I support this proposal.

...Skeeve

*Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
[email protected] ; www.eintellegonetworks.com

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ;  <http://twitter.com/networkceoau>
linkedin.com/in/skeeve

twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com


The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering


On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Andy Linton <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear SIG members
>
>  The proposal "prop-110v001: Designate 1.2.3.0/24 as Anycast to support
> DNS Infrastructure" 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:
>
>       - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
>      - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
>        tell the community about your situation.
>      - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
>      - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>      - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
>        effective?
>
>
>  Information about this policy proposals is available from:
>
>      http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/110
>
>  Andy, Masato
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> prop-110v001: Designate 1.2.3.0/24 as Anycast to support DNS
>               Infrastructure
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>  Proposers:       Dean Pemberton, [email protected]
>                  Geoff Huston, [email protected]
>
>
>  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 unwanted traffic, primarily
>    due to its unauthorised use as private address space [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
>    unsolicited incoming traffic as a continuous sustained traffic level,
>    with peak bursts of over 800Mbps.
>
>     The analysis highlighted individual addresses such as 1.2.3.4 with
>    its covering /24 (identified as 1.2.3.0/24) remain in APNIC
>    quarantine and it is believed they will not be suitable for normal
>    address distribution.
>
>     The proposal proposes the use of 1.2.3.0/24 in a context of locally
>    scoped infrastructure support for DNS resolvers.
>
>  2. Objective of policy change
> -----------------------------
>
>     As the addresses attract extremely high levels of unsolicited
>    incoming traffic, the block has 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.
>
>     The objective of this proposal is to permit the use 1.2.3.0/24 as a
>    anycast addresses to be used in context of scoped routing to support
>    the deployment of DNS resolvers. It is noted that as long as
>    providers who use this address use basic route scope limitations, the
>    side effect of large volumes of unsolicited incoming traffic would
>    be, to some extent mitigated down to manageable levels.
>
>
>  3. Situation in other regions
> -----------------------------
>
>     Improper use of this address space is a globally common issue. However
>    the block is delegated only APNIC and so therefor, no other RIR has
>    equivalent policy to deal with the situation.
>
>
>  4. Proposed policy solution
> ---------------------------
>
>     This proposal recommends that the APNIC community agree to assign
>    1.2.3.0/24 to the APNIC Secretariat, to be managed as a common
>    anycast address to support DNS infrastructure deployment
>
>     Any party who applies to APNIC to use this address block on a
>    non-exclusive basis to number their DNS resolver will receive a
>    Signed Letter of Authority to permit their Autonomous System to
>    originate a route for 1.2.3.0/24, and APNIC will also publish a RPKI
>    ROA designating the AS as being permitted to originate a route. This
>    ROA shall be valid until APNIC is advised otherwise by the AS holder.
>
>  5. Advantages / Disadvantages
> -----------------------------
>
>  Advantages
>
>     - It will make use of this otherwise unusable address space.
>    - DNS operators will have an easy-to-remember address they can use to
>      communicate with their users (e.g. configure "1.2.3.4" as your DNS
>      resolver")
>
>
>  Disadvantages
>
>     - The address attracts a large volume of unsolicited incoming
>      traffic, and leakage of an anycast advertisement outside of a
>      limited local scope may impact on the integrity of the DNS service
>      located at the point associated with the scope leakage. Some
>      operators with high capacity infrastructure may see this as a
>      negligible issue.
>
>  6. Impact on APNIC
> ------------------
>
>     Although this space will no longer be available for use by a single
>    APNIC/NIR account holder, the proposal would result in benefit for
>    all APNIC community members, as well as the communities in other
>    regions.
>
>     There is the need to set up an administrative process in the
>    reception of applications to use the address block, and in the
>    maintenance of a set of ROAs associated with these applications
>
>
>  References
> ----------
>
>     [1] Resource Quality Good for Most of IPv4 Network “1”
>    http://www.apnic.net/publications/press/releases/2010/network-1.pdf
>
>     [2] Traffic in Network 1.0.0.0/8
>    http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2010-03/net1.html
>
>
>
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy
>     *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
>
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to