ERX of v4 address space proposal
Dear Colleagues, Please find attached the proposal for the ERX of IPv4 address space for your review. This proposal was reviewed by the ERX-Taskforce that was set-up at the RIPE 43 meeting. Comments received were summarised and sent to both Database and LIR Working Group mailing lists. We would appreciate your feedback on this proposal no later than Wednesday, 13 November 2002. A timeline for this project will be issued along with final project description. Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC ERX of v4 address space ----------------------- INTRODUCTION When ARIN began operations, it inherited classful blocks of addresses ("legacy" space) that were issued to organisations not in ARIN's region. The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) are co-ordinating the transfer of these records from the ARIN Database to RIPE Database or APNIC Database, as appropriate. This is based on geographic location of each resource holder. The affected records include class B networks and class C ranges, particularly those issued from 192/8. ARIN also maintains reverse delegation for all legacy address space. Once the transfer is complete, this responsibility will be distributed among the RIRs according to their respective regions. BENEFITS This will enable resource holders to maintain all their records in one database and End Users to interface with just one RIR for all database and reverse delegation matters. This effort will also help to locate address holders and recover unused or underutilised address space. IMPACT ON RESOURCE HOLDERS Entities holding legacy space to be transferred can expect the process to be largely transparent. While it will not affect network status in any way, resource holders might be required to create contact identifiers with the proper registry if they do not already exist. Queries made in WHOIS for an IP block that has been transferred to another RIR will be directed to the appropriate RIR. APPROACH The plan is to perform the transfer by /8. For each /8 the following tasks have to be performed: 1. Conflicts (contacts and description) to be resolved 2. Records and associated documentation to be transferred 3. Reverse delegation to be set up A total of 47 /8's with 8030 records have to be transferred. CONFLICTS The following types of conflicts have been identified: C1. Record exists in ARIN DB only. There is no exact matching (range wise) record in the RIPE DB. Proposal: to update internal documentation, create the record in the RIPE DB and protect with a unique generated mntner. C2. Range matches records in both ARIN and RIPE DBs. Meaning that contact and description may be different. Most cases indicate out of date information in one of the Databases, not real conflicts or attempts to hijack address space. What happened in most cases is that people started maintaining their allocation or assignement in the RIPE DB, especially since RIPE DB started to support the Routing Registry. Proposal: Notify conflicts and give time to reach consensus. After the deadline merge those who haven't responded, but _do_not_lock_ (keep the same mntner). C3.0 Record exists in the RIPE DB only. C3.1. One reason why such situation may exist is that this is a valid RIPE NCC allocation. Proposal: To preserve information in the RIPE DB. C3.2 Another situation is that the registration data are simply garbage. Proposal: Notify, give time for explanations and clean up in the end. PROCEDURE for a /8 1. Pre transfer 1.1 Initial dump is prepared for transfer by ARIN 1.2 Announcement is sent to ARIN's contacts 1.3 Reverese delegation domain space is cleaned up in the RIPE DB (reverse domain objects for which no delegation was provided are deleted) 2. Transfer 2.1 Final dump is prepared by ARIN 2.2 C1 group: database records are imported, documentation is updated, contacts are notified 2.3 C2 group: contacts (ARIN+RIPE) are asked to reach consensus. 2.4 C3.2 group: contacts are notified of possible deletion. 2.5 DNS is updated: domain objects are generated, zone (full or partial) is generated. 3. Conflict resolution 3.1 C2 group: non responding records are merged but _not_locked_. 3.2 C3.2 group: records without good reasons are deleted. -------
From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> "A total of 47 /8's with 8030 records have to be transferred." Which /8s ? http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:01 AM Subject: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Dear Colleagues,
Please find attached the proposal for the ERX of IPv4 address space for your review. This proposal was reviewed by the ERX-Taskforce that was set-up at the RIPE 43 meeting. Comments received were summarised and sent to both Database and LIR Working Group mailing lists.
We would appreciate your feedback on this proposal no later than Wednesday, 13 November 2002. A timeline for this project will be issued along with final project description.
Regards,
Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC
ERX of v4 address space -----------------------
INTRODUCTION
When ARIN began operations, it inherited classful blocks of addresses ("legacy" space) that were issued to organisations not in ARIN's region. The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) are co-ordinating the transfer of these records from the ARIN Database to RIPE Database or APNIC Database, as appropriate. This is based on geographic location of each resource holder. The affected records include class B networks and class C ranges, particularly those issued from 192/8. ARIN also maintains reverse delegation for all legacy address space. Once the transfer is complete, this responsibility will be distributed among the RIRs according to their respective regions.
BENEFITS
This will enable resource holders to maintain all their records in one database and End Users to interface with just one RIR for all database and reverse delegation matters. This effort will also help to locate address holders and recover unused or underutilised address space.
IMPACT ON RESOURCE HOLDERS
Entities holding legacy space to be transferred can expect the process to be largely transparent. While it will not affect network status in any way, resource holders might be required to create contact identifiers with the proper registry if they do not already exist. Queries made in WHOIS for an IP block that has been transferred to another RIR will be directed to the appropriate RIR.
APPROACH
The plan is to perform the transfer by /8. For each /8 the following tasks have to be performed:
1. Conflicts (contacts and description) to be resolved 2. Records and associated documentation to be transferred 3. Reverse delegation to be set up
A total of 47 /8's with 8030 records have to be transferred.
CONFLICTS
The following types of conflicts have been identified:
C1. Record exists in ARIN DB only. There is no exact matching (range wise) record in the RIPE DB.
Proposal: to update internal documentation, create the record in the RIPE DB and protect with a unique generated mntner.
C2. Range matches records in both ARIN and RIPE DBs. Meaning that contact and description may be different. Most cases indicate out of date information in one of the Databases, not real conflicts or attempts to hijack address space. What happened in most cases is that people started maintaining their allocation or assignement in the RIPE DB, especially since RIPE DB started to support the Routing Registry.
Proposal: Notify conflicts and give time to reach consensus. After the deadline merge those who haven't responded, but _do_not_lock_ (keep the same mntner).
C3.0 Record exists in the RIPE DB only.
C3.1. One reason why such situation may exist is that this is a valid RIPE NCC allocation.
Proposal: To preserve information in the RIPE DB.
C3.2 Another situation is that the registration data are simply garbage.
Proposal: Notify, give time for explanations and clean up in the end.
PROCEDURE for a /8
1. Pre transfer 1.1 Initial dump is prepared for transfer by ARIN 1.2 Announcement is sent to ARIN's contacts 1.3 Reverese delegation domain space is cleaned up in the RIPE DB (reverse domain objects for which no delegation was provided are deleted)
2. Transfer 2.1 Final dump is prepared by ARIN 2.2 C1 group: database records are imported, documentation is updated, contacts are notified 2.3 C2 group: contacts (ARIN+RIPE) are asked to reach consensus. 2.4 C3.2 group: contacts are notified of possible deletion. 2.5 DNS is updated: domain objects are generated, zone (full or partial) is generated.
3. Conflict resolution 3.1 C2 group: non responding records are merged but _not_locked_. 3.2 C3.2 group: records without good reasons are deleted.
-------
Dear Jim Fleming, Jim Fleming wrote:
From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> "A total of 47 /8's with 8030 records have to be transferred."
Which /8s ? http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
The ipv4 address ranges that are subject to the ERX will be published by the end of the next week. Thanks for bringing this up. Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:01 AM Subject: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Dear Colleagues,
Please find attached the proposal for the ERX of IPv4 address space for your review. This proposal was reviewed by the ERX-Taskforce that was set-up at the RIPE 43 meeting. Comments received were summarised and sent to both Database and LIR Working Group mailing lists.
We would appreciate your feedback on this proposal no later than Wednesday, 13 November 2002. A timeline for this project will be issued along with final project description.
Regards,
Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC
ERX of v4 address space -----------------------
INTRODUCTION
When ARIN began operations, it inherited classful blocks of addresses ("legacy" space) that were issued to organisations not in ARIN's region. The Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) are co-ordinating the transfer of these records from the ARIN Database to RIPE Database or APNIC Database, as appropriate. This is based on geographic location of each resource holder. The affected records include class B networks and class C ranges, particularly those issued from 192/8. ARIN also maintains reverse delegation for all legacy address space. Once the transfer is complete, this responsibility will be distributed among the RIRs according to their respective regions.
BENEFITS
This will enable resource holders to maintain all their records in one database and End Users to interface with just one RIR for all database and reverse delegation matters. This effort will also help to locate address holders and recover unused or underutilised address space.
IMPACT ON RESOURCE HOLDERS
Entities holding legacy space to be transferred can expect the process to be largely transparent. While it will not affect network status in any way, resource holders might be required to create contact identifiers with the proper registry if they do not already exist. Queries made in WHOIS for an IP block that has been transferred to another RIR will be directed to the appropriate RIR.
APPROACH
The plan is to perform the transfer by /8. For each /8 the following tasks have to be performed:
1. Conflicts (contacts and description) to be resolved 2. Records and associated documentation to be transferred 3. Reverse delegation to be set up
A total of 47 /8's with 8030 records have to be transferred.
CONFLICTS
The following types of conflicts have been identified:
C1. Record exists in ARIN DB only. There is no exact matching (range wise) record in the RIPE DB.
Proposal: to update internal documentation, create the record in the RIPE DB and protect with a unique generated mntner.
C2. Range matches records in both ARIN and RIPE DBs. Meaning that contact and description may be different. Most cases indicate out of date information in one of the Databases, not real conflicts or attempts to hijack address space. What happened in most cases is that people started maintaining their allocation or assignement in the RIPE DB, especially since RIPE DB started to support the Routing Registry.
Proposal: Notify conflicts and give time to reach consensus. After the deadline merge those who haven't responded, but _do_not_lock_ (keep the same mntner).
C3.0 Record exists in the RIPE DB only.
C3.1. One reason why such situation may exist is that this is a valid RIPE NCC allocation.
Proposal: To preserve information in the RIPE DB.
C3.2 Another situation is that the registration data are simply garbage.
Proposal: Notify, give time for explanations and clean up in the end.
PROCEDURE for a /8
1. Pre transfer 1.1 Initial dump is prepared for transfer by ARIN 1.2 Announcement is sent to ARIN's contacts 1.3 Reverese delegation domain space is cleaned up in the RIPE DB (reverse domain objects for which no delegation was provided are deleted)
2. Transfer 2.1 Final dump is prepared by ARIN 2.2 C1 group: database records are imported, documentation is updated, contacts are notified 2.3 C2 group: contacts (ARIN+RIPE) are asked to reach consensus. 2.4 C3.2 group: contacts are notified of possible deletion. 2.5 DNS is updated: domain objects are generated, zone (full or partial) is generated.
3. Conflict resolution 3.1 C2 group: non responding records are merged but _not_locked_. 3.2 C3.2 group: records without good reasons are deleted.
-------
-- Andrei
Dear Colleagues, You may find a list of networks (/8's) containing allocations that will be transferred by the ERX project at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/db/erx/erx-ip/ A detailed list of which networks will be transferred, and to which RIR, will be posted before each /8 is transferred. A full schedule for each network will also be published for each /8. Regards, Andrei Robachevsky CTO, RIPE NCC
192.0.0.0/8 ? The swamp is coming to RIPE or which poor RIR ? Peter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:54 PM Subject: [lir-wg] Re: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Dear Colleagues,
You may find a list of networks (/8's) containing allocations that will be transferred by the ERX project at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/db/erx/erx-ip/
A detailed list of which networks will be transferred, and to which RIR, will be posted before each /8 is transferred. A full schedule for each network will also be published for each /8.
Regards,
Andrei Robachevsky CTO, RIPE NCC
Peter Galbavy wrote:
192.0.0.0/8 ?
The swamp is coming to RIPE or which poor RIR ?
Our current data shows that around 753 networks will go to APNIC, 9072 stay with ARIN, 92 will go to LACNIC and 3176 to RIPE NCC. 192/8 will be processed as last and sweet piece, and statistics will be updated.
Peter
Regards, Andrei
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:54 PM Subject: [lir-wg] Re: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Dear Colleagues,
You may find a list of networks (/8's) containing allocations that will be transferred by the ERX project at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/db/erx/erx-ip/
A detailed list of which networks will be transferred, and to which RIR, will be posted before each /8 is transferred. A full schedule for each network will also be published for each /8.
Regards,
Andrei Robachevsky CTO, RIPE NCC
From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net>
Our current data shows that around 753 networks will go to APNIC, 9072 stay with ARIN, 92 will go to LACNIC and 3176 to RIPE NCC.
That of course only applies to the 32-bit AM(0) address space with TOS=0x00,0x*0,0x0*. The FM(1) address space can be allocated based more on quality, as opposed to quantity or unwillingness to pay market value for DNS services and Internet resources. Where do all of the other /8s end up ? http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space Have the RIRs taken all of them over from ICANN ? Note, LACNIC is less than 30 days old, and it will get 92 /8s ? *each* valued at $1 to $2 billion dollars ? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: "Peter Galbavy" <peter.galbavy@knowtion.net> Cc: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 8:40 AM Subject: [db-wg] Re: [lir-wg] Re: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Peter Galbavy wrote:
192.0.0.0/8 ?
The swamp is coming to RIPE or which poor RIR ?
Our current data shows that around 753 networks will go to APNIC, 9072 stay with ARIN, 92 will go to LACNIC and 3176 to RIPE NCC.
192/8 will be processed as last and sweet piece, and statistics will be updated.
Peter
Regards,
Andrei
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:54 PM Subject: [lir-wg] Re: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Dear Colleagues,
You may find a list of networks (/8's) containing allocations that will be transferred by the ERX project at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/db/erx/erx-ip/
A detailed list of which networks will be transferred, and to which RIR, will be posted before each /8 is transferred. A full schedule for each network will also be published for each /8.
Regards,
Andrei Robachevsky CTO, RIPE NCC
Jim, Why don't you and Joe Baptista and Jeff Williams get off our mailing lists, create your own little list and spam each other with junk? (Unless you're the same person - noone has ever seen any of you "mystery men", isn't that right?) The rest of us are actually interested in useful community participation. Thanks RIRs for a good job by the way. Martin Andersen
-- Original Message -- From: "Jim Fleming" <JimFleming@ameritech.net> To: "Peter Galbavy" <peter.galbavy@knowtion.net>, "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> Cc: <yjpark@myepark.com>, <steinle@smartvia.de>, "Richard J. Sexton" <richard@vrx.net>, "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>, <ray@fassett.org>, <love@cptech.org>, <karl@cavebear.com>, <k@widgital.com>, <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>, "Joop Teernstra" <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>, "Joey Borda **star*walker**" <starwalker@gay.com>, "Joe Baptista" <baptista@dot-god.com>, "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>, <JMKing@ipro.org>, "Jkhan" <Jkhan@MetroMgr.com>, <jefsey@jefsey.com>, <hans.klein@pubpolicy.gatech.edu>, <faia@amauta.rcp.net.pe>, <eric@hi-tek.com>, "Elisabeth Porteneuve" <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>, "Bruce Young" <Bruce@barelyadequate.info>, "Ben Edelman" <edelman@law.harvard.edu>, <andy@ccc.de>, "@quasar Internet Solutions, Inc." <shore@quasar.net>, "Stephen Waters" <swaters@amicus.com>, <chandley@ntia.doc.gov>, <censslin@ntia.doc.gov>, <DEvans@doc.gov>, <nvictory@ntia.doc.gov>, <RLayton@ntia.doc.gov>, <vinton.g.cerf@WCOM.COM>, <mouhamet@next.sn>, <lynn@icann.org>, <lyman@acm.org>, <junsec@wide.ad.jp>, <jcohen@shapirocohen.com>, <apisan@servidor.unam.mx>, <Amadeu@nominalia.com>, <helmut.schink@icn.siemens.de>, <lir-wg@ripe.net>, <db-wg@ripe.net>, "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu> Subject: Re: [db-wg] Re: [lir-wg] Re: ERX of v4 address space proposal Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:18:10 -0600
From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net>
Our current data shows that around 753 networks will go to APNIC, 9072
stay with ARIN, 92 will go to LACNIC and 3176 to RIPE NCC.
That of course only applies to the 32-bit AM(0) address space with TOS=0x00,0x*0,0x0*. The FM(1) address space can be allocated based more on quality, as opposed to quantity or unwillingness to pay market value for DNS services and Internet resources.
Where do all of the other /8s end up ? http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space Have the RIRs taken all of them over from ICANN ?
Note, LACNIC is less than 30 days old, and it will get 92 /8s ? *each* valued at $1 to $2 billion dollars ?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: "Peter Galbavy" <peter.galbavy@knowtion.net> Cc: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 8:40 AM Subject: [db-wg] Re: [lir-wg] Re: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Peter Galbavy wrote:
192.0.0.0/8 ?
The swamp is coming to RIPE or which poor RIR ?
Our current data shows that around 753 networks will go to APNIC, 9072
stay with ARIN, 92 will go to LACNIC and 3176 to RIPE NCC.
192/8 will be processed as last and sweet piece, and statistics will be
updated.
Peter
Regards,
Andrei
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrei Robachevsky" <andrei@ripe.net> To: <db-wg@ripe.net>; <lir-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:54 PM Subject: [lir-wg] Re: ERX of v4 address space proposal
Dear Colleagues,
You may find a list of networks (/8's) containing allocations that will
be transferred by the ERX project at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/db/erx/erx-ip/
A detailed list of which networks will be transferred, and to which RIR,
will be posted before each /8 is transferred. A full schedule for each
network will also be published for each /8.
Regards,
Andrei Robachevsky CTO, RIPE NCC
_______________________________________________________ Sök företag på Gula Sidorna http://www.gulasidorna.se
192.0.0.0/8?
The swamp is coming to RIPE or which poor RIR?
I beleive this list of address spaces are just the ones which contain assignments which will be moved, not that the responsibility for maintaining all the data for all the assignments in each of the blocks is going to be moved to RIPE. Regards, - Håvard
Dear Colleagues, Some additional information regarding the ERX project: Project description: http://www.ripe.net/db/erx.html Project FAQ: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/faq/database/erx-faq.html Presentation delivered at the RIPE 43 meeting: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/archive/ripe-43/presentations/ripe43-db-er... Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
Please find attached the proposal for the ERX of IPv4 address space for your review. This proposal was reviewed by the ERX-Taskforce that was set-up at the RIPE 43 meeting. Comments received were summarised and sent to both Database and LIR Working Group mailing lists.
We would appreciate your feedback on this proposal no later than Wednesday, 13 November 2002. A timeline for this project will be issued along with final project description. [...]
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
Please find attached the proposal for the ERX of IPv4 address space for your review.
Most legacy IPv4 address space was assigned directly by InterNIC. Should we read that all those addresses will have "PI" status? Secondly, who will provide reverse delegation and how can users of these blocks affect reverse delegation changes? I guess auto-inaddr will not work since it requires a valid RegID. Thanks! Regards, Beri --------- Berislav Todorovic, Senior IP Specialist -------- ----- KPN Eurorings B.V. - IP Engineering/NOC/Support ----- ---- Wilhelmina van Pruisenweg 78, 2595 AN Den Haag, NL ---- ----- Email: beri@eurorings.net <=> beri@EU.net ----
Dear Berislav, Berislav Todorovic wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
Please find attached the proposal for the ERX of IPv4 address space for your review.
Most legacy IPv4 address space was assigned directly by InterNIC. Should we read that all those addresses will have "PI" status?
As those networks were allocated before the concept of PI existed, the idea is to tag them with the "ALLOCATED UNSPECIFIED" status.
Secondly, who will provide reverse delegation and how can users of these blocks affect reverse delegation changes? I guess auto-inaddr will not work since it requires a valid RegID.
The reverse delegations will be made according to the information recorded in the ARIN database. This will be part of the ERX and will be done free of charge. If a change for reverse delegation is required then one should either become a member (if not already) or find an LIR that will handle such requests.
Thanks!
Regards, Beri
--------- Berislav Todorovic, Senior IP Specialist -------- ----- KPN Eurorings B.V. - IP Engineering/NOC/Support ----- ---- Wilhelmina van Pruisenweg 78, 2595 AN Den Haag, NL ---- ----- Email: beri@eurorings.net <=> beri@EU.net ----
Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC
--On 5. november 2002 10:00 +0100 Berislav Todorovic <beri@eurorings.net> wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
Please find attached the proposal for the ERX of IPv4 address space for your review.
Most legacy IPv4 address space was assigned directly by InterNIC. Should we read that all those addresses will have "PI" status?
Secondly, who will provide reverse delegation and how can users of these blocks affect reverse delegation changes? I guess auto-inaddr will not work since it requires a valid RegID.
I see three possibilities: 1) If you are already a LIR, this is no problem 2) If you are not an LIR, you probably receive connectivity from someone who are, and they should be able to help you out on this. 3) You may choose to become an LIR -hph
participants (7)
-
Andrei Robachevsky -
Berislav Todorovic -
Hans Petter Holen -
Havard Eidnes -
Jim Fleming -
martinandersen＠passagen.se -
Peter Galbavy