November 1995 - lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

CIDR FAQ
by Hank Nussbacher 28 Nov '95

28 Nov '95

------------------------------------------------------------------------ The CIDR FAQ Version 5 15 November 1995 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The following document is a collection of Frequently Asked Questions about CIDR. This document is not meant to be a networking/routing guide and tutorial. Where appropriate pointers to other documents of a more general nature have been mentioned. Updates from a previous version are marked with a '|' in column 1. If you have any questions you would like added, please send them to the editor mentioned below: Hank Nussbacher (Tel Aviv University and IBM Israel) hank(a)vm.tau.ac.il or hank(a)ibm.net.il If you would like to "discuss" items from this FAQ please send your mail to cidrd(a)iepg.org This FAQ is being distributed to the following groups and lists: alt.internet.services alt.internet.access.wanted nanog(a)merit.edu inet-access(a)earth.com iap(a)vma.cc.nd.edu local-ir(a)ripe.net cidrd(a)iepg.org |local-ir(a)apnic.net To retrieve the most up-to-date version of this document: |- ftp://ftp.ibm.net.il/pub/docs/cidr.faq |- http://www.rain.net/faq/cidr.faq.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ General questions ----------------- 1. What does CIDR stand for? CIDR stands for Classless Inter-Domain Routing and is documented in RFC1517/1518/1519/1520. CIDR is an effective method to stem the tide of IP address allocation as well as routing table overflow. Without CIDR having been implemented in 1994 & 1995, the Internet would not be functioning today. Basically, CIDR eliminates the concept of class A, B, and C networks and replaces this with a generalized "IP prefix". CIDR can be used to perform route aggregation in which a single route can cover the address space of several "old-style" network numbers and thus replace a lot of old routes. This lessens the local administrative burden of updating external routing, saves routing table space in all backbone routers and reduces route flapping (rapid changes in routes), and thus CPU load, in all backbone routers. CIDR will also allow delegation of pieces of what use d to be called "network numbers" to customers, and therefore make it possible to utilize the available address space more efficiently. See question #6 below for details on "IP prefix"s. 2. What is an ASN? ASN stands for Autonomous System Number and acts to merge many networks into a logical domain. 3. What is BGP? BGP stands for Border Gateway Protocol and is the de-facto standard for routing between Autonomous Systems in the Internet. All communications between Internet Service Providers (ISP) is handled via BGP4 which supports CIDR. 4. Why should I make the effort and convert my routing to be CIDRized? The routing tables in the Internet have been growing as fast as the Internet and the router technology specifically and computer technology in general has not been able to keep pace. In December 1990 there were 2190 routes and 2 years later there were over 8500 routes. In July 1995 there are now over 29,000 routes, which require approximately 10 MB in a router with a single peer. Routers at interconnection points (or multi-homed hosts doing full routing with many peers) receive these routes from several peers, and need several dozen megabytes of RAM (and the appropriate CPU horsepower) to handle this. A list of those routers that can handle this appears at the end of this question. Routers with 64MB of memory have the capacity for approximately 60,000 routes after which some routes will just have to be left out of the global routing tables, and the more likely ones to be left out are routes covering small pieces of address space. Without the CIDRization work that has gone on for the past 2 years the routing tables would be in excess of 65,000 routes. By CIDRizing you help the Internet reduce the routing overload as well as increasing the liklihood that in the future your routes will be carried by all ISPs. The major benefit of CIDR is to allow for continuous, uninterrupted growth of the Internet. For a significant percentage of sites connected to the Internet the value of the Internet increases with the total number of sites connected to the Internet. Therefore, taking steps needed to allow for continuous uninterrupted growth (like CIDRizing, or renumbering) is beneficial to such sites. The routers today that are available to handle the full routing table are: cisco 7000 w/ 64Mb cisco 4500 w/ 32Mb IBM ENSS and CNSS w/ 64Mb BayNetworks models AN/ASN/BLN/BCN w/ 32Mb 5. Can you give an example of a simple CIDR configuration for a cisco router? The following example creates 2 aggregates and suppresses any more specific addresses that may be contained within those aggregates. The access-list causes only those nets to be distributed as listed, and not any others that may exist in the BGP routing tables. router bgp 64100 no synchronization aggregate-address 172.16.0.0 255.248.0.0 summary-only aggregate-address 192.168.50.0 255.255.255.0 summary-only neighbor 192.168.54.2 remote-as 65000 neighbor 192.168.54.2 distribute-list 12 out default-metric 70 ! access-list 12 permit 192.168.50.0 0.0.0.255 access-list 12 permit 172.16.0.0 0.7.255.255 | Another method might be: | | router bgp 64100 | no synchronization | aggregate-address 172.16.0.0 255.248.0.0 | aggregate-address 192.168.50.0 255.255.255.0 | neighbor 192.168.54.2 remote-as 65000 | neighbor 192.168.54.2 distribute-list 102 out | default-metric 70 | ! | access-list 102 deny 172.16.0.0 0.7.255.255 255.252.0.0 0.3.255.255 | access-list 102 deny 192.168.50.0 0.0.0.255 255.255.255.128 0.0.0.127 An alternate method is via network and route statements: router bgp 64100 no synchronization network 172.16.0.0 mask 255.248.0.0 network 192.168.50.0 mask 255.255.255.0 neighbor 192.168.54.2 remote-as 65000 neighbor 192.168.54.2 default-metric 70 ip route 172.16.0.0 255.248.0.0 Null0 254 ip route 192.168.50.0 255.255.255.0 Null0 254 In this case, only those routes explicitly mentioned in "network" statements will be announced with BGP. For these routes to be announced, there has to be a corresponding route in the IP forwarding table, thus the need to create the static routes. The static routes will also serve as "pull-ups" for the route advertisements and thus prevent route flapping: these routes will always be announced with BGP by this router. Note that as long as more specific routes exist internally in your network, these will be used in preference to the static "less specific" route entries (longest prefix matching is being used). A good rule to follow is to never redistribute IGP learnt routes directly into BGP, but to rather use network or aggregate-address statements. And if you must redistribute dynamically learnt IGP routes into BGP, you MUST use filtering. The reasons for this advice are several, some of which are: 1) if your IGP is classful (e.g. RIP or IGRP) you will by default not do any route aggregation 2) if you have an internal stability problem (accidents do happen), this will be reflected as a "route flap" in the whole routing system, globally burning CPU cycles better spent on other things 3) if the IGP -> BGP transition is unrestricted, this can lead to false routing information escaping from your network (especially if you do not fully have administrative control over your IGP) 6. What do all these /16s and /24s mean in my BGP tables? This refers to the number of bits of the network part of the IP address. A former class B may appear as 172.50.0.0/16, which is the same as 256 class C's which can appear as 192.200.0.0/16. A single class C appears as 192.201.1.0/24. These "things" are often called an "IP prefix", which consists of an IP address and a mask length. The mask length specifies the number of leftmost contiguous significant bits in the corresponding IP address. Thus, an IP prefix with a prefix length of 15 (denoted /15) covers the address space of 128k IP addresses, and a /17 covers the address space of 32k IP addresses. Here is a table of the more popular CIDR blocks: # of former CIDR class C block nets ---- ---- /27 1/8 /26 1/4 /25 1/2 /24 1 /23 2 /22 4 /21 8 /20 16 /19 32 /18 64 /17 128 /16 256 = 1 former class B /15 512 /14 1024 /13 2048 In general, advertising a prefix covering less address space than a /24 prefix will probably not get into the global routing tables, and global Internet connectivity is less likely to happen. Note that for you as an administrator of an AS, it is a good idea to announce as few prefixes as possible and to utilize the address space as much as possible. | A more comprehensive table came out in October 1995 as: | | RFC1860: Variable Length Subnet Table For IPv4 | | This RFC is being revised and a new one will be out shortly. 7. Do I need to carry the full Internet routing table? When would it be necessary? What routers on the Internet carry full routing tables and how much memory is needed? No you do not need to carry the full Internet routing table. If you are single-homed, meaning you have a single connection to an ISP, then all you need to do is point a default route to the ISP and tell your ISP not to send you the full routing table. If you are multi-homed, you will want to know which nets to route via connection A and which nets to route via connection B. The easiest way to do this is to request a partial routing table from one ISP - with those nets that are closest to them, and default everything else to the other ISP. This way your routing tables need not contain the entire Internet universe but only a small subset. The closer you get to the hub or nexus of the Internet, the larger your routing tables need to be. For example, those connected to public exchange points (like the NAPs, CIX, STIX, LINX, dGIX) in general, carry full routing tables and run without a default route. 8. What is there in the Internet to stop me from making a mistake and announcing via BGP an aggregate that is larger than the nets I am in charge of? In principle there is nothing to stop you. The responsibility falls on both ends of the BGP link - you are responsible to filter what you announce and the receiving end - if it has its act together - filters also what it *thinks* it should be hearing from you so as prevent mistakes on your part. Those sites that do not work with access lists and filters and just readily accept what is sent to them are just waiting for a problem to happen. Filtering can either be done at the IP network level or at the BGP path (BGP orgin AS) level. See question 20 below for details on a tool to assist in filtering. 9. Who has to renumber with CIDR ? Sites that move from one ISP to another, and who had been allocated addresses from their original ISP's CIDR block, in all likelihood will have to return those addresses as part of the move. The reason is to keep the number of prefixes in the global routing system within the limits of current technology. | For further hints and procedures for renumbering, see the PIER | (Procedures for Internet/Enterprise Renumbering) homepage at: | | http://www.isi.edu:80/div7/pier Specific questions ------------------ 10. I have a /16 but have registered parts of it as /24s in the RADB. I now want to CIDRize. The problem is parts of the /16s are missing and are routed via a different ASN. Can you explain how more specific routes override more general ones and will I hurt my routing if I just advertise the /16 and not a bunch of /20s and /21s? There are two aspects to the answer: 1) Real (BGP) world: Given there are several AS's sharing addresses out of a /16 prefix, every AS should advertise exactly those prefixes which it is really originating. However, if there is one AS "originating" a significant majority of this address space, the concerned AS's might agree that this one and only advertises the /16 and all others their more specifics. The more specifics always take precedence over the less specific. 2) Routing registry: The registry DB, of course, should always reflect reality. If in the above example the AS's agree on the "big AS" announcing the /16, the "big AS" should document with the route-object that it's not really originating the whole aggregate by using "hole" attributes (see ripe.181, 5. The Route Object). 11. How can I redistribute our IGP routes (IGRP) so that they become aggregated when sent out via BGP? It is strongly discouraged to redistribute IGPs into BGP, because local IGP configuration errors might easily corrupt routing information of the whole Internet. If, however, you have to do it anyway, you MUST use strict distribute-lists with explicit permits (or route-maps) for redistribution. Here is an example for a Cisco configuration: router bgp 64100 aggregate-address 192.168.0.0 255.255.192.0 summary-only aggregate-address 172.16.0.0 255.254.0.0 summary-only redistribute igrp 64100 route-map origin-AS64100 ! ! or: ! redistribute igrp 64100 ! distribute-list 10 out igrp 64100 ! route-map origin-AS64100 permit 10 match ip address 10 ! access-list 10 permit 192.168.0.0 0.0.63.0 access-list 10 permit 172.16.0.0 access-list 10 permit 172.17.0.0 This example would generate one route 192.168/18 and one route 172.16/15 if any of the contained networks is in the IGP. 12. I am multihomed to three ISPs and can only CIDRize to two of them but to the third I need to still announce specific nets. What damage will this do to my AS? No damage can be done if the non-CIDR peer does not further announce your specifics to the global Internet. If your non-CIDR ISP DOES announce your specifics to the global Internet those specifics will have preference over the less specifics and therefore all traffic to you will get routed through the non-CIDR ISP. 13. I don't want to CIDRize. Can someone do proxy aggregation for me? Proxy aggregation should only be done with great care and should be avoided if you are not single-homed ! If you are single-homed ask your ISP. Others may proxy aggregate over your address range without your consent, and send your traffic over paths/links not of your choosing. Use of Routing Registries may help to identify and correct these problem areas. 14. What routers on the market today do support CIDR (classless routing)? Routers that are capable of handling CIDR are: - all Cisco routers running 10.0 or higher - all Bay Networks routers running 8.01 or higher - 3Com Netbuilder II and Netbuilder Remote Office - Telebit EMPB - Unix w/ BSD/OS 2.0 w/ gated 3.5alpha_11 + radix-fixes - IBM 2210 routers 15. How do I reach other parts of a subnetted old-style network when I have only partial routing information for that same old-style network?" There are actually three ways to solve this particular problem with Cisco's software. Which of them applies will depend on what software version is involved: o Preferred solution: turn on "ip classless" in your routers and use a default route inside your AS. The "ip classless" command prevents the existence of a single "subnet" route from blocking access via the default route to other subnets of the same old-style network. o Workaround for 9.1 or later software where the "ip classless" command is not available: install a "default network route" like this: "ip route 39.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 next-hop" along the axis your default route would normally take. o Workaround for 9.0 or older software: create a "default subnet route": "ip route 39.x.y.0 next-hop" combined with "ip default-network 39.x.y.0", otherwise as the 9.1 fix. Both of the latter solutions rely on static routes, and in the long run these will be impossible to maintain. In some topologies the use of static routes can be a problem (e.g. if you have more than one possible exit point from your AS to choose from). Supplemental information ------------------------ The following information is presented as supplemental information that is related to the CIDRization process. 16. What is the Internet Routing Registry? The IRR is a way for ASN's to publicize their own intended routing policies without having to request a change from a go-between. The RAdb which stands for the Routing Arbiter Data Base, which is part of the IRR, is part of a joint project between Merit and ISI. For full details contact: http://www.ra.net/routing.arbiter/RA/index.html. The Routing Arbiter is a project of the US National Science Foundation. As part of that project, it runs a routing registry database. That database (the RAdb) forms part of the IRR collection of databases. The RIPE database is not part of the RAdb but does participate in the IRR. At present, there are five entities that contribute to the IRR effort and more are expected. Today, all the contributing registries use the RIPE-181 database format. All IRR participants can be contacted via automail handlers that accept batch updates via email. An example of a routing update appears below: password: xxxxxxxx *rt: 138.134.0.0/16 *de: NET-IEC *or: AS378 *mb: AS378-MNT *ch: hank(a)aristo.tau.ac.il 950724 *so: RIPE The *rt: tag identifies the net and the routing policy is based on *or: tag. An example of a routing policy is presented below: aut-num: AS378 descr: ILAN descr: Israeli Academic and Research Network as-in: from AS1755 100 accept ANY as-in: from AS174 100 accept ANY as-in: from AS3339 100 accept AS3339 as-out: to AS1755 announce AS378 AS3339 as-out: to AS174 announce AS378 AS3339 as-out: to AS3339 announce ANY default: AS174 10 default: AS1755 20 default: AS3339 30 guardian: HANK(a)vm.biu.ac.il mnt-by: AS378-MNT admin-c: Hank Nussbacher tech-c: Hank Nussbacher changed: hank(a)vm.tau.ac.il 950627 source: RIPE For further details read over ripe-120.ps, ripe-121.ps and ripe-181.ps (via anonymous ftp from info.ripe.net/ripe/docs). |17. Are there any statistics available as to aggregation in the | Internet? | COUNTS OF RADB PREFIXES BY LENGTH - The number of Route objects | registered in the RADB, with active and withdrawn routes listed | by prefix length. Data from the current week is available from: | | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/radb/reports/ | counts-by-prefix/Summarize_prefix.current | | Reports from previous weeks are available from: | | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/radb/reports/ | counts-by-prefix/summarize_prefix.yymmdd | | IRR ROUTES SUMMARIZED BY PREFIX LENGTH WITH AGGREGATION - A | summary of unique prefixes registered in the IRR. Routes are | summarized by the first octet of the network number. If routes | within a prefix can be aggregated, a count is printed for each | prefix length that has a different count after aggregation. Data | from the current week is available from: | | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/radb/reports/ | IRR_profile/IRR_Profile.current | | Reports from previous weeks are available from: | | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/radb/reports/ | IRR_profile/IRR_Profile.yymmdd 18. How do I update the registered routing information for my ASN? You need to submit a "route" object update and perhaps an "aut-num" object update (see examples above). Route objects add new nets to your autonomous system (or you can remove nets from your autonomous system) and the Autonomous-system object describes the type of routing you wish to have. 19. Which Routing database takes precedence? RIPE? RADB? MCI? Do I have to update all of them? Each provider is allowed to select the preference order for authentic data. For example, ANS uses the following precedence: ANS, CANET, MCI, RIPE, RADB If there are two routes (with different origins) within one database, the changed date is used as a tiebreaker. Else, only database precedence is used. Thus, if the RADB entry has a more recent changed date than the RIPE, ANS will use the RIPE entry. You should only have to register in one of the IRR component databases. | There is a report which shows all routes in the RADB for a specified | AS and whether there are any duplicate routes in other IRR | registries or any aggregates which cover the route (in any of the | registries, including the RADB): | | http://www.ra.net/cgi-bin/ra/radb-duplicates.pl 20. How do I check what is registered in the IRR? The tool to use is whois. A few examples make the command self explanatory: whois -h whois.ra.net 128.228.0.0 whois -h whois.ripe.net as378 whois -h whois.canet.ca 142.77.0.0 | There is an easy Web interface to query and update the IRR: | | http://nap-roma.uni.net/cgi-bin/whois 21. Is there a tool to automatically create route filters based on IRR information? rlc is a route list compiler which is a subset of nlc/alc that allows the generation of route based filters (cisco access- lists) by extracting the nets belonging to an AS or AS MACRO from a routing database (i.e. Ripe Routing Database). In addition, it supports a limited set of functions to generate AS based filter lists. rlc is fully classless, and hence supports CIDR routes and subnets, as well as host routes. Source: ftp://dxcoms.cern.ch/pub/ripe-routing-wg Author: Jean-Michel Jouanigot, CERN <jimi(a)dxcoms.cern.ch> |22. What other tools are available in the CIDR world? | A web version of this information can be located at: | http://www.ra.net/~ra/tools | | ------------------------ | Online Tools and Reports | ------------------------ | | IRRWeb | | This graphical interface into the Internet Routing Registry makes | it possible to use the Web to query the IRR and update RADB AS | objects, Route objects, and Maintainer objects. Users can enter | any value that can be submitted through a whois query, such as an | AS number, network IP address, or maintainer. IRRWeb then displays | the corresponding AS objects, Route objects, or Maintainer objects | from the various registries in the IRR. Authorized maintainers can | edit the objects directly; IRRWeb performs a cursory pre-check and | mails the revised object to auto-dbm(a)ra.net. The user then | receives e-mail from auto-dbm confirming and displaying the revised | object, or explaining why the object was rejected. | | See http://www.ra.net/cgi-bin/ra/query-radb.pl | | Source code is available at | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/tools/irrweb.tar.gz | | | Route History Server | | The Route History Server provides a mechanism for tracking | the announce/withdraw history of a given prefix for the last 24 | hours. The History Server peers with the route servers at | each NAP and records all BGP updates in History Server/Route | Server peering session. | | See http://www.ra.net/cgi-bin/ra/rshist.pl | | | ----------------------- | Tools Available for FTP | ----------------------- | | RSd | | The Route Server daemon (RSd) is an enhanced version of | the GateD routing software that provides multiples views of | routing information. | The software provides a mechanism for network service provides | to off-load the computational complexity of routing policy | calculations from their routers. RSd supports configuration and | transparent passing of BGP MEDs. The software also supports | BGP route flap dampening. | | Available at ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/tools/rsd.tar.gz | | | Peval | A policy evaluator that inputs a RIPE-181 policy | expression, performs essential background | calculations such as symbolic evaluations and | expansions, and outputs another RIPE-181 policy | expression that is used by other tools, such as | RTConfig. | | Available as part of the RAToolSet at | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/tools/RAToolSet | | | RTConfig | A router configuration tool that can be used by | providers to generate router configs directly from | the RADB or other IRR registries. Currently in | production use for the RA Route Servers, ANSNET, and | CA*net, RTConfig is a front-end tool that uses peval | and radbserver transparently to users. | | Available as part of the RAToolSet at | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/tools/RAToolSet | | | rrc2r/rrmerge | This Cisco-to-RIPE-181 conversion package makes it possible for | users to convert Cisco router configuration files to RIPE-181 | objects that can be submitted to the Internet Routing Registry | (IRR). The Cisco access-list can be converted into an explicit set | of nets embedded in an AS object or represented as a community. | The RADBserver is queried for any missing or previously registered | information. | | Available at | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/tools/RAToolSet/rrc2r-0.2.tar.gz | | | CiscoBGP | IRR users have long recognized the need for tools that check the | IRR against routes actually propagated in the Internet. CiscoBGP | obtains and analyzes routing information from production Ciscos, | and compares the data with routes in the IRR. The software also | flags prefixes that are reserved by RFC 1597, Address Allocation | for Private Internets. | | Available as part of the MRT software distribution at | http://www.merit.edu/~mrt | | | BGPCheck | BGPCheck obtains and analyzes routing information from BGP4 | peering sessions, and compares the data with routes in the IRR. The | software also flags prefixes that are reserved by | RFC 1597, <em>Address Allocation for Private Internets</em>. | | Available as part of the MRT software distribution at | http://www.merit.edu/~mrt | | | PRtraceroute | The 'prtraceroute' tool is a powerful form of traceroute that | displays the Autonomous Systems that a packet traverses. | PRtraceroute was developed by the Pride project. | | A version of prtraceroute that queries the RADB is available at | ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/pride/prtraceroute-2.0beta2.shar.gz | | | ------------------ | Tool Announcements | ------------------ | PGP-Based Radb Authentication | Follow these steps to take advantage of the new RADB support for | PGP-based digital signatures: | | 1. Register your public key with the Routing Arbiter Service. | 2. Modify your Maintainer object to reflect your use of digital | signatures. | 3. Use PGP to sign your RADB transactions. | | For detailed instructions, see: | http://www.ra.net/routing.arbiter/RA/RADB.tools.docs/pgp.html Contributors: Christian Panigl - Vienna University, Austria Bill Manning - ISI Tony Li - Cisco Systems Havard Eidnes - SINTEF, Norway Yakov Rekhter - Cisco Systems | Craig Labovitz - Merit Network

1 0

test pls ignore
by arjan＠NL.net 28 Nov '95

28 Nov '95

pls ignore

1 0

keeping in touch
by Ndeh_Ningo＠camfido.gn.apc.org 27 Nov '95

27 Nov '95

DJR> Hi Ndeh (may I call you so?), Yes. DJR> Do you need an RFC Index (you could look into and tell me DJR> what papers are of interest)? Yes I am going to subscribe to the ripe-list as you recommended. I am currently reading the material you sent. It is a bit confusing for the uninitiated. I shall get in touch when I can pose some specific questions. In the meantime, if you come across anything that you think can be of interest to me, please I'll appreciate receiving it by e-mail. Best regardss Ndeh

1 0

Re: pro/cons of virtual hosting services
by jcaron＠pressimage.net 27 Nov '95

27 Nov '95

At 17:17 14/11/95, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > poole(a)eunet.ch writes: > > > We strongly discourage use of IP address space for virtual hosting > > > services because this represents no technical reason to assign more than > > > one address to a host. Therefore it is in conflict with address space > > > conservation. > > > > A would strongly suggest that this is a NON-problem, even with the gigantic > > increase in WWW servers that we are all experiencing it is hard to see how > > this could ever become a serious consideration. > >Unfortunately we have seen some significant address space requests based >on this. Note that we are not talking about one additional address per >organisation served, but one additional address per arbitrary entity >requiring a virtual server. Given the boom in http based services this >may become quite significant. > >To repeat: The second soloution proposed provides all aspects of >provider independence. Why should we waste address space if wasting it >does not provide significant additional functionality? It *DOES* provide additional functionality. We had that kind of debate lots of times in lots of places. DNS is the simplest, most integrated "directory assistance" provided on the Internet, and many (most?) people simply try "http://www.company.com" when they need info about that company. The virtual hosting hack is nothing else but a hack. It should never have been used that much, and the "Host:" or "Full-URI" header should already be part of the HTTP spec (it is now postponed till version 1.2 of the spec, if I remember), as the HTTP WG is still trying to normalize the current practice, instead of trying to defined a new good practice (this is not a criticism, the people on the WG do work a lot to define precisely and minutely the protocol, but I think they should place this into perspective, and see that that header should be part of the spec ASAP, before it's too late and the installed base is too large). I think RIPE should put pressure on the people in the WG to include that f***ing header in the spec very soon (1.1 would be a good idea). In the meanwhile, virtual hosting is the only way to do this, so I guess we'll have to do with it. Jacques. --- Jacques Caron - Pressimage Telematique - jcaron(a)pressimage.net Mail: 5/7 rue Raspail - 93108 Montreuil Cedex - France Tel: +33 (1) 49 88 63 56 - Fax: +33 (1) 49 88 63 64 Pager: 0000026 (Tel: 36 60 60 60/Minitel: 36 09 09 09) Planete.net: Bordeaux, Lille, Marseille, Montreuil, Toulouse, Nantes et Nancy. Bientot Rouen et Lyon - http://www.planete.net

5 4

Announcement for Local IR Training Course in Amsterdam
by RIPE NCC Training 20 Nov '95

20 Nov '95

* * * Announcement * * * Local Internet Registries Training Course Date: Thursday, 1. February, 1996 Time: 0900 - 1700 Venue: RIPE NCC Kruislaan 409 1098 SJ Amsterdam The Netherlands Course Audience --------------- The target audience for this course is personnel of European Local Internet Registries that contribute to the RIPE NCC. Material Covered ---------------- The course is a one day introduction on Internet name, address and routing policy registration procedures in Europe. It also teaches how to query and use the information registered for operational purposes. This includes the following material and activities: o Overview of name, address and routing registration procedures. o Responsibilities of both RIPE NCC and Local IR's to each other. o Wider context of the Delegated Registry system and relevant issues (IPv4 address depletion, CIDR) and how this relates to IP requests. o How to use the RIPE NCC Database. o Use of AS numbers, Routing Registry concepts and an introduction to using PRIDE tools. o DNS feedback on commor errors, how to request delegations, and pointers to useful tools. We again stress that this course will *not* teach Local Registries on how to run their business as Internet Service Providers. It is clearly focussed on registration procedures and the interaction between the RIPE NCC and local IR's. A detailed outline is appended below. The course itself will include lunch and will be free. This of course does not include your travel and subsitence ;-). How to Register --------------- Please send an RSVP to <training(a)ripe.net> if you would like to attend the course. If you have previously approached us about attending this course, we ask you to confirm that you (or a colleague) will be attending. Registrations will be accepted on a first come, first served basis. If the course is oversubscribed, we will give priority to local IRs who have paid the signup fee in 1995. If it is still oversubscribed, we will accept only one person per new local registry. We will provide additional course dates in Amsterdam as necessary. If a number of local registries so request, we will present courses at other European locations. If you would like a local course or have any questions or suggestions, please do not hesitate to contact us. The RIPE NCC Training Team: Mirjam Kuehne, Daniel Karrenberg --- Course Outline -------------- For this second course, we will provide a slidebook and a reader on the day of the course, as well as electronically. Once feedback is received, it is planned to make detailed documentation available in the form of a guide much like the PRIDE guide. The program will divide the actual content into the following sections: 1. Introduction For those unfamiliar with the Delegated Internet Registry system and the RIPE NCC, this section will give a historical overview of how we have arrived at today's model of operation and why training of local IR's is a much needed activity. 2. IP Registry procedures This section will clarify the procedures between the RIPE NCC and local IR's with respect to requests for IP address space. It will take a step by step approach on how to complete documentation, the kind of information that is required, what the "handholding" procedure is, how to deal with very large requests, and very small requests, and more generally what criteria the RIPE NCC and local IR's use for their customers in the context of CIDR and IPv4 address depletion. 3. RIPE NCC Database This section will explain what the RIPE NCC Database is and how it fits into the scheme of other registry databases. It will cover how to create and update RIPE NCC Database objects and will explain how to query the database. 4. Routing Registry procedures This section will examine AS numbers, when you need them and how to request them. This will be set within the context of how AS numbers are used as part of the RIPE Routing Registry. Understanding the basic principles behind the Internet Routing Registry and how registering your policy is an important element in the global schema. This section will also include a brief introduction to the PRIDE tools and how they can be useful to you. 5. DNS procedures Where to request forward and reverse domain delegation. Which documentation should be completed. How reverse domain delegation requests are processed at the RIPE NCC (with a useful tool). We will also take a look at common errors in setting up DNS with respect to relevant RFCs and RIPE recommendations. Feedback Please! Throughout the course there will be ample chance for feedback and discussion with an emphasis for you to tell us how we can improve ;-). %%%%%%%%%%% PLEASE NOTE %%%%%%%%%%% Our handling of ALL course registrations is fully automated. To register for the course, please complete the registration form and send it to <training(a)ripe.net>. Please send only the registration form in your reply and edit out all other text. Add in a value in the `box' area marked between the square brackets (i.e. "[" and "]" s). If you have any questions about the training course or your registration form, please contact us at <training(a)ripe.net>. You will receive a notification message that your request has been processed. Many thanks, and look forward to seeing you, RIPE NCC Training Team ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- %START PART 1 - Registration 1) Your name Enter First name, Last name in FULL e.g. John Doe Mary-Beth Walton # NAME [ ] 2) Your Registry ID (format: country-code.<name of registry>) # REG [ ] 3) Your e-mail address # EMAIL [ ] 4) The course you plan to attend (date and location) # COURSE [ ] %END

1 0

Virtual Web Hosting Services
by David Guthrie 19 Nov '95

19 Nov '95

Daniel, We strongly support Peter Galbavy's position on web hosting services and that using a single ip address is not bad! The Internet's growth and success have made it crucial for any good sized company to have a presence on the Web. The alternatives are usually to install a leased line, router and web server which would usually take up a much larger subnet or even a full class C address or to use a web hosting service of some sort that uses only a single ip address for an entire company. This is clearly much more efficient that each Web site using a larger address space assignment and thereby placing greater strain on the diminishing address pool. Large companies have lots of budget and if they can't get the lower cost shared web server solution, they will opt for the higher solution. Our experience is that they will not tolerate the www.provider.xx/~yourco sort of addressing convention. Great, however for individuals. Birds of a feather like to fly together. Most of the big birds have their own www.yourco.xx registations and now the smaller ones now want the same sort of presentation. The designers of http should perhaps have thought this out or get thinking about a solution. In the meantime the rest of us have to find a way to make it work the most efficiently. Regards David Guthrie, Technocom plc, U.K.

3 2

Valid Use [was pro/cons of virtual hosting]
by Oliver Smith 17 Nov '95

17 Nov '95

I wish to propose that RIPE produce a document defining acceptable use of an IP address. I'm not sure which of the lists is the most apropriate, but I'm sure discussion can be moved to the relevant group. I believe such a document would be beneficial to the RIPE NCC community as a whole. Regards, Oliver Smith

1 0

RE: Routing wars pending?
by Hank Nussbacher 16 Nov '95

16 Nov '95

On Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:00:04 MET you said: > With regard to the rest of your message - here is what we do, both as a > Service Provider Registry and a as backbone provider which has to deal > with routing: > > We strictly refuse requests to assign address space for further > sub-assignement. Adresses are *directly* assigned to the eventual user. > If a service provider wants to act as a Local-IR, then the proper way > of doing it is to get in touch with the RIPE-NCC and establish a > registry of it's own. Is that the general consensus in other countries? > > Just to make sure that everybody understands the rules, we explicitely > point out that the assignement is only valid for the purpose of > connecting (directly or through an intermediate step) to our backbone. > We explicitely reserve the right to reclaim the address space if these > conditions are not (or no longer) met. I know that RLR are slightly > different, of course. We have had problems with this also. > > With regard to routing, the answer is both collaboration by all > service providers (which is working rather well, I think) *and* > filtering based on the route objects in the RIPE database (which > appears to gain popularity). If somebody tries to play games, and most > of the backbones would have filters, then there is a good chance that > the hickup is confined to a small part of the Internet - which > eventually makes the "highjacked" addresses more or less useless. Yes Europe is very organized - but what do you do about the USA? > > And the multiple database issue should be sorted out anyway, because > the problem of inconsistency *is* there, even without malicious intent > on any side. > > Wilfried. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at > Computer Center - ACOnet : > Vienna University : Tel: +43 1 4065822 355 > Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4065822 170 > A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : NIC: WW144 > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hank

2 1

RE: PRO/CONS OF VIRTUAL HOSTING SERVICES
by 116780＠ibmmail.com 16 Nov '95

16 Nov '95

Daniel writes: >http://company.com/ generally is generally no more intuitive than >http://company.com/company/. This is a rehash of the "predictable >domain name" and "predictable mailbox name" discussion. It only makes a >difference for very well known company names. Promoting this practise >will give a wrong image of prestige to a "short URL". I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with this. For those companies who are using or wish to use the WWW for marketing purposes, it is a question of following what is *already* established practice and being on an equal footing with other companies. (I'm not pleading special interest - We are in the process of moving from a virtual host on an "WWW Hotel" to a new dedicated server of our own - no address space is thus freed up.) Andrew J Cowie Royal Insurance plc (http://www.royal-group.com/) Extra X400 information begins: Originator Name: COWIEA Org Units: LIVERPOOL Organisation: NHP Domain: GB/IBMX400/ROYINT Node.Userid: IBMX400.116780 Message Id: 0002C9A6.MAI Sent by Name: COWIEA Org Units: LIVERPOOL Organisation: NHP Domain: GB/IBMX400/ROYINT Node.Userid: IBMX400.116780 Free Fmt Name: COWIE, Andrew / NHP Subject: RE: PRO/CONS OF VIRTUAL HOSTING SERVICES Recipients Name: INET INET Domain: GB/IBMX400/IBMMAIL Node.Userid: IBMMAIL.INET Free Fmt Name: INET, INET Reply request: No

1 0

pro/cons of virtual hosting services
by Daniel Karrenberg 15 Nov '95

15 Nov '95

Dear colleagues, The following questions raises a current problem. Please take note. > luc(a)inbe.net (Luc Dierckx) writes: > > > Hello, > > Does RIPE have any opinions about the use of multiple IP addresses for > virtual hosting services ? (So using ifconfig ep0 alias, ifconfig ef0:1, > ifconfig vif0 ... not using different physical machines on the same > network) > > Technically, this is just a waste of IP addresses and pollution of the > naming space just for the 'niceness' of the URL. (http://www.customer.com/ > instead of http://www.provider.net/customer/ or aliased via > http://www.customer.country/customer/ ) > > Commercially, it's just another sales argument: 'Yes, we can offer you > http://www.company.com/'. > > Today INnet do not support the virtual hosting > but commercial pressure is up. I feel this needs immediate attention. > Unless there is really no problem with it. > If yes, it should be brought to every one's attention. We strongly discourage use of IP address space for virtual hosting services because this represents no technical reason to assign more than one address to a host. Therefore it is in conflict with address space conservation. We recommend to use URLs of the form http://www.www-provider.com/customer1/ http://www.www-provider.com/customer2/ or if customers desire www.customer.com: http://www.customer1.com/customer1/ http://www.customer2.com/customer2/ with CNAME RRs for www.customer1.com and www.customer2.com pointing to the real server. The latter variant provides mobility for the customer without using extra address space. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Regards Daniel Karrenberg RIPE NCC Manager

11 19