Dear colleagues

The four-week final comment period for the proposal 'Allocate 1.0.0.0/24
and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as Research Prefixes' has ended.

During the comment period there were no objections raised to the 
proposal. The Chairs therefore deem that consensus has been maintained
on the proposal.

We formally request that the APNIC Executive Council endorse this
proposal.

For a detailed history of this proposal see:


Regards


APNIC Policy SIG Chairs

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@apnic.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”

   [2] Traffic in Network 1.0.0.0/8