Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Update about the “SHOULDs Analysing Project” in RIPE Policy Documents “Should” we use the RFC 2119 Defined Language in RIPE Policy Documents? Jan Žorž,
Advertisements

IPv4 Run Out and Transitioning to IPv6 Marco Hogewoning Trainer, RIPE NCC.
IPv4 Addresses. Internet Protocol: Which version? There are currently two versions of the Internet Protocol in use for the Internet IPv4 (IP Version 4)
December 2013 Internet Number Resource Report. December 2013 Internet Number Resource Report INTERNET NUMBER RESOURCE STATUS REPORT As of 31 December.
March 2014 Internet Number Resource Report. March 2014 Internet Number Resource Report INTERNET NUMBER RESOURCE STATUS REPORT As of 31 March 2014 Prepared.
1 Overview of policy proposals Policy SIG Wednesday 26 August 2009 Beijing, China.
1 Change in the Minimum Allocation Criteria Policy Proposal Proposed by Rajesh Chharia, President – ISPAI Presented by Kusumba S Vice President - ISPAI.
ARIN Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or.
Improving 8.4 Anti-Flip Language. Problem Statement Current policy prevents an organization that receives BLOCK A in the previous 12 months from.
ARIN Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification.
1 Draft Policy Globally Coordinated Transfer Policy Original Authors: Chris Grundeman, Martin Hannigan, Jason Schiller AC Shepherds: Bill Darte,
Recommended Draft Policy Section 8.4 Inter-RIR Transfer of ASNs.
Advisory Council Shepherds: Scott Leibrand & Stacy Hughes Remove Single Aggregate requirement from Specified Transfer.
ARIN Clarifying Requirements for IPv4 Transfers Dan Alexander- Primary Shepherd David Farmer- Secondary Shepherd.
IPv6 Addressing – Status and Policy Report Paul Wilson Director General, APNIC.
2009-3: Allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries.
Policy Implementation and Experience Report Leslie Nobile.
Policy Experience Report Richard Jimmerson. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
IPv4 Addresses. Internet Protocol: Which version? There are currently two versions of the Internet Protocol in use for the Internet IPv4 (IP Version 4)
Shepherd’s Presentation Draft Policy Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors 59.
Draft Policy Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors 59.
Policy Implementation & Experience Report Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services.
1 San Diego, California 25 February Jon Worley Senior Resource Analyst Obtaining IP Addresses II: ARIN’s IPv4 Waiting List and the IPv4 Transfer.
Open Policy Hour Einar Bohlin, Policy Analyst. OPH Overview Draft Policy Preview Policy Experience Report Policy BoF.
POLICY EXPERIENCE REPORT Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
Skeeve Stevens APNIC 29, Kuala Lumpur Alternative criteria for subsequent IPv6 allocations Prop-083v002.
1 APNIC allocation and policy update JPNIC OPM July 17, Tokyo, Japan Guangliang Pan.
Life After IPv4 Depletion Leslie Nobile. Overview ARIN’s current IPv4 inventory Trends and observations Ways to obtain IP addresses post IPv4 depletion.
Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. The PDP Cycle Need Discuss Consensus Implement Evaluate
ARIN Section 4.10 Austerity Policy Update.
PROP Leif Sawyer. Draft Policy ARIN Eliminating Needs-based Evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 Netblocks Author:
ARIN Out of Region Use Tina Morris. Problem Statement Current policy neither clearly forbids nor clearly permits out of region use of ARIN registered.
John Curran APNIC 29 5 March 2010 ARIN Update. 4-byte ASN Stats In 2009 – Received 197 requests for 4-byte ASNs – 140 changed request to 2-byte – ARIN.
Advisory Council Shepherds: Marc Crandall & Scott Leibrand Combined M&A and Specified Transfers.
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.
Anne Lord & Mirjam Kühne. AfNOG Workshop, 10 May IP Address Management AfNOG Workshop, 11 May 2001 Accra, Ghana presented by:
Draft Policy IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement.
IP Addressing and ICT Development in the Pacific Islands Anne Lord and Save Vocea, APNIC ICT Workshop, Fiji, November, 2002.
Policies for ASN Management in the Asia Pacific Region – Revised Draft Address Policy SIG APNIC14, Kitakyushu, Japan 4 Sept 2002.
ARIN Update Aaron Hughes ARIN Board of Trustees Focus Increased focus on customer service – Based on feedback and survey Continued IPv4 to IPv6.
1 Life After IPv4 Depletion Jon Worley –Analyst Leslie Nobile Senior Director Global Registry Knowledge.
Registration Services Department Trends, Observations & Statistics Leslie Nobile.
Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
Current Policy Topics Emilio Madaio RIPE NCC RIPE November 2010, Rome.
Registration Services Feedback Andrea Cima RIPE NCC RIPE 67 - Athens.
Draft Policy LIR/ISP and End-user Definitions.
Draft Policy Merge IPv4 ISP and End-User Requirements 59.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Out of Region Use Presented by Tina Morris.
Policy SIG Report APNIC AGM Friday 29 August 2008 Christchurch, New Zealand 1.
1 Madison, WI 9 September Part 1 IPv4 Depletion Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services.
60 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Reduce All Minimum Allocation/Assignment Units to /24.
60 Draft Policy ARIN NRPM 4 (IPv4) Policy Cleanup.
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.
ARIN Update John Curran President and CEO, ARIN Focus IPv4 to IPv6 Transition Awareness – Targeting ISPs and Content Providers Continued enhancements.
Policy Implementation Report Leslie Nobile. Purpose Update the community on recently implemented policies Provide relevant operational details.
ARIN Alignment of 8.3 Needs Requirements to Reality of Business.
Draft Policy ARIN Christian Tacit. Problem statement Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses via the transfer market and then.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN
Policy Experience Report
2011-4: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure
Draft Policy ARIN Amy Potter
IPv4 Addresses.
ARIN Scott Leibrand / David Huberman
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Post-IPv4-Free-Pool-Depletion Transfer Policy Staff Introduction.
RIPE Policy Landscape Filiz Yilmaz ESNOG, February 2008.
Recommended Draft Policy Section 8
ARIN Inter-RIR Transfers
Overview of policy proposals
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Transfers for new entrants
Presentation transcript:

Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile

Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified policy may be needed – Operational experience – Customer feedback Provide feedback to community and make recommendations when appropriate Purpose

Policies Reviewed Definition of End-user and ISP(LIR) ( NRPM 2.6 and 2.4 ) Can an RIR issue space to an organization outside its region? ( NRPM 2.2 ) Transfers to Specified Recipients ( NRPM 8.3 ) 4-byte ASNs ( NRPM 10.3 )

NRPM 2.4 Local Internet Registry – “An IR that primarily assigns address space to the users of the network services that it provides. LIRs are generally Internet Service Providers (ISPs)” NRPM 2.4 “End-User” – “An end-user is an organization receiving assignments of IP addresses exclusively for use in its operational networks”

Issues No current definition of ISP Definitions of LIR and End-user are somewhat nebulous Some newer technologies do not clearly fit the categories (e.g. cloud computing services, content delivery networks, “software as a service” providers, etc.) – This makes it challenging for ARIN staff to apply policy With recent policy change to 3 month supply of IPv4 for ISPs, may be advantageous to be in the End-user category

Questions for the Community What is an End-user and what is an ISP? Should staff determine whether an org is an ISP or an End-user or should the org decide? Should an ISP be able to switch to become an End-user and vice versa thus allowing a different set of policy criteria?

NRPM 2.2 – “Regional Internet Registry” – “The primary role of RIRs is to manage and distribute public Internet address space within their respective regions.” Issue There is nothing specific in any policy that says you must be located in the ARIN region or plan to use the resources in the ARIN region to request resources here

Questions for the Community With v4 depletion imminent in some regions, what will prevent RIR shopping? Should there be criteria that states who is eligible to request resources from ARIN? – (e.g. * Must have legal presence in the region?) Should there be clearly defined criteria requiring the resources to be used within the ARIN region? – (e.g. * Route origination in the region?) *Current Practice

NRPM 8.3 “Transfers to Specified Recipients” – “IPv4 number resources within the ARIN region may be released to ARIN by the authorized resource holder, in whole or in part, for transfer to another specified organizational recipient. Such transferred number resources may only be received under RSA by organizations that are within the ARIN region and can demonstrate the need for such resources, as a single aggregate, in the exact amount which they can justify under current ARIN policies.”

Issues Current policy based on justified need, however, no stipulation in 8.3 that would disallow an organization from immediately “flipping” any IP addresses they were recently issued by ARIN for profit by using NRPM 8.3 Is it fair to allow someone to obtain a limited resource based on justified need, and then never actually use it? This behavior would seem to be a direct violation of the RSA

Suggestion Make policy consistent with the RSA’s requirement that resources be used in the manner for which they were approved Various options: A.Update 8.3 to add a requirement that resources must be registered for a minimum of one year to be eligible B.Update 8.3 to state that resources are not eligible for subsequent transfer C.Apply “A” or “B” to some percentage of received resources D.Other?

NRPM 10.3 “IANA Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to RIRs” – After Dec 31, 2010, IANA and the RIRs make no distinction between 2-byte and 4-byte ASNs and will operate from an undifferentiated 32-bit pool Issue – Most customers are specifically asking for 2-byte ASNs, or exchanging their 4-byte ASNs once issued – To date, there are only 38 4-byte ASNs actively registered – 53 4-byte ASNs have been exchanged for 2–byte Typical reason for exchange: “Upstream said their router wouldn’t support 4-byte ASN”

Current Practice ARIN assigns from one pool starting with the lowest numbers first (2-byte) – Customer still has option to choose 2-byte or 4-byte – Staff ensures customer really wants 4-byte ASN before issuing – Will exchange 4-byte ASN when asked

Network managers and router vendors must ensure that their networks and products are compatible with 4-byte ASNs Is there something ARIN can do to help with the transition to 4-byte ASNs? Question for the Community