Experimental Internet Resource Allocations Philip Smith, Geoff Huston September 2002.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Axel Pawlik. LACNIC III, November 2002, Mexico City. 1 6bone Address Registry Proposal Axel Pawlik / Mirjam Kühne RIPE NCC.
Advertisements

Whos who in the IETF Zoo? Geoff Huston Executive Director, Internet Architecture Board.
1 IPv6 Unique Local Addresses Update on IETF Activity ARIN Public Policy Meeting April 2005 Geoff Huston APNIC.
IPv4 Address Transfer proposal APNIC prop-050-v002 Geoff Huston.
Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses A review from an RIR perspective Geoff Huston August 2003.
Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses A review from an RIR perspective Geoff Huston August 2003.
Proposal-062: Use of Final /8 Jonny Martin, Philip Smith & Randy Bush Policy APNIC 26 28th August 2008 Christchurch, New Zealand.
Policy SIG report 29 February 2008 APNIC 25, Taipei Toshiyuki Hosaka Randy Bush Jian Zhang.
Operational Policies for NIRs in the APNIC Region NIR Meeting APNIC14, Kitakyushu, Japan 4 Sept 2002.
Policy Proposals: AfriNIC-10 Public Meeting Vincent Ngundi AfriNIC PDP-MG Chair AfriNIC-10, Cairo, Egypt.
A S I A P A C I F I C N E T W O R K I N F O R M A T I O N C E N T R E APNIC Open Address Policy Meeting Address Policy SIG October 26th, Brisbane.
Rule-Making Book II EU Administrative Procedures – The ReNEUAL Draft Model Rules 2014 Brussels, May th Herwig C.H. Hofmann University of Luxembourg.
1 Overview of policy proposals Policy SIG Wednesday 26 August 2009 Beijing, China.
ARIN Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or.
60 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Anti-hijack Policy.
IPv6 Addressing – Status and Policy Report Paul Wilson Director General, APNIC.
Resource PKI: Certificate Policy & Certification Practice Statement Dr. Stephen Kent Chief Scientist - Information Security.
Update on RIPE NCC Inter- RIR Transfer proposal Adam Gosling APNIC 38 Policy SIG Meeting 18 September 2014.
2009-3: Allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries.
Implementation Update Adam Gosling APNIC Policy SIG Meeting Thursday, 18 September 2014.
Environmental Impact Assessment Prepared by: Miss Syazwani Mahmad Puzi School of Bioprocess Engineering UniMAP.
Overview of policy proposals Policy SIG 27 February 2008 APNIC 25, Taipei.
UNECE and OSCE joint event, Almaty, May 2012
BY Karen Liu, Ph. D. Indiana State University August 18,
Copyright © 2008 Japan Network Information Center JPNIC's review of IPv4 address transfer  Izumi Okutani  Japan Network Information.
Documenting the Participation of Fishing Vessel Crew Members in Alaska’s Commercial Fisheries Documenting the Participation of Fishing Vessel Crew Members.
CHAPTER 3 SCOPING AND AGENCY COORDINATION. Scoping - the procedure for determining the appropriate level of study of a proposed project/activity - process.
IP Policy in APNIC and What about TWNIC ? Kuo-Wei Wu.
ARIN Section 4.10 Austerity Policy Update.
1 APNIC Open Address Policy Meeting Special Interest Group Session March 2nd, Korea, Seoul.
A Brief Overview of draft-ietf-sidr-cp-01.txt draft-ietf-sidr-cps-rirs-01.txt draft-ietf-sidr-cps-isp-00.txt Steve Kent BBN Technologies.
Erik Bais, May 13 th 2015 PP – unassigned yet General Transfer Policy Presenter : Erik Bais –
6bone address registry proposal Bob Fink ESnet 17 July 2002 Yokohama.
Policy Implementation & Experience Report Leslie Nobile.
Draft Policy Preview ARIN XXVII. Draft Policies Draft Policies on the agenda: – ARIN : Globally Coordinated Transfer Policy – ARIN : Protecting.
Draft Policy Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors 59.
APNIC Policy SIG report: Open Policy Meeting Masato Yamanishi, Chair APNIC 40 Jakarta, Indonesia.
IP Addressing and ICT Development in the Pacific Islands Anne Lord and Save Vocea, APNIC ICT Workshop, Fiji, November, 2002.
ARIN VCalgary, Canada Members Meeting Agenda April 5, :30 Doors Open - Continental Breakfast 9:00 Meeting Called to Order 9:05 Adoption of Meeting.
Policies for ASN Management in the Asia Pacific Region – Revised Draft Address Policy SIG APNIC14, Kitakyushu, Japan 4 Sept 2002.
Internet Protocol Addresses What are they like and how are the managed? Paul Wilson APNIC.
A S I A P A C I F I C N E T W O R K I N F O R M A T I O N C E N T R E Emerging Registry Criteria ASO General Assembly Budapest, 19 May 2000.
Policy Development Processes in the APNIC Region 4 th ASO General Assembly Santiago, Chile 24 April 2003.
Slide 1 July 2006, Montreal, QuebecIETF DNSEXT 2929bis Donald E. Eastlake 3 rd
APNIC 32 AMM Policy SIG Report Andy Linton Thursday 1 September 2011.
News from APNIC German Valdez Communications Area Manager RIPE October 2008.
IPv4 IXP Address Policy APNIC Policy SIG Meeting Taipei, August 2001 Philip Smith.
ARIN Anti-hijack Policy. Context Proposal prompted by presentation at NANOG 60 “Understanding IPv6 Internet Background Radiation” With an LOA.
1 IANA global IPv6 allocation policy [prop-005-v002] Policy SIG 1 Sept 2004 APNIC18, Nadi, Fiji.
Advisory Council Shepherds: David Farmer & Chris Grundemann Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 allocation mechanisms by the IANA.
Policy SIG Report APNIC AGM Friday 29 August 2008 Christchurch, New Zealand 1.
60 Draft Policy ARIN NRPM 4 (IPv4) Policy Cleanup.
Improving Compliance with ISAs Presenters: Al Johnson & Pat Hayle.
Whois & Data Accuracy Across the RIRs. Terms ISP – An Internet Service Provider is allocated address space by an RIR for the purpose of providing connectivity.
Proposal-061: 32-bit ASNs for documentation purposes Gaurab Raj Upadhaya & Philip Smith Policy APNIC 26 28th August 2008 Christchurch, New Zealand.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN
APNIC Open Address Policy Meeting
KRNIC Member Workshop November 2001 Seoul, Korea
IPv6 Documentation Address Policy
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Post-IPv4-Free-Pool-Depletion Transfer Policy Staff Introduction.
IPv6 Address Allocation APNIC
IPv6 Unique Local Addresses Update on IETF Activity
News from APNIC ARIN XXII 16 October 2008.
Policy SIG Thursday 26 February Manila, Philippines
4-Byte AS number registry Policy Proposal [LACNIC Proposal ]
Overview of policy proposals
Recovery of Unused Address Space prop-017-v001
Experimental Internet Resource Allocations
Overview of policy proposals
Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses
Presentation transcript:

Experimental Internet Resource Allocations Philip Smith, Geoff Huston September 2002

The Objective To support the temporary assignment by APNIC of public address space for use within recognized experiments Allow deployment experiments in new technologies to proceed without being encumbered with existing policy requirements relating to assignments and allocations

The Proposal There is no APNIC policy supporting temporary allocation of addresses to organizations who are undertaking experimental work relating to the deployment of a particular technology This is a proposal for such a policy

What is an Experiment? RFC 1797, Class A Subnet Experiment, 1995 Proposed the temporary use of an address block for experimentation in the deployment of Classless Inter-Domain routing RFC2471, IPv6 Testing Address Allocation, 1998 Proposed the temporary use of IPv6 space in gaining early deployment experience with IPv6 networks (6Bone)

Proposal Details (1) Describe the experiment Reference a current Experimental RFC, or Submit an experiment proposal The experiment proposal would normally be made public upon acceptance of the proposal. If disclosure of the experiment is not permitted, than this would preclude experimental allocation The organisation requesting the resources will have to detail what experimental work they are going to carry out. Such detail can usually be made by either: by submitting a proposal that references a current IETF Experimental RFC (Detail Two), or by submitting an experiment proposal detailing what resources are required, and what activities will be carried out (Detail Three). Such experimental proposals will, in the normal course of events be made public upon acceptance of the proposal by an RIR. Consideration will be given to non-disclosure constraints, but this is anticipated to be a prohibitive constraint upon the use of public Numbering Resources, even in an experimental context. The RIR will not allocate resources if the entire research experiment cannot be publicly disclosed as per Details Two and Three following.

Proposal Details (2) Experimental RFCs Experimental RFCs may need to include RIR Considerations to describe the address resources that may be necessary for the experiment This section of an Experimental RFC may require some level of liaison with the RIRs. The IETF from time to time describes experimental activities and associated requirements for resources that will be required by participants in the experiment. It is considered as being acceptable for the organisation to reference a current Experimental RFC and indicate the organisations participation in the experiment. Organisations such as the IETF, who describe experimental activities as part of their standards development process, need to consider the associated Numbering Resource requirements with any proposed experiment, and under this proposal will need to liaise with the RIRs as part of the process of publishing a draft as an experimental RFC.

Proposal Details (3) Experiment Outcomes Should be published in an openly and freely available document For experimental proposals not covered by Detail Two, the RIR will require the experiments aims and objectives to be published in a publicly accessible document. The RIRs have a strong preference for the use of an Experimental RFC published through the IETF, but will accept other publication mechanisms where the experiments objectives and practices are publicly and openly available free of charges and free of any constraints of disclosure. The RIRs would also normally require that the experiments outcomes be published in an openly and freely available document, again free of charges and free of any constraints of disclosure.

Proposal Details (4) Period of Experimental Allocations One year with the potential to renew The Numbering Resources are allocated on a lease/license basis for a period of one year. The allocation can be renewed on application to the issuing RIR providing information as per in Detail One. The identity and details of the applicant and the allocated Numbering Resources will be published under the conditions of the RIRs normal publication policy (for example, listed as a temporary allocation in the RIRs database).

Proposal Details (5) Additional Allocations Will not be made within the annual cycle The RIR will make one-off allocations only, on an annual basis. Additional allocations outside the annual cycle will not be made unless justified by a subsequent complete application. Its important for the requesting organisation to ensure they have sufficient resources requested as part of their initial application for the proposed experimental use.

Proposal Details (6) APNIC Fee Cover registration and maintenance only Each RIR may charge an administration fee to cover each allocation made of these experimental resources. This fee simply covers registration and maintenance, rather than the full allocation process for standard RIR members. This administration fee should be as low as possible as these requests do not have to undergo the same evaluation process as those requested in the normal policy environment.

Proposal Details (7) Allocation Size Consistent with the experiment and the RIR minimum allocation size. Justification for allocations greater than the minimum size is required The Numbering Resources requested come from the global Internet Resource space, and are not from private or other non- routable Internet Resource space. The allocation size should be consistent with the existing RIR minimum allocation sizes, unless small allocations are intended to be explicitly part of the experiment. If an organisation requires more resource than stipulated by the minimum allocation sizes in force at the time of their request, they should include in their research proposal why this is required.

Proposal Details (8) Not for Commercial Use May be withdrawn immediately if used in a commercial context If there is any evidence that the temporary resource is being used for commercial purposes, or is being used for any activities not documented in the original experiment description provided to the RIR, the issuing RIR reserves the right to immediately withdraw the resource and reassign it to the free pool.

Proposal Details (9) APNIC to Assess and Comment on Experimental Allocation Proposals May modify a request as appropriate Option of recourse to RIR appeal mechanism in the case of a dispute The RIRs should be in a position to assess and comment on the objectives of the experiment with regard to the requested amount of Numbering Resources. The issuing RIR should be able to modify the requested allocation as appropriate, and in agreement with the proposer. In the event that the proposed modifications are not acceptable some recourse to either the open policy meeting or some point of appeal and arbitration such as the IETF or other standards body involved with the experiment is necessary.

Considerations Systematic response to Experimental Requirements Use of RIR Considerations section in Experimental RFCs Stable basis for future deployment experimentation Acceptance of this proposal means that the assignment of temporary or experimental Numbering Resources is taken care of by the RIRs, rather than on a more ad hoc or unclear basis as it is at the moment. It would be helpful to the RIRs is, in conjunction with adoption of this policy, future experimental RFCs include an RIR Considerations section describing the resources required for the experiment, and in full consultation with the RIRs, detailing which resources will be used, if applicable, as well as the anticipated timeframe of the experiment. A clearly documented policy framework for obtaining Numbering Resources to be used for experimental purposes, with inexpensive cost-recovery based allocations, will ensure a stable and known entry point through the RIRs for future organisations and future developments in the Internet.

Implementation Experimental Allocation Proposal to be considered by other RIRs in Q Implementation 3 months after consensus has been reached It is proposed that each RIRs implement this new policy three months after consensus has been reached. All necessary supporting documents will be prepared by each RIR by the implementation date. This will include updating request and membership applications forms. The community will be informed of the changes in policy through the relevant RIR website and related mailing lists.