[sig-policy] Fwd: [Sig-policy-chair] DRAFT### Final Comment Period: prop

  • To: SIG policy <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] Fwd: [Sig-policy-chair] DRAFT### Final Comment Period: prop-109: Allocate and to APNIC Labs as Research Prefixes
  • From: Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org>
  • Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 17:21:50 +1300
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apnic.net; s=c3po; h=received:received:dkim-signature:x-google-dkim-signature:x-gm-message-state: x-received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id: subject:to:content-type; bh=2ktmIWmrNMalkKgisRuGMuVyoKjLO41ga+SZPvdW/lE=; b=DHuzMY91Rk/mQJrnqKN5ySuUOYEBjIre4S7rCl8IDQFU31lonfV/f6A4bvlchnNFAazE4QZGV7Axs qEfloeeK2Us4KMPbxdfngnv5/sAPNeXyV2QXo0hFYp3SKAK3iMmF/x2CzFp4knruIERAgE0n4FN/Lk G0c4cMHtCOzxPJvM=
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lpnz.org; s=dkim; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=2ktmIWmrNMalkKgisRuGMuVyoKjLO41ga+SZPvdW/lE=; b=Pl4yHoAzyUTw2U5ym3qtCvarXV3l6lHaonxITAGLLS1Kb3FjytkNCFoqYryVbxj9YB p66EeIJiYIThAJ7vfEi9KQXvEWMZwGr5ge9bACH02HeMIj3ys9ht2EKWgx3+2g1tyAmB 6n1+pG6gObWbTSrWkg+oiWDlKnWBPoAM6VucQ=
  • In-reply-to: <99F75E2B2B34CC43B21E446903FC0F7C88B5DE42@NXMDA1.org.apnic.net>
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
  • List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
  • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • References: <99F75E2B2B34CC43B21E446903FC0F7C88B5DDB8@NXMDA1.org.apnic.net> <99F75E2B2B34CC43B21E446903FC0F7C88B5DE42@NXMDA1.org.apnic.net>
    • Dear colleagues

      Version 1 of prop-109v001: Allocate and to APNIC
      Labs as Research Prefixes, reached consensus at the APNIC 37 Policy SIG
      and later at the APNIC Member Meeting.

      This proposal will now move to the next step in the APNIC Policy
      Development Process and is being returned to the Policy SIG mailing list
      for the final comment period.

      Following the implementation of prop-108: Suggested changes to the APNIC
      Policy Development Process, the Comment Period will be 4 weeks. This may
      be extended to 8 weeks at the discretion of the Policy SIG Chair.

      At the end of this period the Policy SIG Chairs will evaluate comments
      made and determine if the consensus reached at APNIC 37 still holds.

      If consensus holds, the Chairs of the Policy SIG will ask the Executive
      Council to endorse the proposal for implementation.

      ÂÂ - Send all comments and questions to: <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
      ÂÂ - Deadline for comments:Â 24:00 (UTC+10) Monday, 31 March 2014

      Proposal details

      Proposal details, including the full text of the proposal, history, and
      links to the APNIC 37 meeting archive, are available at:

      ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-109


      Andy and Masato

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

      Proposer:ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ Geoff Huston, gih at apnic dot net

      1. Problem statement

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

      ÂÂ Testing, conducted by APNIC R&D found that certain blocks within
      ÂÂ Network 1 attract significant amounts of unsolicited incoming
      ÂÂ traffic. [2]

      ÂÂ Analysis revealed that, prior to any delegations being made from the
      ÂÂ block, attracted an average of 140Mbps - 160Mbps of
      ÂÂ incoming traffic as a continuous sustained traffic level, with peak
      ÂÂ bursts of over 800Mbps. This analysis highlighted the individual
      ÂÂ addresses as the single address with the highest level of
      ÂÂ unsolicited traffic, and it was recommended that the covering /24
      ÂÂ prefix, and also be withheld from allocation pending a
      ÂÂ decision as to the longer term disposition of these address prefixes.

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

      ÂÂ This proposal is intended to define a long term approach to the
      ÂÂ management of and

      2. Objective of policy change

      ÂÂ The objective of this proposal is to allocate and
      ÂÂ to APNIC Labs, to be used as research prefixes.

      3. Situation in other regions

      ÂÂ Other RIRs (notably the RIPE NCC) have used their policy process to
      ÂÂ review self-allocations of number resources to the RIR as a means of
      ÂÂ ensuring transparency of the address allocation process. This
      ÂÂ proposal is consistent with such a practice.

      4. Proposed policy solution

      ÂÂ This proposal recommends that the APNIC community agree to allocate
      ÂÂ and to APNIC Labs as research prefixes. The
      ÂÂ intent is to use these prefixes as passive traffic collectors in
      ÂÂ order to generate a long term profile of unsolicited traffic in the
      ÂÂ IPv4 internet that is directed to well known addresses to study
      ÂÂ various aspects of traffic profiles and route scope leakages.

      ÂÂ An experiment in gathering a profile of unsolicited traffic directed
      ÂÂ at was started by APNIC Labs in 2013, in collaboration
      ÂÂ with Google. This experiment was set up as a temporary exercise to
      ÂÂ understand the longer term trend of the traffic profile associated
      ÂÂ with this address. Through this policy proposal we would like to
      ÂÂ place this research experiment on a more certain longer term
      ÂÂ foundation.

      5. Advantages / Disadvantages


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

      ÂÂ - The research analysis may assist network operators to understand
      ÂÂÂÂ the effectiveness of route scoping approaches.


      ÂÂ - The proposer is unclear what the downsides to this action may be.
      ÂÂÂÂ The consideration of this proposal by the community may allow
      ÂÂÂÂ potential downsides to be identified.

      6. Impact on APNIC

      ÂÂ There are no impacts on APNIC.


      ÂÂ [1] Resource Quality Good for Most of IPv4 Network â1â
      ÂÂ http://www.apnic.net/publications/press/releases/2010/network-1.pdf

      ÂÂ [2] Traffic in Network
      ÂÂ http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2010-03/net1.html