Mirjam Kühne 1 EC, Oct Policy Development in RIPE & the RIPE NCC Mirjam Kühne RIPE NCC

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 2 RIPE –in the global context RIPE NCC –in the global context Policy development –how can you participate IPv4 & IPv6 Allocation Policies Overview

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 3 What is RIPE? Reseaux IP Européens (1989) –collaborative organisation of ISPs –open to all interested parties –voluntary participation, no fees –works by consensus –encourages face-to-face discussion –“interest group” for Internet community in ‘Europe’

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 4 RIPE Meeting attendees for 1998 Total: 669

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 5 Global Context World-wide Internet Technical Development & Standards Body World-wide Operators Forum EU Operators USA Operators Asian Operators IETF IEPG RIPE APRICOT NANOG

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 6 What is the RIPE NCC? Co-ordination and support services for ISPs Not-for-profit association under Dutch law –formal membership, Executive Board, yearly fee 7 years of history members (mainly ISPs, but open to anyone)

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 7 RIPE NCC Membership

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 8 Why an NCC ? Support for RIPE/ISP community Activities need continuity –Database... Neutrality and impartiality important –to ensure fair distribution of resources –neutral ground for ISPs to co-ordinate technical & administrative issues

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 9 RIPE NCC Activities Registration Services –IPv4 & IPv6 address & AS number allocation –Reverse delegation Co-ordination & Liaison –RIPE database maintenance –Technical Projects Information Dissemination & Education

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 10 Activity Development Process RIPE Working Groups –define requirements, suggest activities RIPE NCC Staff –produces activity plan & budget RIPE NCC Executive Board –submits to membership RIPE NCC Membership –approves and sets fees

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 11 Global Policy Development Developed in open policy meetings Implemented by Regional Internet Registries Co-ordinated among RIRs

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 12 RIPE NCC in Global Context Ultimate global numbers authority Sets policy and criteria for Regional Registries Regional Registries: Policies and criteria aligned but differences in local implementation RIPE NCC ARIN APNIC RIPEARIN MtgAPRICOT IANA/ICANN

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 13 Policy Development in RIPE Developed in RIPE LIR-WG open-open-open Implemented by RIPE NCC –open; controlled by membership

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 14 Policy Development Process Policy (changes) can be suggested by –Members/Local IRs –RIPE NCC –Public at large Policy must be –fair to all –‘good’ for the Internet –consistent with global policies

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 15 How Can You Participate RIPE Working Groups –LIR-WG Open Mailing Lists – Public Meetings –next meeting in Amsterdam February 1999 RIPE NCC membership –AGM

Mirjam Kühne 16 EC, Oct IPv4 Facts & Information

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 17 IPv4 Allocation Policies RIPE NCC Member Initial allocation: /19 Next allocation based on usage rate Support and Training to ensure fair distribution

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 18 IANA Allocations 192.x.y.z: 1992/ /8: Sep /8: Sep /8:Mar /8:Apr /8Jan /8:May 1999 B’s: 1993 (last assigned from in 1996)

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 19 Address Space Usage

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 20 Address Space Usage APNIC

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 21 RIPE NCC Allocations 1,500 Members –mainly ISPs –also Telcos, Gov., Associations, Academic Initial allocation: /19 –Next allocation based on usage rate Support and Training to ensure fair distribution 85 Countries

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 22 Service Regions of the Registries RIPE NCCARIN APNIC

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 23 1,5 New Members a Day

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 24 RIPE NCC Charging Model 3 Categories –pre-1997: self-determined –now based on allocations and aging 2000 (prelim.) Small Medium Large Sign-up

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 25 LIR Charging Model RIPE Community agreement –Service charge –no per-address charge See ‘Charging by Local Internet Registries’ –Authors: RIPE NCC & LIR-WG chair

Mirjam Kühne 26 EC, Oct IPv6 Information & Experiences

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 27 IPv6 Allocation Policies Peering with 3  subTLAs AND either Plan to provide IPv6 services within 12 months OR  40 SLA customers

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 28 IPv6 Allocation Policies (Bootstrap Phase) Peering with 3  ASes AND Plan to provide IPv6 services within 12 months AND either  40 IPv4 customers OR 6bone experience

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 29 IPv6 Allocations Initial Allocation: /35 subTLA Entire /29 reserved (aggregatable) APNIC: 3 sub-TLAs allocated ARIN: 2 subTLAs allocated RIPE NCC: 6 subTLAs allocated

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 30 IANA Allocations APNIC: 2001:0200::/23 ARIN: 2001:0400::/23 RIPE NCC: 2001:0600::/23

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 31 Database Object inet6num:2001:0600::/23 netname:RIPE-NCC descr:RIPE Network Co-ordination Centre descr:Amsterdam, Netherlands country:NL admin-c:NN44-RIPE tech-c:MK16-RIPE status: ASSIGNED PA mnt-by:LIR-MNT source:RIPE

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 32 TLA/NLA/SLA Relationship NLA & SLA database registration Review before next TLA allocation No additional charges for IPv6 in 1999/2000 Part of existing charging scheme in 2001 –review by membership

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 33 Open Issues Multihoming –IETF IPng WG –Current solution: multiple SLAs Renumbering –outside the IP layer

Mirjam Kühne 34 EC, Oct ASO & ICANN

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 35 Global Aspects All addresses are global Co-ordination among RIRs and IANA Dependent on topology –one backbone? –Local connection? IANA does not allocate addresses directly

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 36 Interaction with other Technologies Difference to dynamic dial-up? –addresses don’t move, user moves Co-operation with Telco Operators and ETSI –started –continue in the future

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 37 Pointers & References RIPE Meetings IPv4 Allocation Policies IPv6 Allocation Policies Presentation

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne 38 QUESTIONS?