQ: How does the probe connect to the Internet? https://atlas.ripe.net/about/faq/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. R. Braden, Editor. Requirements for internet hosts -- communication layers. IETF RFC-1122, October 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Vladimir Brik, Jesse Stroik, and Suman Banerjee. Debugging DHCP performance. In IMC, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. CAIDA. Routeviews prefix to as mappings dataset (pfx2as) for IPv4 and IPv6. https://www.caida.org/data/routing/routeviews-prefix2as.xml.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Martin Casado and Michael J. Freedman. Peering through the shroud: The effect of edge opacity on IP-based client identification. In NSDI, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. The CBL. http://www.abuseat.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Jacky C. Chu, Kevin S. Labonte, and Brian N. Levine. Availability and locality measurements of peer-to-peer file systems. In ITCom: Scalability and Traffic Control in IP Networks, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Ralph Droms. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. IETF RFC-2131, March 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Fail2ban. http://www.fail2ban.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Zwangstrennung (Forced IP address change). https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwangstrennung.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. John Heidemann, Yuri Pradkin, Ramesh Govindan, Christos Papadopoulos, Genevieve Bartlett, and Joseph Bannister. Census and Survey of the Visible Internet. In IMC, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Philip Homburg. NTP measurements with RIPE Atlas. https://labs.ripe.net/Members/philip_homburg/ntp-measurements-with-ripe-atlas, February 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jaeyeon Jung and Emil Sit. An empirical study of spam traffic and the use of DNS black lists. In IMC, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Andrew J. Kaizer and Minaxi Gupta. Open resolvers: Understanding the origins of anomalous open DNS resolvers. In PAM, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Manas Khadilkar, Nick Feamster, Matt Sanders, and Russ Clark. Usage-based DHCP lease time optimization. In IMC, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Marc Kührer, Thomas Hupperich, Jonas Bushart, Christian Rossow, and Thorsten Holz. Going wild: Large-scale classification of open DNS resolvers. In IMC, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Gregor Maier, Anja Feldmann, Vern Paxson, and Mark Allman. On dominant characteristics of residential broadband internet traffic. In IMC, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Glenn McGregor. The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP). IETF RFC-1332, May 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Giovane CM Moura, Carlos Ganán, Qasim Lone, Payam Poursaied, Hadi Asghari, and Michel van Eeten. How dynamic is the isps address space? towards internet-wide dhcp churn estimation. IFIP, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Thomas Narten, Richard Draves, and Suresh Krishnan. Privacy extensions for stateless address autoconfiguration in ipv6. IETF RFC-4941, September 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ioannis Papapanagiotou, Erich M. Nahum, and Vasileios Pappas. Configuring DHCP leases in the smartphone era. In IMC, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. David Plonka and Arthur Berger. Temporal and spatial classification of active IPv6 addresses. In IMC, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Moheeb Abu Rajab, Jay Zarfoss, Fabian Monrose, and Andreas Terzis. My botnet is bigger than yours (maybe, better than yours): why size estimates remain challenging. In Proceedings of the 1st USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Understanding Botnets, Cambridge, USA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Philipp Richter, Georgios Smaragdakis, David Plonka, and Arthur Berger. Beyond Counting: New Perspectives on the Active IPv4 Address Space. In IMC, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. RIPE NCC. Atlas. http://atlas.ripe.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. RIPE NCC. Become a ripe atlas probe host. https://atlas.ripe.net/get-involved/become-a-host/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. RIPE NCC. Built-in measurements. https://atlas.ripe.net/docs/built-in/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. RIPE NCC. RIPE atlas connection logs url format. https://atlas.ripe.net/probes/prb_id/connection-history/yyyy/mm/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. RIPE NCC. RIPE atlas probe archive. https://atlas.ripe.net/api/v1/probe-archive/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. RIPE NCC. Technical updates. https://atlas.ripe.net/resources/announcements/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. RIPE NCC Staff. RIPE Atlas: A global internet measurement network. Internet Protocol Journal, 18(3), September 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Stefan Saroiu, P. Krishna Gummadi, and Steven D Gribble. Measurement study of peer-to-peer file sharing systems. In MMCN, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Aaron Schulman and Neil Spring. Pingin' in the rain. In IMC, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Vyas Sekar, Yinglian Xie, Michael K. Reiter, and Hui Zhang. A multi-resolution approach for worm detection and containment. In DSN, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Subhabrata Sen and Jia Wang. Analyzing peer-to-peer traffic across large networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (ToN), 12(2):219--232, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Yuval Shavitt and Eran Shir. Dimes: Let the internet measure itself. ACM CCR, 35(5):71--74, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. William Simpson. The Point-to-Point Protocol. IETF RFC-1661, July 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Sorbs (spam and open-relay blocking system). www.sorbs.net/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. The spamhaus project. http://www.spamhaus.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Brett Stone-Gross, Marco Cova, Lorenzo Cavallaro, Bob Gilbert, Martin Szydlowski, Richard Kemmerer, Christopher Kruegel, and Giovanni Vigna. Your botnet is my botnet: analysis of a botnet takeover. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Tech stuff - static and dynamic IP addresses. http://www.zytrax.com/isp/faqs/static.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Why does my external IP change every day? http://www.makeuseof.com/answers/why-does-my-external-ip-change-every-day/, June 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Why does your IP address change now and then? http://whatismyipaddress.com/keeps-changing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Why do ISPs change your IP address? http://www.howtogeek.com/163747/why-do-isps-change-your-ip-address/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Yinglian Xie, Vyas Sekar, David Maltz, Michael K. Reiter, Hui Zhang, et al. Worm origin identification using random moonwalks. In Proc. of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Yinglian Xie, Fang Yu, Kannan Achan, Eliot Gillum, Moises Goldszmidt, and Ted Wobber. How dynamic are IP addresses? In ACM SIGCOMM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Reasons Dynamic Addresses Change

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IMC '16: Proceedings of the 2016 Internet Measurement Conference
        November 2016
        570 pages
        ISBN:9781450345262
        DOI:10.1145/2987443

        Copyright © 2016 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 14 November 2016

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        IMC '16 Paper Acceptance Rate48of184submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate277of1,083submissions,26%

        Upcoming Conference

        IMC '24
        ACM Internet Measurement Conference
        November 4 - 6, 2024
        Madrid , AA , Spain

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader