- ripe-list - mailman.ripe.net

RIPE DNS Hostcount January 1994
by Marten Terpstra 01 Feb '94

01 Feb '94

Folks, Please find below the RIPE DNS hostcount for January 1994. - Again a big increase of over 33,000 (or 6%) to 587,118. Again this indicates a doubling of the number of hosts in about one year (Dec 1992 = 284,000, Jan 1993 = 303,000). - We promised last month that we would produce a worldwide hostcount, but due to time constraints we have not been able to analyse the data. You might have seen the new ZONE survey of Mark Lottor of SRI, and we have made a comparison between the two sets of data. This comparison is available as ftp.ripe.net:ripe/hostcount/History/RIPE-SRI - All output is again available at ftp.ripe.net:ripe/hostcount. The large output files have been gzipped this time, to save some disk space and network bandwidth. History again appended below. Cheers, -Marten RIPE DNS Hostcount Previous Count : Fri Dec 31 1993 This Count : Mon Jan 31 1994 CY SOA COUNTED DUPL REAL CHANGE ============================================================ al 0 0 0 0 0 at 297 12871 284 12587 - 2546 be 78 7679 135 7544 + 470 bg 4 29 7 22 + 6 by 0 0 0 0 0 ch 224 39187 196 38991 + 6634 cs 86 2579 18 2561 - 332 cy 6 37 4 33 + 1 cz 119 4999 67 4932 + 465 de 1719 124612 4578 120034 + 8415 dk 139 8846 143 8703 + 344 dz 0 0 0 0 0 ee 19 402 2 400 - 37 eg 4 50 0 50 + 40 es 316 15264 109 15155 + 1006 fi 323 36686 981 35705 + 2620 fo 1 0 0 0 0 fr 731 57300 625 56675 + 2910 gb 1 17 0 0 - 17 ge 1 0 0 0 0 gr 108 2206 271 1935 + 204 hr 57 752 5 747 + 409 hu 43 3343 19 3324 + 274 ie 53 2385 55 2330 + 14 is 48 1992 9 1983 + 222 it 500 18380 353 18027 + 1735 il 131 6872 54 6818 + 528 li 2 17 0 17 0 lt 1 0 0 0 0 lu 20 310 2 308 + 14 lv 4 80 1 79 + 20 ma 1 0 0 0 0 mk 1 0 0 0 0 mt 1 0 0 0 0 nl 480 45407 490 44917 + 1166 no 493 32299 268 32031 + 1358 pl 243 5155 184 4971 + 97 pt 117 3455 73 3382 - 150 ro 10 63 1 62 - 5 se 568 42763 512 42251 + 1330 si 14 660 5 655 + 43 sk 40 629 13 616 + 265 su 161 1624 92 1532 + 101 tn 2 14 2 12 + 12 tr 25 471 6 465 - 58 ua 39 203 17 186 + 3 uk 906 129070 11994 117076 + 6200 va 0 0 0 0 0 yu 1 2 0 2 0 ============================================================ 8137 608710 21575 587118 +33761 This is an overview of the History of the RIPE hostcounts. It only contains the totals. The totals for 1990-1991 should be considered rather unstable and unreliable because the program used then was not really tuned, plus the count was not done as regular as it is now. Count : total hostcount for all European top level domains Delta : delta since previous count Delta % : delta as percentage of previous count Q Delta : delta over the past quarter Q Delta%: delta over last quarter as percentage of end of last quarter count For the Q Deltas I have not calculated those back before 1992, because the figures for 1990-1991 are not too reliable. *) Dec 1991 hostcount estimated at 135,000. Count Delta Delta % Q Delta Q Delta % ------------------------------------------------------------------- Oct 1990 31724 Nov 1990 33665 + 1941 + 6.1% Dec 1990 29230 - 4435 - 13.2% Jan 1991 43832 + 14602 + 50.0% Feb 1991 - Mar 1991 44506 + 674 + 1.5% Apr 1991 46948 + 2442 + 5.5% May 1991 - Jun 1991 63267 + 16319 + 34.8% Jul 1991 - Aug 1991 73069 + 9802 + 15.5% Sep 1991 92834 + 19765 + 27.0% Oct 1991 104824 + 11990 + 12.9% Nov 1991 129652 + 24828 + 23.7% Dec 1991 - Jan 1992 141308 + 11656 + 9.0% Feb 1992 161434 + 20126 + 14.2% Mar 1992 167939 + 6505 + 4.0% + 32939 *) + 24.4% *) Apr 1992 170050 + 2111 + 1.3% May 1992 182528 + 12478 + 7.3% Jun 1992 196758 + 14230 + 7.8% + 28819 + 17.2% Jul 1992 213017 + 16259 + 8.3% Aug 1992 221951 + 8934 + 4.2% Sep 1992 232522 + 10571 + 4.8% + 35764 + 18.2% Oct 1992 254585 + 22063 + 9.5% Nov 1992 271795 + 17210 + 6.8% Dec 1992 284374 + 12579 + 4.6% + 51852 + 22.3% Jan 1993 303828 + 19454 + 6.8% Feb 1993 322902 + 19074 + 6.3% Mar 1993 355140 + 32238 + 10.0% + 70766 + 24.9% Apr 1993 366164 + 11024 + 3.1% May 1993 385522 + 19358 + 5.3% Jun 1993 404930 + 19408 + 5.0% + 49790 + 14.0% Jul 1993 426827 + 21897 + 5.4% Aug 1993 451116 + 24289 + 5.7% Sep 1993 469356 + 18240 + 4.0% + 64424 + 15.9% Oct 1993 500018 + 30662 + 6.5% Nov 1993 533701 + 33683 + 6.7% Dec 1993 553357 + 19656 + 3.7% + 84001 + 17.9% Jan 1994 587118 + 33761 + 6.1%

1 0

Reimersholme Internet eXchange announcement
by Peter Lothberg 29 Jan '94

29 Jan '94

(:- ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE REIMERSHOLME INTERNET EXCHANGE Hereby we prodly announces that resources have been made available to facilitate a continuation of the current pilot Reimersholme Internet eXchange. The Reimersholme Internet eXchange is a 'European Multi Model eXchange' where several exchange concepts are availiable withn the same facility; 1. Demilitarized Zone -------------------------------------------------------- DMZ - using black 10base2 cable - using a multimode FDDI ring - using a multiport repeater - using a multiport transceiver (AUI plug) - using an etherswitch hub 2. Universal Neutral Internet eXchange -------------------------------------------------------- UNIX - using the technology presented by the Pride project during the Ripe meeting. - there is a connector tap avaliable for a route-server 3. Distributed Global Internet eXchange -------------------------------------------------------- D-GIX - using black 10base2 cable - using a multimode FDDI ring - using a multiport repeater - using a multiport transceiver (AUI plug) - using an etherswitch hub - route server that knowns about underlaying payload technology, such as SMDS, 802.3 MAC. 4. Interim Neutral Internet eXchange -------------------------------------------------------- INIX - as not specified by the Ebone D-GIX group - using 802.3 local network technology 5. Internet eXchange Facility -------------------------------------------------------- IXF - as specified in the IXF architecture document - using any media that can transport packets The pilot Reimersholme Internet eXchange invites all interested parties to participate. Facilities including UPS power, environmental support, test equipments, routing traffic analyzers and generators, many fat pipes and 24*7 onsite staffing is avaliable. The Internet eXchange is available, on the basis that the participating parties pays a minimum facility management fee and line costs. The Reimersholme Internet eXchange is part of the current experimental Distributed Global Internet eXchange. A route server with integrated distributed routing registry (using Ripe-81 format) is planned for the second quarter of 1994. Updates are done by sending new entries by E-mail to the server and data integratety and security is maintained using secure/authenticated mail protocols. The distributed routing registry is deployed in order to solve the emerging problems caused by the fact that established routing registrys like the Ripe-NCC are served by network providers who's AUP may restric universal access from users served by other service providers. For more information please contact the Reimersholme GIX coordinator at the address below. Disjoint Network Team Reimersholme Interconnect Box 9129 S-102 72 Stockholm Sweden D-GIX(a)Europa.NET +46 8 699 9720 -:)

1 0

Re: neutral interconnects in Europe
by peter＠unipalm.co.uk 24 Jan '94

24 Jan '94

While I welcome this paper I think that it is ill judged that a INIX does not also require connection to at least one European D-GIX. As a result an INIX could send all their european traffic via the US. Peter Dawe PIPEX Peter Dawe, Managing Director PIPEX Ltd.Email: peter(a)unipalm.co.uk Director Unipalm Limited, Voice: +44(0)223 250100 216 The Science Park, Milton Road Fax: +44(0)223 250101 Cambridge, England, CB4 4WA ****Warning**** This Email does not include smiles, shoulder shrugs and winks. Please assume this message is sent in good humour, with a smile, until MIME or X.400 has a correct body type! 8->

2 1

Re: THE LONDON INTERNET EXCHANGE
by Dave Morton 24 Jan '94

24 Jan '94

Peter, I was wondering how long it would take for this to be announced :- Any bets as to who is next ? :- Cheers, Dave

1 0

Re: neutral interconnects in Europe
by peter＠unipalm.co.uk 24 Jan '94

24 Jan '94

Kees Neggers <Kees.Neggers(a)SURFnet.nl> wrote : >Although I support both Peter Daws and Peter Kirsteins concerns about >European connectivity and the possible need for European traffic to >fly via the US, I like to point out that it is not the INIX, but the >providers who are responsible for payload traffic exchange. >As indicated in the statement, a possible and likely future >requirement for an INIX, but than it will probably change >name, will be to be part of a distributed GIX. The associated >requirements for that are currently under investigation in the D-GIX >developments activities. > >Kees Neggers In that case why the requirement for a US connection:-/ please be consistant. Basically, anyone can set up a *IX. The interconnection to the US and Europe is a matter for whether they become part of the D-GIX peering arrangement. Peter Peter Dawe, Managing Director PIPEX Ltd.Email: peter(a)unipalm.co.uk Director Unipalm Limited, Voice: +44(0)223 250100 216 The Science Park, Milton Road Fax: +44(0)223 250101 Cambridge, England, CB4 4WA ****Warning**** This Email does not include smiles, shoulder shrugs and winks. Please assume this message is sent in good humour, with a smile, until MIME or X.400 has a correct body type! 8->

1 0

THE LONDON INTERNET EXCHANGE
by peter＠unipalm.co.uk 24 Jan '94

24 Jan '94

ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE LONDON INTERNET EXCHANGE JANET and PIPEX hereby jointly announces that resources will be made available to facilitate the establishment of the pilot London Internet Exchange. It is planned to have a Route Server at the pilot London Internet Exchange in operation as soon as possible, subject to availability of the appropriate software and infrastructure support. The pilot London Internet Exchange will be available to all interested Internet service providers. The connections at the pilot London Internet Exchange would be made available, during 1994, on the basis that the connecting organisation pays only marginal line and connection costs. It is the intent that the London Internet Exchange will be a part of a Distributed Global Internet eXchange facility. For more information please contact PIPEX or JANET at the addresses below: Bob Day Joint Network Team c/o Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Chilton Didcot Oxon OX11 0QX R.Day(a)jnt.ac.uk +44 (0)235 44 5163 Richard Nuttall PIPEX Ltd 216 The Science Park Cambridge CB4 4WA richard(a)pipex.net +44 (0)223 250120 Peter Dawe, Managing Director PIPEX Ltd.Email: peter(a)unipalm.co.uk Director Unipalm Limited, Voice: +44(0)223 250100 216 The Science Park, Milton Road Fax: +44(0)223 250101 Cambridge, England, CB4 4WA ****Warning**** This Email does not include smiles, shoulder shrugs and winks. Please assume this message is sent in good humour, with a smile, until MIME or X.400 has a correct body type! 8->

1 0

Re: neutral interconnects in Europe
by P.Kirstein＠cs.ucl.ac.uk 23 Jan '94

23 Jan '94

While I welcome this paper I think that it is ill judged that a INIX does not also require connection to at least one European D-GIX. As a result an INIX could send all their european traffic via the US. Peter Dawe PIPEX I agree with Peter, it would be most unfortunate if Europe-Europe traffic was sent via a GIX in the US, and traversed the Atlantic via any research link. I note that there are recommendations that this not happen, but I am not sure that this is strong enough. For example, because of reciprocity, the UK-US network provision may agree to accept traffic from the US GIX; it may not plan to accept traffic from a European operator who has got to that GIX via another Europe-US route. Peter Kirstein Peter Dawe, Managing Director PIPEX Ltd.Email: peter(a)unipalm.co.uk Director Unipalm Limited, Voice: +44(0)223 250100 216 The Science Park, Milton Road Fax: +44(0)223 250101 Cambridge, England, CB4 4WA

2 1

neutral interconnects in Europe
by Frode Greisen 20 Jan '94

20 Jan '94

20 January 1994 Interim neutral interconnect structure in Europe ------------------------------------------------ A joint statement by Howard Davies, Dante Frode Greisen, Ebone Glenn Kowack, EUnet Christian Michau, Renater Bernhard Stockmann, KTH Peter Villemoes, NORDUnet 1. Introduction --------------- With the growth of the Internet and with the growing number of service providers it is mandatory to develop the interconnect structure. The pilot GIX (Global Internet eXchange) in Washington (1,2) has gone in production in 1993 and new plans for a D-GIX (Distributed GIX) structure are being developed (3). It is expected that the D-GIXes will use the same routing registry data base as the GIX, but that tools will be developed which will allow the derivation of different routing databases for the D-GIX route servers to describe the situation at any particular D-GIX. However, as this is development and pilot work, there is a need to agree on interim solutions which support the overall strategy towards improved interconnectivity. The authors of this paper met to discuss how the service providers in Europe could best take advantage of the D-GIX development and also to set up guiding principles for the providers on how to cooperate until the D-GIX technology is fully developed. Regardless of the D-GIX development, a number of interconnecting points exist, eg. ethernets where different providers connect routers to exchange IP traffic. Such points are sometimes called DMZs (De-Militarized Zones) or neutral interconnects. We suggest a new name for such interconnection points that satisfy certain criteria: INIX (Interim Neutral Internet eXchange). For definition of other terms, such as GIX, route server, D-GIX, peering etc. see reference 1,2 and 3. 2. INIX definition ------------------ An INIX is an IP network connection structure that satisfies the following three conditions: 1. Freedom of peering. Each partner may bilaterally or multi-laterally decide to peer (send traffic to and accept traffic from) or not to peer with any other partner connected to the INIX. The partners are also free to establish transit agreements or not. 2. Potential GIX access. In order to minimise the undue proliferation of INIX sites, an interconnect point must demonstrate at least one access possibility to the GIX in Washington in order to qualify as an INIX. The organization owning the INIX may have such a connection itself, or one of the network connected to the INIX may have it so that a transit access can be offered to other networks, on terms to be determined by the network having the connection. 3. Openness and fairness. The owner of the INIX must offer any service provider the possibility to place a router at the INIX. This may be at a cost but such cost must be the same for all networks. Different INIXs may have different costs and tariffs and these tariffs as well as eg. the geographic location will determine whether any particular INIX will attract connections or not. INIXs may not make access conditional on the purchase of further services. Note that an INIX is not necessarily a D-GIX as a route server is not needed to exchange routing and payload traffic and thus not a condition. However, we expect that INIXs develop into D-GIXes, see below. 3. Strategy for European IP providers. -------------------------------------- At present, three announcements have been made in Europe of interconnects which seem to fit our INIX definition: - NORDUnet at KTH in Stockholm (contact Bjorn Eriksen <ber(a)sunet.se>) - Renater in Paris (contact Christian Michau <michau(a)urec.fr>) - Surfnet in Amsterdam (contact Erik-Jan Bos <erik-jan.bos(a)surfnet.nl>) The authors recommend that service providers use these INIXs to establish peering where improved connectivity is required. Note that the GIX is an INIX according to the above definition but that our recommendation is that the European INIXs are used to exchange production traffic between European service providers. We further recommend support of the D-GIX development work in agreement with the overall strategy of improved, cost effective connectivity. Finally, we recommend that the INIXs develop into D-GIXes, or IXFs or whatever will be the name of the structure which will provide optimal routing stability and connectivity support for Internet service providers. This is because service providers will need to invest in lines and equipment to connect to the INIXs and such investments will only be justified if they can be used over a long period. We have no recommendation regarding the number of INIXs. On the one hand, a large number of INIXs may minimize line costs if suitable transit agreements develop, on the other hand, the D-GIX development and eventual operation may become more difficult if there are too many locations in the structure. We could not identify an organization that would formally decide where INIX should or should not be located, rather we expect that market forces will determine the number and location of the INIXs. (1) Almes, Ford and Lothberg: Proposal for Global Internet Connectivity, 1992. (2) Bates, Karrenberg, Lothberg, Stockmann and Terpstra: Internet Routing in a Multi Provider, Multi Path Open Environment, 1993. (3) Eidnes: Draft Distributed GIX Specification, 1993.

1 0

RIPE 17 - Agenda
by k13＠nikhef.nl 20 Jan '94

20 Jan '94

17th RIPE Meeting ----------------- Amsterdam, January 24-26 1994 AGENDA ------ ----- M O N D A Y 24 J A N U A R Y -------------- 14:00 h -------------- 1. Opening 15 min o welcome o apologies o dinner o logistics o agenda 2. Minutes RIPE-16 15 min o approval of the minutes o review of the Action List 3. RIPE NCC Report 45 min o technical report (D.Karrenberg) o financial report (R.Blokzijl) 4. RIPE NCC Activity Plan for 1994-1995 15 min o introduction (R.Blokzijl) o discussion o approval ----- break 15:30 h - 16:00 h ------------------------------------------- 5. Joint Projects - Status and Progress 45 min o PRIDE (T.Bates) o Route Server (T.Bates) 6. European Engineering and Planning Group (EEPG) 30 min o Terms of Reference (B.Stockman) o Workplan (B.Stockman) 7. IP Next Generation 30 min o Introduction (B.Carpenter) o discussion 8. RIPE: Restructuring the Organisation 15 min o Introduction (R.Blokzijl) o Discussion ----- E N D O F D A Y 1 ------------------------ 18:00 h -------------- ----- T U E S D A Y 25 J A N U A R Y ------------ 09:00 h -------------- Parallel Sessions: o Routing Working Group o Connectivity Working Group ----- break 10:30 h - 11:00 h ------------------------------------------- o Routing Working Group o European Engineering and Planning Group ----- lunch 12:30 h - 14:00 h ------------------------------------------- o Data Base Working Group o Network Information Discovery & User Services Working Group o European Engineering and Planning Group ----- break 15:30 h - 16:00 h ------------------------------------------- o Domain Name System Working Group o Data Base Working Group ----- E N D O F D A Y 2 ------------------------ 18:00 h -------------- ----- W E D N E S D A Y 26 J A N U A R Y -------- 09:00 H -------------- Parallel Sessions: o Local Internet Registries Working Group o RIPE Restructuring BOF ----- break 10:30 h - 11:00 h ------------------------------------------- 9. Report on networking with the CIS and Baltics 30 min 10. Points for Decision 30 min o RIPE NCC activity plan o EEPG Terms of Reference o EEPG Work Plan 11. Short Announcements 15 min o EUnet (P. G. Bilse) o CEENet (W. Woeber) 12. Next Meetings 15 min o RIPE 18: Amsterdam, May 16-18, 1994 o RIPE 19: Lisbon, September 1994 (proposed) o RIPE 20: Somewhere, January 1995 ----- lunch 12:30 h - 14:00 h ------------------------------------------- 13. Reports from the Working Groups 90 min 14. A.o.b. 15. Closing ----- E N D O F D A Y 3 ------------------------ 16:00 h --------------

1 0

Re: **Announcement* RIPE 17 DINNER
by Graca Carvalho 20 Jan '94

20 Jan '94

Anne, As you possibly know, Portugal and Indonnesia don't have a very friendly relationship due to all the serious problems, specialy the disrespect of human rights, that involve East Timor. So, unfortunatly and with great sorrow, I will not attend the 17th RIPE Meeting Dinnner. Graca.

1 0