mirjam kühne 1 ec, oct. 1999 policy development in ripe & the ripe ncc mirjam kühne ripe ncc

Mirjam Kühne1 EC, Oct. 1999

Policy Development in RIPE &

the RIPE NCC

Mirjam Kühne

RIPE NCC

EC, Oct.1999Mirjam Kühne2

• RIPE– in the global context

• RIPE NCC – in the global context

• Policy development– how can you participate

• IPv4 & IPv6 Allocation Policies

Overview


What is RIPE?

• Reseaux IP Européens (1989)– collaborative organisation of ISPs

– open to all interested parties

– voluntary participation, no fees

– works by consensus

– encourages face-to-face discussion

– “interest group” for Internet community in ‘Europe’


DE

UK

SE

EU

NL

USFR IT

NO

CZIE

PT

SI

SKUA CM

GR

AE

BA

GM

JP

LU

ES

DK

PL

HU RU

FI

ATCH

BE

RIPE Meeting attendees for 1998

Total: 669


Global ContextWorld-wide Internet

Technical Development & Standards Body

World-wide Operators Forum

EU Operators USA Operators

Asian Operators

IETF

IEPG

RIPE

APRICOT

NANOG


What is the RIPE NCC?

• Co-ordination and support services for ISPs

• Not-for-profit association under Dutch law

– formal membership, Executive Board , yearly fee

• 7 years of history

• 1500+ members (mainly ISPs, but open to

anyone)


RIPE NCC Membership

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

UKDERUITFRCHNLATSEBEUAESFIEUTRDKHUCZNOSKPLBGPTGRIESILVJOEEILLUYULTMKLBKZCYSAMTMDKWKEBYBAROMCIREGAZAMUZNGMAKGISHRGIZZYEVATMSNSMSDOMGMGLGHGEDZCMBHADBFAEUSSYSUMRCIAPAL


Why an NCC ?

• Support for RIPE/ISP community

• Activities need continuity– Database ...

• Neutrality and impartiality important– to ensure fair distribution of resources

– neutral ground for ISPs to co-ordinate technical & administrative issues


RIPE NCC Activities

• Registration Services– IPv4 & IPv6 address & AS number allocation– Reverse delegation

• Co-ordination & Liaison– RIPE database maintenance– Technical Projects

• Information Dissemination & Education


Activity Development Process

RIPE Working Groups – define requirements, suggest activities

RIPE NCC Staff– produces activity plan & budget

RIPE NCC Executive Board– submits to membership

RIPE NCC Membership– approves and sets fees


Global Policy Development

• Developed in open policy meetings

• Implemented by Regional Internet Registries

• Co-ordinated among RIRs


RIPE NCC in Global ContextUltimate global numbers authority

Sets policy and criteria for Regional Registries

Regional Registries: Policies and criteria aligned but differences in local implementation

RIPE NCC ARIN APNIC

RIPE ARIN Mtg APRICOT

IANA/ICANN


Policy Development in RIPE

• Developed in RIPE LIR-WG

• open-open-open

• Implemented by RIPE NCC– open; controlled by membership


Policy Development Process

• Policy (changes) can be suggested by– Members/Local IRs – RIPE NCC– Public at large

• Policy must be– fair to all– ‘good’ for the Internet– consistent with global policies


How Can You Participate

• RIPE Working Groups– LIR-WG

• Open Mailing Lists– <[email protected]>

• Public Meetings– next meeting in Amsterdam February 1999

• RIPE NCC membership – AGM

http://www.ripe./net/meetings


IPv4

Facts & Information


IPv4 Allocation Policies

• RIPE NCC Member

• Initial allocation: /19

• Next allocation based on usage rate

• Support and Training to ensure fair distribution


IANA Allocations

• 192.x.y.z: 1992/1993• 193/8: Sep. 1993• 194/8: Sep. 1993• 195/8: Mar. 1994 • 62/8: Apr. 1995• 212/8 Jan. 1998• 213/8: May 1999• B’s: 1993 (last assigned from in 1996)


Address Space Usage

0

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

213/8

212/8

62/8

195/8

194/8

193/8


y = 51 6699x - 6E +08

05,000,000

10,000,00015,000,00020,000,00025,000,00030,000,00035,000,000

Feb-

95

Jun-

95

Oct

-95

Feb-

96

Jun-

96

Oct

-96

Feb-

97

Jun-

97

Oct

-97

Feb-

98

Jun-

98

Oct

-98

Feb-

99

Jun-

99

Address Space Usage APNIC


RIPE NCC Allocations

• 1,500 Members

– mainly ISPs

– also Telcos, Gov., Associations, Academic

• Initial allocation: /19

– Next allocation based on usage rate

• Support and Training to ensure fair distribution

• 85 Countries


Service Regions of the Registries

RIPE NCCARIN APNIC


1,5 New Members a Day

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Feb-98

Apr-98

Jun-98

Aug-98

Oct-98

Dec-98

Feb-99

Apr-99

Jun-99

Aug-99

UKGermanyAustriaFranceItalyNetherlandsRussiaSaudiArabiaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandOthers


RIPE NCC Charging Model

• 3 Categories– pre-1997: self-determined– now based on allocations and aging

2000 (prelim.) 1999 1998

Small 2400 2650 2450

Medium 3350 3700 3400

Large 4400 4900 4500

Sign-up 2100 2100 2000


LIR Charging Model

• RIPE Community agreement– Service charge– no per-address charge

• See ‘Charging by Local Internet Registries’– Authors: RIPE NCC & LIR-WG chair

http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-152.html


IPv6

Information & Experiences


IPv6 Allocation Policies

Peering with 3 subTLAs

AND either

Plan to provide IPv6 services within 12 months

OR

40 SLA customers


IPv6 Allocation Policies(Bootstrap Phase)

Peering with 3 ASes

AND

Plan to provide IPv6 services within 12 months

AND either

40 IPv4 customers

OR

6bone experience


IPv6 Allocations

• Initial Allocation: /35 subTLA

• Entire /29 reserved (aggregatable)

• APNIC: 3 sub-TLAs allocated

• ARIN: 2 subTLAs allocated

• RIPE NCC: 6 subTLAs allocated


IANA Allocations

• APNIC: 2001:0200::/23

• ARIN: 2001:0400::/23

• RIPE NCC: 2001:0600::/23


Database Object

inet6num: 2001:0600::/23

netname: RIPE-NCC

descr: RIPE Network Co-ordination Centre

descr: Amsterdam, Netherlands

country: NL

admin-c: NN44-RIPE

tech-c: MK16-RIPE

status: ASSIGNED PA

mnt-by: LIR-MNT

changed: [email protected] 19990820

source:RIPE


TLA/NLA/SLA Relationship

• NLA & SLA database registration

• Review before next TLA allocation

• No additional charges for IPv6 in 1999/2000

• Part of existing charging scheme in 2001– review by membership


Open Issues

• Multihoming– IETF IPng WG– Current solution: multiple SLAs

• Renumbering – outside the IP layer


ASO & ICANN


Global Aspects

• All addresses are global

• Co-ordination among RIRs and IANA

• Dependent on topology– one backbone?– Local connection?

• IANA does not allocate addresses directly


Interaction with other Technologies

• Difference to dynamic dial-up?– addresses don’t move, user moves

• Co-operation with Telco Operators and ETSI– started – continue in the future


Pointers & References

• RIPE Meetingshttp://www.ripe.net/meetings/ripe/index.html

• IPv4 Allocation Policies

http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-185.html

• IPv6 Allocation Policieshttp://www.ripe.net/lir/registries/ipv6.html

• Presentation

http://www.ripe.net/meetings/pres/index.html


QUESTIONS?

http://www.ripe.net

mirjam kühne 1 ec, oct. 1999 policy development in ripe & the ripe ncc mirjam kühne ripe ncc

Documents