[sig-policy] End of Comment Period: prop-109: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as Research Prefixes

  • To: SIG policy <sig-policy@apnic.net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] End of Comment Period: prop-109: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as Research Prefixes
  • From: Andy Linton <asjl@lpnz.org>
  • Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 09:47:40 +1300
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy@clove.apnic.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:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=tLoNVuMEqYaY/0w4bIbfSzhk5GpCXpGKnLMBTlABZ1E=; b=53XfLSM0D7qYA0UtlLQEEo6pfL4n9/PFoIShDwntH+35g7JjEzOuKH04OWnzuLznTaM6+ofKVBA54 heyuULECn8FE3oTMXExOgefcJvel0pX09g6O3l+xGTBAFknxbD5j/GtS8rjqcffEnLykqvoaj3Ydto fm8NRgyHTSNsOVYY=
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lpnz.org; s=dkim; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=tLoNVuMEqYaY/0w4bIbfSzhk5GpCXpGKnLMBTlABZ1E=; b=lgxDeWjQrLsQEi63RYsl6DkbNFTDWrWhG4iwDjiXBPgD+WuJEP9Zi9wwG8TWqVXDIx xn66P+Obm5nXYPWgU8HFQyWLPSeaPzMhLZ2iId+UUgKovf3u0TKjq517DfcZxcSudIqh psYkaqIv1E3WL0D5getKoHNSaDaRlXC+DKemc=
  • 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>

    • 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 theÂ
      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
      Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ÂResearch Prefixes
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


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


      1. Problem statement
      ----------------------------

      Â ÂNetwork 1 (1.0.0.0/8) was allocated to APNIC by the IANA on 19
      Â ÂJanuary 2010. In line with standard practice APNIC's Resource Quality
      Â ÂAssurance activities determined that 95% of the address space would
      Â Âbe suitable for delegation as it was found to be relatively free of
      Â Âunwanted traffic [1].

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

      Â ÂAnalysis revealed that, prior to any delegations being made from the
      Â Âblock, 1.0.0.0/8 attracted an average of 140Mbps - 160Mbps of
      Â Âincoming traffic as a continuous sustained traffic level, with peak
      Â Âbursts of over 800Mbps. This analysis highlighted the individual
      Â Âaddresses 1.1.1.1 as the single address with the highest level of
      Â Âunsolicited traffic, and it was recommended that the covering /24
      Â Âprefix, and also 1.1.1.0/24 be withheld from allocation pending a
      Â Âdecision as to the longer term disposition of these address prefixes.

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

      Â ÂThis proposal is intended to define a long term approach to the
      Â Âmanagement of 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24.


      2. Objective of policy change
      --------------------------------------

      Â ÂThe objective of this proposal is to allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and
      Â Â1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs, to be used as research prefixes.

      3. Situation in other regions
      -------------------------------------

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


      4. Proposed policy solution
      -----------------------------------

      Â ÂThis proposal recommends that the APNIC community agree to allocate
      Â Â1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as research prefixes. The
      Â Âintent is to use these prefixes as passive traffic collectors in
      Â Âorder to generate a long term profile of unsolicited traffic in the
      Â ÂIPv4 internet that is directed to well known addresses to study
      Â Âvarious aspects of traffic profiles and route scope leakages.

      Â ÂAn experiment in gathering a profile of unsolicited traffic directed
      Â Âat 1.1.1.0/24 was started by APNIC Labs in 2013, in collaboration
      Â Âwith Google. This experiment was set up as a temporary exercise to
      Â Âunderstand the longer term trend of the traffic profile associated
      Â Âwith this address. Through this policy proposal we would like to
      Â Âplace this research experiment on a more certain longer term
      Â Âfoundation.

      5. Advantages / Disadvantages
      ----------------------------------------

      Advantages

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

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

      Disadvantages

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


      6. Impact on APNIC
      -------------------------

      Â ÂThere are no impacts on APNIC.

      References
      --------------

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

      Â Â[2] Traffic in Network 1.0.0.0/8