Dear Colleagues,

And, here is prop-115. No comment has not been made for this proposal.

If reached consensus, it may needs significant change for whois database.
I just reviewed implementation impact assessment by the Secretariat,
and it says it might take more than 6 months.
I think same thing will happen for whois database of each NIRs.
And if your company have a system linked with APNIC/NIR whois database, it will be impacted also.

As Chair, I'm always very neutral for each proposal, including prop-115.
However, I would like to emphasis prop-115 should be discussed more widely as it has wide impact.
It is very appreciated if you will express your views.

Masato Yamanishi, Policy SIG Chair (Acting) 

2015-02-04 14:52 GMT-06:00 Masato Yamanishi <>:
Dear SIG members

The Problem statement "Registration of detailed assignment information
in whois DB" has been assigned a Policy Proposal number following the
submission of a new version sent to the Policy SIG for consideration.

The proposal, "prop-115-v001: Registration of detailed assignment
information in whois DB" now includes an objective and proposed solution.

Information about this and earlier versions is available from:

You are encouraged you to express your views on the proposal:

 - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
 - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
   tell the community about your situation.
 - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
 - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
 - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more



prop-115-v001: Registration of detailed assignment information in
               whois DB

Proposer:      Ruri Hiromi

               Tomohiro Fujisaki

1. Problem statement

    Recently, there are some cases need to get IP address assignment
    information in more detail to specify user IP address.

    With out this information, operators cannot filter out specific
    address range, and it might lead to 'over-filter' (i.e. filtering
    whole ISP's address range).

    For example:

    1) 'Port' range information in IPv4

        ISPs are using 'CGN' or other kinds of IPv4 address sharing
        technology with assignment of IP address and specified port
        range to their users.

        In this case, port information is necessary to specify one user.

        ex) 1-256 is for HomeA
   257-511 is for HomeB

        or 1-65536 is shared address of ISP-X
        minimum size is /32

    2) address assignment size information in IPv6

       The IPv6 address assignment size may be different from ISP to
       ISP, and address ranges in one ISP. Address assignment prefix
       size will be necessary.

       ex) 2001:db8:1::0/56 is for HomeA
           2001:db8:1:1::0/48 is for HomeB

           or 2001:db8:1::/36's minimum size is /56

2. Objective of policy change

    Lots of operators look a record when harmful behavior coming to
    their network to identify its IP address confirming it can be
    filtered or not.

    The goal is providing more specific information to support these

3. Situation in other regions

    No same regulation/discussion can be seen in other regions.

4. Proposed policy solution

    Provide accurate filtering information generated from whois DB.

    For IPv4, propose to add 'port range' information to IP address

    For IPv6, propose to provide 'assignment prefix size' information
    for specific IPv6 address.

5. Advantages / Disadvantages


 - operators can set filtering by IP address based on correct assignment
   information base.

 - users who share same address space can be avoid to be including bulk


 - registration rule will move to more strict manner.

 - strict watch and control in registration of database records.

 - additional record or option will be considered.

 - privilege for withdrawing detailed information will be set for these

6. Impact on APNIC

    This might be beyond the scope of using whois DB.

7. Other Consideration

    For the security reason, this detailed records may be able to see
    only by operators.(some kind of user control/privilege setting is

    For hosting services, /32 in IPv4 and /128 in IPv6 registration
    should be discussed based on its operability and possibility. But a
    harmful activities to filter by IP addresses are coming from hosting
    services as well. Here it seemed to be some demands.