Info & FAQ |  Resource services |  Training |  Meetings |  Membership |  Documents |  Whois & Search |  Internet community

You're here:  Home  Mailing Lists sig-policy 

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[sig-policy] prop-109v001: Allocate and to APNIC Labs as Research Prefixes

Dear SIG members

The proposal "prop-109v001: Allocate and 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:

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

Information about this policy proposals is available from:


Andy, Masato

prop-109v001: Allocate and to APNIC Labs as
       Research Prefixes

Proposer: Â Â Â ÂGeoff Huston, gih@apnic.net

1. Problem statement

 ÂNetwork 1 ( was allocated to APNIC by the IANA on 19
 ÂJanuary 2010. In line with standard practice APNIC's Resource Quality
 ÂAssurance activities determined that 95% of the address space would
 Âbe suitable for delegation as it was found to be relatively free of
 Âunwanted traffic [1].

 ÂTesting, conducted by APNIC R&D found that certain blocks within
 ÂNetwork 1 attract significant amounts of unsolicited incoming
 Âtraffic. [2]

 ÂAnalysis revealed that, prior to any delegations being made from the
 Âblock, attracted an average of 140Mbps - 160Mbps of
 Âincoming traffic as a continuous sustained traffic level, with peak
 Âbursts of over 800Mbps. This analysis highlighted the individual
 Âaddresses as the single address with the highest level of
 Âunsolicited traffic, and it was recommended that the covering /24
 Âprefix, and also be withheld from allocation pending a
 Âdecision as to the longer term disposition of these address prefixes.

 ÂAs these addresses attract extremely high levels of unsolicited
 Âincoming traffic, the blocks have been withheld from allocation and
 Âperiodically checked to determine if the incoming traffic profile has
 Âaltered. None has been observed to date. After four years, it now
 Âseems unlikely there will ever be any change in the incoming traffic

 ÂThis proposal is intended to define a long term approach to the
 Âmanagement of and

2. Objective of policy change

 ÂThe objective of this proposal is to allocate and
 Â1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs, to be used as research prefixes.

3. Situation in other regions

 ÂOther RIRs (notably the RIPE NCC) have used their policy process to
 Âreview self-allocations of number resources to the RIR as a means of
 Âensuring transparency of the address allocation process. This
 Âproposal is consistent with such a practice.

4. Proposed policy solution

 ÂThis proposal recommends that the APNIC community agree to allocate
 Â1.0.0.0/24 and to APNIC Labs as research prefixes. The
 Âintent is to use these prefixes as passive traffic collectors in
 Âorder to generate a long term profile of unsolicited traffic in the
 ÂIPv4 internet that is directed to well known addresses to study
 Âvarious aspects of traffic profiles and route scope leakages.

 ÂAn experiment in gathering a profile of unsolicited traffic directed
 Âat was started by APNIC Labs in 2013, in collaboration
 Âwith Google. This experiment was set up as a temporary exercise to
 Âunderstand the longer term trend of the traffic profile associated
 Âwith this address. Through this policy proposal we would like to
 Âplace this research experiment on a more certain longer term

5. Advantages / Disadvantages


 Â- It will make use of this otherwise unusable address space.

 Â- The research analysis may assist network operators to understand
  Âthe effectiveness of route scoping approaches.


 Â- The proposer is unclear what the downsides to this action may be.
  ÂThe consideration of this proposal by the community may allow
  Âpotential downsides to be identified.

6. Impact on APNIC

 ÂThere are no impacts on APNIC.


 Â[1] Resource Quality Good for Most of IPv4 Network â1â

 Â[2] Traffic in Network