Re: [sig-policy] prop-109v001: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APN
We had an opinion collection meeting with our community in Japan, and
would like to share our input.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[prop-109] Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as
Research Prefixes
Would like to ensure fairness and transparency:
- Would the result of the experiment be publicly shared?
- Can anyone wishing to join the experiment with APNIC?
- How would the collected data will be managed?
(especially in the experiment with a third party such as Google)
- Would like to suggest defining as documentation prefix, which is
another approach as the use of space for the public benefit
The space should be distributed to applicants:
- Since IPv4 address is scarce, the space should be distributed for
applicants even if it attracts unrequested traffic.
- On the other hand, observation was made that it will be added to the
final /8 policy pool and can not be distributed immediately anyways.
(as argument against the comment above)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best regards,
Toshio Tachibana
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org> wrote:
> Dear SIG members
>
> The proposal "prop-109v001: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC
> Labs as Research Prefixes" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It
> will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 37 in Petaling Jaya,
> Malaysia, on Thursday, 27 February 2014.
>
> We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
> before the meeting.
>
> The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
> important part of the policy development process. We encourage 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
> effective?
>
>
> Information about this policy proposals is available from:
>
> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/109
>
> Andy, Masato
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> prop-109v001: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as
> Research Prefixes
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Proposer: Geoff Huston, gih at apnic dot net
>
>
> 1. Problem statement
> --------------------
>
> Network 1 (1.0.0.0/8) was allocated to APNIC by the IANA on 19
> January 2010. In line with standard practice APNIC's Resource Quality
> Assurance activities determined that 95% of the address space would
> be suitable for delegation as it was found to be relatively free of
> unwanted traffic [1].
>
> Testing, conducted by APNIC R&D found that certain blocks within
> Network 1 attract significant amounts of unsolicited incoming
> traffic. [2]
>
> Analysis revealed that, prior to any delegations being made from the
> block, 1.0.0.0/8 attracted an average of 140Mbps - 160Mbps of
> incoming traffic as a continuous sustained traffic level, with peak
> bursts of over 800Mbps. This analysis highlighted the individual
> addresses 1.1.1.1 as the single address with the highest level of
> unsolicited traffic, and it was recommended that the covering /24
> prefix, and also 1.1.1.0/24 be withheld from allocation pending a
> decision as to the longer term disposition of these address prefixes.
>
> As these addresses attract extremely high levels of unsolicited
> incoming traffic, the blocks have been withheld from allocation and
> periodically checked to determine if the incoming traffic profile has
> altered. None has been observed to date. After four years, it now
> seems unlikely there will ever be any change in the incoming traffic
> profile.
>
> This proposal is intended to define a long term approach to the
> management of 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24.
>
>
> 2. Objective of policy change
> -----------------------------
>
> The objective of this proposal is to allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and
> 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs, to be used as research prefixes.
>
> 3. Situation in other regions
> -----------------------------
>
> Other RIRs (notably the RIPE NCC) have used their policy process to
> review self-allocations of number resources to the RIR as a means of
> ensuring transparency of the address allocation process. This
> proposal is consistent with such a practice.
>
>
> 4. Proposed policy solution
> ---------------------------
>
> This proposal recommends that the APNIC community agree to allocate
> 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as research prefixes. The
> intent is to use these prefixes as passive traffic collectors in
> order to generate a long term profile of unsolicited traffic in the
> IPv4 internet that is directed to well known addresses to study
> various aspects of traffic profiles and route scope leakages.
>
> An experiment in gathering a profile of unsolicited traffic directed
> at 1.1.1.0/24 was started by APNIC Labs in 2013, in collaboration
> with Google. This experiment was set up as a temporary exercise to
> understand the longer term trend of the traffic profile associated
> with this address. Through this policy proposal we would like to
> place this research experiment on a more certain longer term
> foundation.
>
> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> -----------------------------
>
> Advantages
>
> - It will make use of this otherwise unusable address space.
>
> - The research analysis may assist network operators to understand
> the effectiveness of route scoping approaches.
>
> Disadvantages
>
> - The proposer is unclear what the downsides to this action may be.
> The consideration of this proposal by the community may allow
> potential downsides to be identified.
>
>
> 6. Impact on APNIC
> ------------------
>
> There are no impacts on APNIC.
>
> References
> ----------
>
> [1] Resource Quality Good for Most of IPv4 Network "1"
> http://www.apnic.net/publications/press/releases/2010/network-1.pdf
>
> [2] Traffic in Network 1.0.0.0/8
> http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2010-03/net1.html
>
>
>
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>