These are unedited transcripts and may contain errors.
Notice: Use of undefined constant steno - assumed 'steno' in /var/www/html/ripe-60/steno-transcripts.php on line 24
Plenary Reports Session, 5th May, 2010:
THE COURT: Is chair. Thanks. I hope you can define is in a bench command. Also chair chair is chair. Thanks. I'm not sure if I have a job dictionary selected now. You may have to select one from Liz Bonn. Thanks. Or all the jobs from [] Liz Bonn. Be
[] CHAIR: Good morning everyone. Welcome to the second part of the Plenary. This is the session where the RIRs and also the ASO provide you with an update on what's happening in the different regions, so if I can ask my colleague, Adiel Akplogan, who is the Managing Director of AfriNIC to come up and present, he will start off this morning. Thank you.
ADIEL AKPLOGAN: Thank you, Paul. Okay. We'll give you a brief update on AfriNIC activities, starting with a big picture of where we are today. We are 17 people at work, equivalent to 15 FTE, so a few of them work part?time. From those, we have seven who are new, 40 percent of the staff is new staff who joined last year, last quarter of 2009, and we are planning to get more on board this year. We have about 8 new positions opening in 2010. The membership also has grown significantly. We are serving, today, a little bit more than 100 members in the region with with a budget in 2010 of 2.1 million dollars.
We have planned some growth in 2010, too. And as all the area, we run public policy meeting and we have already run 11 public policy meetings, the 12th one is happening next month, and currently we have policy on our discussion in our mailing list. I'll talk about that a little bit later.
Key orientation of our 2010 budget. We are reviewing our whole technical infrastructure. After five years, we are improving some areas, renewing some of the material and getting ready to serve DNSSEC, implement routing registry and also have a more consolidated monitoring system because we have a very scattered infrastructure right now, and we want to consolidate the monitoring of all of that.
We are also preparing for RPKI but also our business RPKI infrastructure. We are continuing to work very hard to keep control on our cost because we have a very small area, but we have almost the same challenges as all the other RIRs, so that means we have to be very careful about our finances.
We are also continuing to promote our v6 programme. We are planning to dedicate more resources to v6, planning to hire a very dedicated person on our IPv6 programme and improve our training activity around the region. We ever already covered more than 40 countries in Africa with IPv6 training programme and we are planning to do more. We are also continue in 2010 to reinforce our human resource capacity through training, hiring new staff.
A very important part of the budget is also dedicated to our training plan and translation activities. We have been running training for the past five years. Now we are trying to make that a little bit more professional, adding e?Learning platform, using part?time trainers, we are going to train trainers that will be in different regions of the Continent that can be used to deliver training when we need it, instead of making people travel every time to deliver training.
We are also working to move to our new office. This is planned to be done at the end of this month, so everything is being done. We are very active now, packing, and making sure that the relocation is done. These are some graphics of what the new office will look like, and we will be happy to invite you to this new AfriNIC office.
Very nice.
So that's what we have in the budget. But what are we doing currently? What are we working on? We are working on reviewing our communication plan to try to orientate it to what we call non?conventional decoders, we have a lot of strong communication with the technical community in general, but we want to involve more people who we don't have direct relationship with, like Government, civil society, mobile operators, regulator, etc., so we are working on our communication plan to include them into our activities.
In that regard, for instance, we are going to reactivate our associate membership category which will allow members who doesn't have allocation from AfriNIC to also be able to participate formally into our process which will allow Government and other people to become formal AfriNIC members.
In technical area, we have several projects ongoing: RPKI, routing registry, monitoring servers, etc., and into our membership process. We have noticed and have received a lot of feedback from our members about our process. The time it takes for a member to get resources and to become formal member, it's long and also it's impacts our productivity, too. So we have conducted an audit of our membership process and we are now implementing the outcome to allow the process to be very smooth and one characteristic of the new process will be, it will be all online. That means the member can do everything online. Now, part of the process is online where they can fill the membership form, they can generate the registration service automatically, but we want to add, on top of that, the resource evaluation, the payment, part of the payment is due anyway, which is they set up fee, for instance, so as soon as the member fills the form, fills his IP address request, he can, at the same time, pay his setup fee and also see if his IP address plan makes sense.
Policy which are under discussion: We have three. We have a new policy which has been introduced recently about adding an abuse contact for IRT and send a response team into all WHOIS object. It's a new policy. The second one is about the soft landing policy which is a policy that was introduced about a year ago and still under discussion. It has been discussed during the last meeting. There was no consensus yet, so it was reintroduced. And the review of PDP, there is a new policy introduced also to review our policy development process as a whole, so try to adjust it and make ?? add more precision into the process.
Some numbers: Well, this gives a brief overview of how our membership has been growing in terms of IPv6, IPv4 and the different countries. And the pie on your right ?? on your left, actually, shows the distribution of our resources in the region, so you can see that South Africa hold more than 50% of the IP address, we had a look at it last year in Africa, followed by Egypt, Algeria, etc.. So that gives us ?? also, we are using those to focus our training activities and our awareness activities based on that. And we can see that extra small category, a category where we are seeing more progress over the years. IPv6 is also picking up, we are seeing a significant growth in IPv6 allocation in the region.
We, also, cooperate and collaborate with different organisations in the region. As an area, AfriNIC is also a member of the NRO and we participate actively into the NRO activity through the EC, the ECG, the CCG, and the ad hoc group. We are also heavily involved, nowadays, into regional organisation, political organisation in order to raise awareness among them, so we have set up a Government Working Group, which is a formal Working Group, we are working to formalise these Working Groups as part of our structure, so that we can consult them and can involve them more formally into our activities. We have conducted the first workshop of the Government Working Group in January for law enforcement agency in Mauritius, was very well attended. We have been present in several Government activity recently. We run a booth at the African union summit in January, the event was dedicated to ICT, so we were there and that gives us the opportunity to meet ICT Minister and president, which are very heavily active in the ICT environment in the region. We have also been appointed as observer in the ICT Minister meeting, which allows us to comment on their documents and give them inputs in what they are doing.
In addition to that, we also collaborate with different organisations like African union association of university, AFNOG, AfTLD, and others. For the AAU, we have signed, recently, an MoU with them, which allows us to allocate and get membership from academic institution for free. Two years ago they waived 50% of the fee for academy and research institution. Now, this MoU allows us to waive the remaining 50% through a funding, so that means any institution, university or research institution that wants to get their IP addresses, can get it for free with the approbation of the African Association of the University that makes sure that they are a regular institution, they are approved and they're a member of the African Association of Universities. That's working very well. We are seeing a very significant raise in membership in that category.
So, upcoming event: We are preparing for our AfriNIC 12 public policy meeting in Rwanda, early June. You are all invited. Our next meeting is planned in South Africa at end of November and AfriNIC 14 is planned the same period, end of May/early June in 2011. The venue will be announced soon.
Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIR: Are there any questions? Thanks very much.
Next up is APNIC, and Geoff Huston, the chief scientist from APNIC will be giving the update.
GEOFF HUSTON: Good morning. My name is not Paul Wilson. He is a lot more handsome than me. I am here to give you the APNIC update, and, as Paul said, I come from the chief scientist's office over there in APNIC.
I'd like to talk very quickly this morning about an update into our services, some of the policy outcomes from the most recent APNIC meeting, APNIC 29. Some of the activities we have been doing in recent months might be of interest to you, and other news and upcoming meetings.
Up and to the right, typical Internet kind of stuff, we have been giving out lots and lots of addresses up and to the right. The first one is IPv4. Currently, APNIC and the Asia Pacific region, last year, for example, handed out about 48 to 50% of all the IPv4 addresses on the planet. This reflects the massive growth in the area of China and also in Korea, Japan and also in India, where there seems to be a double consumption level, because not only are those economies still, particularly in China, doing a massive amount of broadband deployment with wired deployment, but those countries are also the same as you. I?phones are sold everywhere, so they, too, are doing a massive roll?out of 3G and the same pressures we are seeing in other developed economies with address pressure on fuelling the mobile market is happening there as well. That double pressure of both wired and wireless and the enormous populations in the region, are part of the reason why, at this particular point, APNIC is getting through a little bit under six /8s a year, which is, as I said, about half of the global consumption.
In IPv6, these are the number of allocations, not the amount of address space. With IPv6, a /32 as compared to, say, a /20 is not just a little bit bigger; a /20 is enormously bigger, and the big allocations tend to skew the numbers a little bit when you are trying to see trends. So in the v6 graph, it's not the amount of addresses there; it's actually the number of allocations.
We'll talk a bit more about why that graph is just kicking up pretty hard because we have done a number of initiatives in the region which we hope and think have actually encouraged some of the participants in the industry there to do an IPv6 deployment now a little bit more seriously.
And last but not least, AS numbers. I talked about this in Lisbon and I thought it was some sort of hemispherical thing. But for some reason, it's RIPE. We hand out 12.3 ASs every day on this planet. There is a little crew out there that does it ? there is only twelve of them; they do one a day each. They have been in Europe for the last few years because RIPE alone is responsible for more than half of the AS numbers out there. I don't know why, but, in APNIC, we certainly get through a much, much lower rate of autonomous system numbers. It's subtly different and one of the more obvious differences I see between the regions is the use and deployment of AS numbers.
Anyway, on to other numbers. We have lots and lots of members. We actually have lots and lots more, but, of course, in our national Internet registry scheme which we run, where a number of economies run their own national registries, that membership actually isn't visible in the APNIC numbers. So as well as the 2264, which is 400 new members last year, there is also a large number of folk in China, in Japan, in Korea, Indonesia and Vietnam and Taiwan that also have recipients through the national Internet registry scheme.
It's pretty obvious, though, that the v4 exhaustion message is hitting home. It's obvious that if you don't do something this year, next year might be a little bit more uncertain as to your plans, and certainly it's, I think, no particular surprise that this year was the largest month on record for new members coming along saying "please, you know I want to be a member," sign up and want some addresses. That also mirrors some other help?desk levels where we are doing a huge number of calls and we we have got 2,400 folk now on the MU APNIC portal. So things are moving very quickly.
We are quite ambitious in the way we set up our portal service and initially went almost purist in a certificate world and said the portal requires an end user certificate, no compromise. We did find that requiring that certainly presented challenges to folk who, whenever they moved laptops, and you guys, by the way, you suffer from bad cases of laptop envy. Typically, most consumers will use their laptops for at least two years, but for some reason out there in the technical community, a laptop that's six months old is rubbish, because when you try and move certificates with your laptop, you tend to fail. And we see it because all of a sudden you come back going "my certificates won't work". Well, obviously exploit your certificates and bring them into the new machine, yeah.
We struck this with a lot of inquiries, so for a certain number of services in the MyAPNIC portal, we dropped the requirement to have a certificate and have a more simple password?based mechanism. But some of the tasks still require certificate based access to make sure it is really you.
The other thing we have done is, I think Leo [Vegoeder] has pointed out a view times that when you drain the water low enough in the barrel, what's left is pretty putrid and smelly. And certainly, in IPv4, we were lucky enough and I suppose because we are doing so many /8s, we were lucky enough to get network 1. If you have ever set up your own private network, the temptation not to use 10 and to use 1, for some of you, is overwhelming. And you don't do your firewalls and filters right and a relatively massive amount of traffic leads outwards words to default. We actually did test how much traffic is going to network 1 and George will give you the full details of that. Certainly, it raised my eyebrows and it should raise yours. It's not what we thought.
We have now been given network 14. Anyone here from Telecom Italia, because it should look a mighty familiar number. Network 14 and network 223, we are not sure who used 223 but somebody did.
That's underway right now. We hope to have a report out in about two weeks.
On the policy side, I believe I heard he mentioned a policy around abuse confirmation as a mandatory in the registry. A similar proposal was passed in APNIC where it is now a mandatory abuse contact field in our WHOIS database so we actually get contacts out there.
We had a policy that's currently being discussed on the mailing list, I believe, which is the prefix exchange policy. In APNIC, once it gets passed at a meeting, we then have an eight?week comment period on the mailing list. We had a policy that allows folk to basically aggregate an historical sort of collection of things into a single aggregate. So, three or or more non?contiguous blocks could be placed with a contiguous block. We feel, as the water does drain out of the barrel, our ability to replace those non?contiguous with a single large contiguous is being compromised because there is not much address space left, so that policy was approved at the membership meeting and is now currently in the middle of the follow?up mail comment period.
Last but not least, we did have a criteria for IPv6 allocations that said you had to aggregate, and a number of folk pointed out that they do do disparate sites and areas and they did want the ability to use these v6 blocks in smaller amounts in each site. And the policy relating to aggregation was getting in the way. And the community decided to remove that particular criteria.
Address transfers: After a long, I think it's three or four years, and the discussion was I think very similar in the RIPE community, that address transfers in v4 has presented this community with particular policy challenges and certainly our community as well. We have almost a two phase of this policy. While there is still /8s that we are handing out, transfers work within a similar construct where you need to actually demonstrate your ability to justify that space on a needs basis, the same as you would for a normal allocation. But that only holds while there is still space in the free pool in APNIC. Once we run out, and are unable to hand out any IPv4 addresses in a registry, the constraints on the address it ever system also lift and we are then able to register transfers as they happen. That was a compromise between maintaining the integrity of the registry and having some desire to express some kind of policy about aggregation. We felt, though, as a community, that once we'd run out of addresses, a lot of that policy framework also didn't have the same degree of relevance and the important issue was then the accuracy and timeliness of the registry in reflecting reality. So, I suspect that that thinking is very similar to here.
Last but not least, a policy around simplifying the assignment of IPv6 allocations to members. And this is what I talked about the number of IPv6 allocations jumping up. We have done a one?click allocation, what we call kick start, so that, with one click, you can get now v6 addresses if you are an APNIC member using the portal.
There is a new fee schedule. We are doing 50% discount in least?developed countries. We have modified the fee formula after some years of debate.
Over in the chief scientist land we have been working extremely hard, as we always do, doing routing research and you saw some of the results in the presentation yesterday. And certainly for many years we have been working extremely hard on resource public key infrastructure and we have been running a resource certificate service as part of our portal as a production service now for over a year. Any member can now get certificates of their resources and actually generate various forms of attestations such as rowers and similar.
We have done work on DNS service dynamics and tracking DNSSEC. We secondary RIPE and are now starting to sign our own zones and we are not talking about it in this meeting, but uncovered a remarkable strange behaviour that happens in DNSSEC world with stale keys, and signing of the route and proper delegation downward is in DNSSEC world a really, really good thing to do, because in the current arrangements, with luck side lists and manual keys, if you get the keys wrong and they go stale, your resolver starts issuing and extraordinary number of requests to servers, an extraordinary number being on the scale of melt down. Bad thing.
We have also been doing the test traffic measurement programme extending that work that RIPE has been active in in the Asia Pacific area and I mentioned one /8 and, of course, a day in the life of the Internet.
We are about to do the DNSSEC signing ourselves with five reverse zones published I think, we started last week. And as I said before, we have done a full RPKI implementation with a full implementation for members through the portal. That will also link into the DNSSEC signed zone so we can automate that as well.
We reached 10% left in v4. We are now down to 7.8 percent and we are with the media campaign of IANA of saying to the industry at large, this really is a problem. And at the same time in February this year, we did the kick start programme which has actually managed to do another 275 allocations. If you have v4 already and you are a member of APNIC getting an equivalent v6 allocation takes one click. And that's it, you are done.
We have also been attending a number of regional events around this, including the CIO's forum, APIC tell us is happening next week, and a workshop in Bali and a communicasia event in Singapore in June so we have been busy engaging in the industry in our region in all of those forums.
Equally, we have been doing training now for many, many years, and, these days, training is a big activity for us. We have done 77 courses in 36 locations, with over 1870 participants. By the year 4000, we would have trained the entire world.
We now have a fully equipped training lab of v6, of course, and we do specialise a lot on the v6 message. We also work with a number of other folk in this area, including six deployed team to try and make sure we are delivering material that meets folks' needs.
We did a community consultation in APNIC 29, because, as you may be aware of, some of you, over in Geneva somewhere, there is an august institution in the ITU which is having its plenipotentiary later this year and they are considering a structure around country?based address registries as one possible response in some ways to the existing system. So we had a community consultation to understand what the Asia Pacific region felt about that kind of move and their own views on the way in which addresses should be appropriately distributed in our region and around the world. That formed the basis of a formal submission into the ITU IPv6 group, and we certainly hope that the ITU continues to listen as distinct from merely say.
We went to the Solomon Islands for PETA. There is a World Telecommunications Development Council, I think it is in India, and, of course, there is a regional IGF coming up in Hong Kong.
On better news: We are building a ?? we have bought a new building on the other side of the river and it's a ripper. It safes us quite a significant amount of rental costs over the years. So this is hopefully an ability where we are use some other reserves to make a bit more productive use and create a building that meets our own needs. We are redoing the office. That's the way is looks at the moment, and someone wasn't busy enough with the PowerPoint to splash a massive APNIC logo over all three floors, but it will come very soon, believe me.
Next meeting: We are planning to go to Bangkok, but you may have noticed there are all kinds of folks with all kinds of coloured T?shirts wandering around town in Bangkok and there is a certain amount of activity going on. We don't usually like to send our members to places where there is large amounts of civil unrest. So we are watching that very, very carefully. So, at this point, while we are planning Bangkok, those plans may change in the coming weeks. So, if you are thinking about coming to our meeting, and you are certainly welcome to come, please, before you buy a ticket, just check on that site roundabout the end of May to make sure where you know to buy a ticket to go to.
Following that, we are going to Hong Kong, which we were last at, from memory, just before the handover, which was a great time to be there and I'm sure it will abrogate time to be there now and that will be in February next year. And a year after that we are again with APRICOT and we are in Delhi in India.
Any questions?
AUDIENCE SPEAKER: A short question. Geoff, what are you planning of doing after the testing the one /8 and 14 /8s, for what are you testing those blocks? Do you plan to contact the people that is holding or using those addresses?
GEOFF HUSTON: We did this testing on the vacant /8. So no one is using them yet. This is before we handed them out. George is, I think, going to talk a lot about this, because as I said, some of the results certainly raised our eyebrows. I don't think I'll steel his thunder, I think I'll leave it it to George and he does explain what we intend to do about it, and yes we are not going to do what we normally do, there is a bit more associated with the handling of particularly one /8.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)
CHAIR: That talk actually will take place this afternoon at 2:00 here, so if you are interested in hearing that. If I can just ask the present CEO of ARIN, John Curran to give us an update.
JOHN CURRAN: Good morning, I will try to be brief, but bring everyone up to speed. What's been happening at ARIN. I am going to try to get us on track time?wise.
So, first, 4?byte ASN stats. Geoff Huston mentioned this at one point. The fact of the matter is that we have this initiative to try to get 4?byte ASNs deployed and in every region it's a little bit stymied. Just for information for this community, in the ARIN region we received 197 requests for 4?byte ASNs in 2009. 197 requests, 140 of which became requests for 2?byte ASNs after the fact, and the typical reason for this:
Well, Upstream said their router won't support 4?byte ASNs, so this is a major issue. We need to get the ISP community supporting 4?byte ASNs for BGP before we actually run out of 2?byte ASNs to assign to organisations. This could be a small issue in some regions, but, as Geoff said, there is quite a few ASNs issued in the RIPE region, so I imagine you have a similar situation to pay an attention to. But to the extent that you are an ISP support BGP it's time to support 4?byte ASNs.
WHOIS traffic at ARIN. This is another interesting situation going on.
That's the traffic graph for our WHOIS server over the last three years and if you want to look at that, that actually goes up to about 400 requests for second of self?referential traffic. Over 50% of the requests to the ARIN WHOIS server are requests for WHOIS information on an IP address which matches the address of the source of the choice query, so these are people literally doing WHOIS queries asking for who is for this IP address that I am coming from. We are interested in help from the community to the extent you know a piece of software that does this, we'd like to know about it because this traffic is increasing dramatically. It seems to be, we get a disproportionate share with you I can't tell among the other RIRs. It is possible it's a BotNet, though all the likely sources have told us it doesn't appear to be one. But to the extent that you are aware of software that does self referential WHOIS queries, asks its own IP address about the WHOIS information, bring it to our attention because we are interested in talking to the author of the software and seeing if that's really desirable.
Public facing developments efforts: We have a number of very large development efforts going on at ARIN now. ARIN online is our online portal. We started out being ?? automating requests and changes to points of contact that's been completed and rolled out. We recently deployed a new version of ARIN online that allows organisational registration and organisational record changes. This automation effort is crucial for ARIN long?term for being able to be cost effective and being able to handle quantities of requests from customers without having to have dozens and dozens and dozens of registration analysts. So it's a big effort. It is the majority of our development effort afterward it's going very successful, very well received by the community.
DNSSEC, we are also moving ahead with this. We are signing zones now. We will soon update ARIN online to let people put in the DS record necessary for you to have the designated signer information.
RPKI, we have an RPKI pilot out right now. We are interested in the ARIN region in doing RPKI can participate. That will become a production service by the end of 2010. So we intend to be in production with with RPKI Jan 1st, 2011.
WHOIS RWS, this is interesting. We have never really had a great protocol that allows updates of the WHOIS database. There is been all sorts of interesting initiatives to replace WHOIS and make it distributed, but we have settled on a restful we object service, an RWS service, and WHOIS RWS is ARIN's proposal for that to the extent that you want to query and update the database directly, there is an actual scheme out there for that that we are supporting and we intend to stabilise on this as our long term interface to the WHOIS database. This eventually will be what we expect people doing algorithmic access to the database to replace that rather than mailing us whip entries, for example, long term. So, pilot right now and production service again by the end of 2010.
Outreach: We are doing a human amount of outreach. In the ARIN region we are participating in dozens of conferences with the industry, making people aware of the IPv4 depletion and the need for IPv6 deployment. We are engaged with shows. We are outreach with the NIR and the other RIRs on the same messages. We have a website, teamarin.net which is dedicated to our outreach activities. If you want to see the amount of activity in this area we have dedicated a website for that because some of our customers are wondering are we doing enough? We are doing a huge amount of out leach but the Internet is a big place and it's hard to get the message out to everyone. So, important initiative on our part.
Implemented policy: So we have implemented two sets of policies for IPv4. 2009?1 is the number given to the global IPv4 policy that, in this region, is 2009?3. We have actually adopted that as people know we adopted that with a change allowing designation for blocks to be returned to the as opposed to requiring it but we have thought that that's the right method to proceed so that policy is now ready to go, waiting of course the global policy process.
We also adopted a 2009?8 which, in our region, provides for a cap of three months of allocation once we are down to the last /8. So at the point in time where the IANA hands out the final /8 blocks to the RIRs, we would no longer allow requests for more than three months' worth of IPv4 resources. That wouldn't affect transfers, but it would affect requests that are actually coming from the free pool.
IPv6: We removed the requirement to route the single aggregate which was originally in the IPv6 end user policy, 2009?7. We adopted a multiple discrete networks policy which provides for organisations that have technical or political reasons why they need multiple blocks to obtain them. And we adopted a community network policy for IPv6.
Policy proposal discussions. We have a number of discussions underway. IPv4 minimum assignment to /24, we are considering raising the minimum assignment size for IPv4 to /24, that's an active discussion in the region.
IPv6 initial allocation criteria, multihomers to get a /32, that's a present discussion right now in the region on the PPML. And a simple access and transfer policy which makes clear that during an merger an acquisition any unused address space would be returned to ARIN, not transferred as part of the merger and acquisition.
We have some ongoing work on a waiting list proposal for unmet IPv4 requests, sort of the question that comes up is: When we get to the point where we have no IPv4 resources available, if people are still applying for blocks, how do we handle that? And it's an interesting question, because there is a number of ways to satisfy a queue of varying sizes when you have varying resource that is might be returned to the community.
Also, work ongoing on the IPv6 assignment criteria. We haven't quite gotten to the APNIC click here to get your block, but we are looking at ways of simplifying the IPv6 assignment policy to make it more convenient for organisations to get v6 resources.
Abandon policy proposals, this happened in Toronto at the last ARIN meeting just three weeks ago. Customer confidentiality proposal would allow organisations to emit customer information from WHOIS, we actually had a strong showing from law enforcement at the ARIN meetings from multiple countries, indicating the difficulty in them doing their job, also from anti?abuse organisations, so that policy was abandoned. IPv4 minimal allocation of /23 was overtaken by the minimum assignment to /24 discussions and a policy proposal to effectively create address categories or address classes for IPv6 of /40, 48, 32, 28 and 24, so, organisations would be given an address block of a particular class was also discussed and abandoned in the ARIN region.
For people who want more information on any of these, www.arin.net/policy.
ARIN meetings upcoming: We are in Atlanta in October. That will be a drink meeting with our friends from NANOG, the network operating forum for North America, and then for spring 2011, we are going to go back to San Juan, Puerto Rico, welcome people who can make it to either of these meetings to come on out. We love to have people from the other regions attend and participate in the ARIN discussions.
Any more information, proposals, as I said, at policy, mailing lists, ARIN ?? www.arin.net/participate, will get you information on the mailing list where the discussion of the policies take place. That's it. Thank you. Any questions?
CHAIR: I think there is a question for you.
AUDIENCE SPEAKER: Jim Reid. You are talking about doing DNSSEC. What's the plans to deal with ERX space, specifically getting key material from LIRs in other service regions and then getting into the RN database so they can then be signed?
JOHN CURRAN: That's an interesting question. So with respect to how we are doing DNSSEC, because of the ERX cleanup project that's taken place, we have clear designation at every /8 boundary of which RIR is responsible for it. So there is no reason why we won't accept information that is for another RIR that happens to show up, we know that, we are willing to put that in our database and accept the key signing material. We are also working right now, just for the curious ?? in?addr.arpa is currently generated by ARIN in cooperation with all the RIRs but it's generated and produced by ARIN. We are actually working with IANA to have them participate in the in?addr.arpa DNS zone generation will eventually transfer that to them, if that answers your question.
Thank you. Any others? .
CHAIR: Thank you very much, John. Thanks.
And last up, we reserved the best spot for you, Raul. Raul Echeberria, the Director of LACNIC, who will give us the update for the LACNIC region.
RAUL ECHEBERRIA: Thank you very much, Paul. Good morning everybody. I will give an update of LACNIC activities.
First of all, I will not show any graph of numbers regarding our registration services, because they are part of the NRO statistics, so you have the opportunity to look at those numbers later. But let me speak a bit about the growing of the organisation.
We are growing in terms of our staff. We have created a new position that didn't exist until now. It is the human resource manager position, who is here with us, he is holding this position. He is here because the NRO is holding a human resource managers meeting, which is a very good experience.
We have created a new CTO, which is a very new interesting challenge for us, because it's the first time that we changed the people that is in charge of this important job in the operation an RIR, so we are waiting ?? what has been a very exotic ?? he is a Mexican living in the UK so we are exporting him to Uruguay next week, so he will be in the position next week as we are waiting for him with a huge amount of work on the desk.
So, we currently are 21 full?time employees, and we expect to be around 25 at the end of the year. As we are growing in the engineer area is part of the work that is waiting for [Aturo] to hire a couple of more people from his area.
As the membership is growing, too, we have reached 1,200 members in the last month in April, and the membership is very interesting.
Since the 31st December until now, we have I think it's 120 new members, which is very promising for this year.
The problem that happens when you change the software that you are using for presentations so ?? any new office is not very friendly sometimes.
As we have six policies under discussion for our next meeting. And four of them are related with resource of management and IPv6 blogs announcement policies, it has with ?? there are currently some requirements in terms of aggregation and it is being discussed in the region, probably those requirements will be removed. There is a new proposal for IPv6 micro assignments. We are also discussioning southern regions policy for permitting IPv4 addresses between organisations within LACNIC region, and we are also discussing a modification of the direct allocations, a policy, which is a policy that is for use mainly in new ?? people that can not justify the use of previous allocated IP addresses, so the current policy require that those organisations are multihomed. But in some countries it is a bit difficult to be multi?homed because of monopolies so we are facing some problems with new ?? mainly that the centres operators that cannot meet the requirements of this policy and so there is a proposal to change it, the policy as it is today.
There are two policies that are being proposed that are related to the policy development process and the election of the chairs and the number of chairs of the public policy forum.
In terms of engineering projects, we are suspending important resources in RPKI projects. We will be ready in two weeks for launching our prototype for issuing the certificates. We will enter in the phase of testing RPKI solution. We have our own software developed based on the RIPE NCC code as we have a tapped the RIPE NCC and developed the interfaces and all the inter?connection with our systems.
We are working also in DNSSEC, as are the other RIRs, and we are a bit delayed in this project also for the lack of the engineers that will be brought in very soon. We think that we will be ready to deploy DNSSEC in the region in the third quarter of this year. As we are ?? we have already signed a couple of domains that are under our management.
Very soon we are using our new registry system based on the EPP, that is a very innovative solution and it will provide, on our perspective, important benefits for our members and also for the national registries that we have, I don't know if, you know, but we have two national registries in our region, one in Mexico and one in Brazil, so there is new system will provide new facilities and better options for inter?connection between the LIR systems and ours.
In IPv6 training, we were very active in 2009. We organised activities in 11 countries. We trained last year 879 people in total, as we met the number of 5 thousand people trained in IPv6 issues, IPv6 related matters in LACNIC region in the last four years. 1,500 of them have been trained in hands?on workshops. This is important for us because many times we speak about the IPv6 adoptions and we show also the numbers of the IPv6 allocations, or the IPv6 addresses that are being announced on the Internet. But it is important also that we understand that, in LACNIC region, we don't have a huge number of IPv6 allocations, but we have an important amount of people trained in IPv6. So we have contributed very much in building the capacities for IPv6 deployment. So we think that we are very confident that the capacities are there for deploying IPv6 when IPv6 ?? when it is necessary for all the companies. So the companies will be ready. This is a very important difference in relation with what was the situation four or five years ago, and now, everybody in most of ISPs are aware of the situation and are trained and they are able to deploy IPv6 at any moment.
We are running a project that is named AMPARO project. It's a very interesting project that we are running in partnership with IDRC from Canada, a cooperation agency from Canada. As part of this project, we are developing materials for being used in openly, there will be allowed publicly for anyone interested as we are also training people, training trainers, future trainers to reproduce those training tasks we are organising. We have organised two workshops this year and we are organising another one next month in Mexico.
Probably some of you have already heard about FRIDA programme. It has been a very important programme in LACNIC for the last four years. As part of this programme, we have funded almost 60 research projects in the region, so we have spent, together with your partners, IDLC from Canada, an Internet society, more than 1 million, 1,200,000 US dollars, it has been ?? it has had a very important impact in the region and promoting research in ICT issues.
As part of this programme we are planning to give an award this year in November to the projects that are contributing in the more important way to the development of ICTs in the region.
As part of our public affairs activities, we are a member of [] /SEU tell recollect the inter?America telephone communications. It's a body of American states as we participate in all the governments from the region, also a member of these organisations and we work together in that environment.
We have developed many activities with governments in that forum. And the most important is that, recently, we have gotten a very important resolution from [CITEL] general assembly in March that is a resolution that promotes the coordination in the deployment of IPv6, but in part of the resolution, it says that the current RIR system has contributed very much to the, to increase the fairness of the allocation of IP addresses around the world and it has been very important in creating regional technical communities and increasing the coordination and ?? holders. I think that this is very important in the context of all the discussion that are being held in the ITU environments. So it's to have endorsement, strong endorsements from all the governments from the American region that was presented also in the recent ITU IPv6 Working Group meeting.
We have LACNIC governments Working Group, and we have currently representatives of 21 governments in a mailing list, and this group will meet for a third time in on the 17th May.
We continue deploying the route servers in the LACNIC region. We have an agreement with ISC for deploying the F?root in LACNIC regions and we have installed a sixth in, route server F in St. Martin's, very soon we will launch the 7th copy of F?root in Haiti, everything is ready for that. It will be publicly announced in Curacao, so see you in two weeks.
Finally, our next meeting, as I mentioned a couple of times, will be held in two weeks in Curacao. It is a point of intersection between RIPE NCC and LACNIC, since while Curacao is in the Caribbean, it is also part of the Netherlands, so it is an amazing situation. So you can go to Curacao, those of who that attend meetings, in RIPE NCC meetings in Amsterdam will feel like at home in Curacao. The landscape is a bit different from Amsterdam; there are more beaches.
It is very interesting, because maybe we will be showing some of the taxes that are paid by our colleagues of RIPE NCC in Amsterdam. So thank you, RIPE NCC, for supporting our meeting in Curacao. And so that's all. Thank you very much.
(Applause)
CHAIR: Any questions for Raul? Unfortunately, we do not all get to go to Curacao. I wish that was the case. Anyway... Thanks very much, Raul.
That completes the updates from the RIRs. Now, if I can ask Dave Wilson from the ASOAC, from the address supporting organisation address council to come up and give the update on behalf of the whole AC.
DAVE WILSON: Thank you very much. I am Dave Wilson, I work for HEAnet, which is the Irish National Research and Education Network, and I am a member of the ASO Address Council with Wilfried and Hans, who is also here this week.
Many of you will have seen a lot of this information before. I will be very brief and stick to the main updates.
The three things that the ASO Address Council does, being elected by the members of the individual regions, there are 15 of us, three from each region. Our main job, the most substantial thing we do is when there is a global policy proposal, that is one which affects how the IANA distributes addresses to the RIRs. We shepherd that policy through the process of getting it ratified by ICANN itself. We assert that the policy development process was properly followed in each region, and show that that's the case.
There are a couple of other duties we have. We appoint two ICANN board directors for three?year terms and we nominate someone to the ICANN nominations committee itself.
One piece of news: As I said, we appoint, or we elect board members to the ICANN directors' board, and we just did so very recently. We have now got a board member, [Ramunda Becca], whose term ends around now and we had a number of candidates apply to fill that position. [] queue a would you from the APNIC region was appointed. We are delighted, we want to say, with the response from the community, we saw some very strong candidates and I want to say, right here publicly, thank you to all the candidates who applied and particularly to Ramunda who did fine work for two consecutive terms, we have been privileged to have his service.
Very briefly, there will be more of this of course in the address policy Working Group later. There are two global policy proposals on the table right now. One is a global policy proposal on autonomous system numbers. I think that's basically all done bar the shouting. It's awaiting approval in one region where I think it's more or less reached the end of its process and I will be surprised now if it doesn't go ahead to be ratified.
The other is on the allocation of IPv4 blocks to RIRs. This is 2009?01 in our region and the state we are in is it's gotten a little bit stuck. There are different texts adopted in different regions and RIPE has its own decision to make this week.
With that. Thank you very much to the NRO itself for providing ongoing support, guidance and indeed funding and secretariat for the hard work they do. The secretary at is rotated each year between the different regions so there is an overhead in picking up each year and they always do an excellent job in that, I must say.
And there are some contacts.
Thank you very much and I'll be delighted to answer any questions.
CHAIR: Any questions for Dave?
Thank you very much.
(Applause)
CHAIR: Next up is Axel, the Managing Director of the RIPE NCC who is going to give us a regional sources update.
AXEL PAWLIK: Good morning. As Paul has said, I am the Chairman of the NRO this year, so that's the reason I am standing here.
What is it? Basically, it's a vehicle of the RIRs to work together and to do joint projects and basically to represent all the RIRs at the same time. As you have heard earlier, there is lots and lots of things that the RIRs are doing individually in terms of regional outreach, but some of the things we do together and we have established the NRO as that vehicle.
Formerly, we were set up, basically we got together and said we need this thing as a plan B if anything should go wrong with the unallocated address pool around IANA. That hasn't happened, which is very nice, but we still want to have some organ available in case we need it. But mostly, as I said, the NRO is there to represent the RIRs all together, to reach out to act as a focal point in the big wide world.
Also, and that's something that Dave just referred to, the NRO has re established the address policy organisation of ICANN in 2004 where where he said look, we are the RIRs together, we have formed this NRO and we can perform all the functions of the address Council within ICANN and so, that's what we do.
Current office holders. It's me as Chairman, it's Raul as secretary and John as the Treasurer.
We have a number of coordination groups. As I said, we need to work together and coordinate among ourselves in terms of engineering, in terms of outreach and public affairs. So, we have chairs of those groups and they sit with the Chairman. So, and re for the engineers and Paul for the, as you would expect, communications and public affairs people.
Within the NRO, or among the RIRs, whatever you want to say, have agreed to a long, long, long time ago to split the joint cost that we are paying for various projects, for instance for the ICANN contribution, according to a not?too?complicated scheme that relies to some degree on the amount of addresses that we have allocated every single year. So that's the reason you see APNIC coming back up there again.
But, yeah, that's basically what it is. We have agreed with ICANN, we have reconfirmed that agreement with ICANN that we want to contribute to their budget what we think is a relatively moderate amount, seeing as the budget is quite significantly rising. We have remained stable here because we do what we do and we do that on a stable level.
We do go to ICANN meetings relatively regularly, we do interact with various stakeholder groups there, namely the Government Advisory Council there that is one important step, that we are at most ICANN meetings, used to talk to the governments of the world represented there on things that we are doing and the status of our affairs.
The last ICANN meeting I missed myself, but there is another coming up in Brussels in a short time so we'll be there again and do what we have to do so represent all of you there.
Okay, that's ICANN.
There is also the Internet Governance Forum, has been going on for a couple of years now and it's basically is mostly about last year. We have MIT Stakeholder Advisory Group that meets regularly to prepare those meetings and set the format and agree on workshops. And I am happy to say that Raul is represented in that group, and that actually will meet again next week. There is sort of a couple of days open consultations and there is then the multi?stakeholder advisory group meeting that will decide what the next meeting of the IGF will look like. The NRO, as such, has submitted, I think, three proposals for workshops. There are loads of workshops and they go in ten parallel sessions. I don't know how many. It is a really, really, really big event, and, as you imagine, there are many, many people proposing those workshops or similar workshops, and, in the end, it's all a big merged fest where they have to come together because there is only so much time available. But, in general, we find the IGF is a well?working vehicle for people to come together and talk to each other without having a fixed agenda or a formal outcome which makes everybody a little bit more relaxed than they would be in other fora. So we very much support it and would like it to go on. The initial run of the IGF was for five years, so this year is formally the last of that one and there is a bit of a review going on, but the NRO has said that, we, together with much of the technical Internet community, that we would like the IGF to continue in this format, more or less.
Okay, the other areas we cooperate in as the NRO, that's certainly the ITU and you have heard and you will hear more about this, there has been an ongoing commentary about problems that the current Internet address allocation regime has not been able to service appropriately the developing countries of the world and before a couple of years already go there, meet with the ITU people and try to find out what those problems are and, I have heard actually that there are no problems, but concerns. So actually, the ITU has set up an IPv6 Working Group which has had its first meeting and will have another one in September and we have been there, together with lots of people from the technical community again, and there are now two correspondence groups established, that's fair name for mailing lists and it's just starting to go on with some discussion but basically we have very strong support for what we said in, we need to find out what the problems are before we we can solve them. We know that the people around the ITU have interesting ideas of how those problems could be solved, which problems again? So, I think it's currently going a bit in the right direction, but we need your support of course and again you'll hear about it later on.
The OECD. We are quite proud that the NRO has proposed and established the Internet technical advisory committee within the OECD, a formal committee with lots of members from the technical community, that's a very good outcome what we went through a couple of years ago already.
And we have been in very close contact with the OECD and contribute there and they come back to us and ask us questions which is exactly what we want.
Other ongoing activities. Last year and this year, obviously the certification effort is going on among the RIRs.
Outreach: Again, yes, we are running out of IPv6 addresses and we should all do ?? did I say that? We are running out of IPv4 addresses and we should all do IPv6. Going to the IGF together, preparing that stuff, dealing with the Working Group, the ITU IPv6 Working Group there, all do this together, and to focus among all the busy meeting schedules and day?to?day lives, we go occasionally on retreats, we did one earlier this year in February, it was hosted by APNIC, very nicely. And the other coordination groups met there and then reported to the NRO Executive Council. And we agreed to have another one in June, I think, end of June, at the end of the Brussels ICANN meeting.
So, what came out of the retreat? Preparations for the ITU IPv6 Working Group. Again, an agreement that was relatively easily achieved to continue to, on a moderate level, support the IGF secretariat, and some detailed work on RPKI coordination among the RIRs.
And that, basically, is my quick report from the NRO. I am happy to entertain any questions. If not, thank you. And I'll say good morning.
(Applause)
CHAIR: Thank you, Axel. Actually, in a lot of those pieces that Axel had touched upon will be taken up in the Cooperation Working Group, which is tomorrow afternoon, we are going to touch on the ITU, what's happening there, what are the next steps, we are going to review what's been happening at the IGF, so all of those pieces will be touched on a bit more so we'll welcome you to that session. Next up is my colleague, Andrea Cima, who is our registration manager, who is going to give us the NRO statistics update.
ANDREA CIMA: This is the joint stats report, a report which is made by the five RIRs and which is updated at the end of of each quarter. As you can see, this is report as of the 31st March, 2010.
Now, starting with IPv4 address space, the most interesting question is always how much address space does the IANA have left to allocate to the RIRs? Now, we can see on the slide IANA reserved, it says 22 /8s; this number has decreased to 20 now, as recently, after we updated this presentation, APNIC has received two additional /8s, if you look immediately above at the green part of the pie, let's say the dark, 35 /8s are not available for allocation by the IANA. Next to it, we have 91 /8s, which are set to the central registries, three /8s that have been allocated before the RIRs system was actually set in place. And finally, we see that the RIRs have received a total of 110 /8s, out of which 36 to APNIC, 33 to ARIN, 3 to AfriNIC, 3 to LACNIC and 30 to the RIPE NCC.
Now, if we look at the amount of address space that has been allocated by the RIRs over the last decade, we can see that there has been a steady growth, apart from a little slowdown in the last couple of years due to the economical crisis, and one thing that I think is interesting to point out is, as you can see in the first quarter of 2010, in the APNIC region, there has been a little bit more than one?and?a?half /8s which have been allocated. So it shows that the strongest growth is actually, yes, in this area.
If we look at the total amount of address space issued by the RIRs in the last decade, we can see that the RIPE NCC has allocated a little bit more than 26 /8s, APNIC slightly more than 32 /8s, AfriNIC 1.3 /8s, LACNIC 4.6 and ARIN almost 24 /8s.
Now, moving on to ASN assignments. Over the past decade, it's interesting to notice that, until 2004, ARIN was the RIR that had been assigning the highest number of AS numbers. This role has been taken over by the RIPE NCC since 2005, and we can see that this trend continues in 2010 where the RIPE NCC is the RIR that has assigned the highest number of AS numbers. I think personally what I can say is that the reason behind this is, that there are many organisations in the RIPE service region that want to be independent from their provider, and we find this back, also, in the number of provider independent assignments that have been made. If we look, for example, at this year, the RIPE NCC has allocated about 600 blocks, 600 allocations, but we have made also about 800 provider independent assignments, and most of these assignments come together when they say assignments are requested and AS number is requested together with it.
Now, if we look at total amounts, the number of AS numbers that have been assigned over the past decade, we can see that ARIN and the RIPE NCC are the RIRs that have the highest number of assignments. Then we have APNIC, LACNIC and AfriNIC.
Now, moving on to IPv6 address space, if you look at the doughnut on the top left, we see all the IPv6 address space available. Out of this, a /3 has been reserved for Global Unicast, and, out of this, 512/12s ?? five /12s have been allocated to the RIRs. One ?? it says here "miscellaneous," because there are some ranges set aside for special purposes and this /12 also contains the /23 allocations which were being made by the IANA to the RIRs before the global policy came in place in October 2006.
Now, looking over the last decade, how many allocations have the RIRs issued to their members? We can see that there has been a slow but study growth. It's interesting to notice that from 2008 on, you can see a big jump in the number of allocations made by the RIPE NCC, and this is mainly due to a policy change that occurred in 2007 removing the requirement of 200 /48 assignments that were being made. So the policy here helped the number of allocations made.
It's very interesting to see, as well, that in the first quarter of 2010, APNIC has made more IPv6 allocations than it did in the entire past year. And as Geoff Huston explained previously, this is also as a result of a change in the policy in the APNIC region.
Here, if you look on the, at the doughnut on your left side, you will see the number of allocations made, number of IPv6 allocations made by the different RIRs over the past ten years. You can see the RIPE NCC has made about 1900 of them, ARIN 840, APNIC slightly over 800, LACNIC 270, and AfriNIC number 70 allocations. Now, if you look at the other pie doughnut, what you can see is that the number of address space, which has actually been allocated in terms of /32s, this number is much higher. What does that mean? It means that allocation that is RIRs have been making, allocations which are much larger than the minimal allocation size, which is actually /32.
These are the names where you can find the presentations and at the end of the every quarter the updated presentations, and the historical data as well.
Are there any questions? Everyone wants to go for coffee.
CHAIR: Thank you very much. Well that completes the session for this morning. We are a little early. We are ten minutes early so we will let you go to have your coffee. Please be back here in this room at 11 o'clock sharp starting for the next session. Thanks everyone, thanks very much.
(Coffee break)