Hi Dean, Hiromi-san will reply soon, but as you wrote, we think using 'remarks' field will be one option to achieve our goals.
Yours Sincerely, -- Tomohiro Fujisaki From: Dean Pemberton <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] New Version of prop-115-v001: Registration of detailed assignment information in whois DB Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 07:04:20 +0900 | I am currently neither in favour or opposed to this proposal, but I | would like to ask for a point of clarification... | | Is the author suggesting that new fields in the whois be added to | allow this funtionality? | | It would seem that this is something which operators could choose to | implement today using the 'remarks' field as they do for BGP community | information as shown below. | | $ whois -h rr.Level3.net as702 | | % RIPEdb(3.0.0a13) with ISI RPSL extensions | | aut-num: AS702 | as-name: AS702 | descr: Verizon Business EMEA - Commercial IP service provider in Europe | admin-c: DUMY-RIPE | tech-c: DUMY-RIPE | remarks: -------------------------------------------------------------- | Verizon Business filters out inbound prefixes longer than /24. | We also filter any networks within AS702:RS-INBOUND-FILTER. | -------------------------------------------------------------- | VzBi uses the following communities with its customers: | 702:80 Set Local Pref 80 within AS702 | 702:120 Set Local Pref 120 within AS702 | 702:20 Announce only to VzBi AS'es and VzBi customers | 702:30 Keep within Europe, don't announce to other VzBi AS's | 702:1 Prepend AS702 once at edges of VzBi to Peers | 702:2 Prepend AS702 twice at edges of VzBi to Peers | 702:3 Prepend AS702 thrice at edges of VzBi to Peers | -------------------------------------------------------------- | Advanced communities for customers | 702:7020 Do not announce to AS702 peers with a scope of | National but advertise to Global Peers, European | Peers and VzBi customers. | 702:7001 Prepend AS702 once at edges of VzBi to AS702 | peers with a scope of National. | 702:7002 Prepend AS702 twice at edges of VzBi to AS702 | peers with a scope of National. | 702:7003 Prepend AS702 thrice at edges of VzBi to AS702 | peers with a scope of National. | 702:8020 Do not announce to AS702 peers with a scope of | European but advertise to Global Peers, National | Peers and VzBi customers. | 702:8001 Prepend AS702 once at edges of VzBi to AS702 | peers with a scope of European. | 702:8002 Prepend AS702 twice at edges of VzBi to AS702 | peers with a scope of European. | 702:8003 Prepend AS702 thrice at edges of VzBi to AS702 | peers with a scope of European. | -------------------------------------------------------------- | Additional details of the VzBi communities are located at: | http://www.verizonbusiness.com/uk/customer/bgp/ | -------------------------------------------------------------- | Details of VzBi's peering policy and how to get in touch with | VzBi regarding peering policy matters can be found at: | http://www.verizonbusiness.com/uunet/peering/ | -------------------------------------------------------------- | remarks: **************************** | remarks: * THIS OBJECT IS MODIFIED | remarks: * Please note that all data that is generally regarded | as personal | remarks: * data has been removed from this object. | remarks: * To view the original object, please query the RIPE Database at: | remarks: * http://www.ripe.net/whois | remarks: **************************** | mnt-by: WCOM-EMEA-RICE-MNT | changed: [email protected] 20000101 | source: RIPE | -- | Dean Pemberton | | Technical Policy Advisor | InternetNZ | +64 21 920 363 (mob) | [email protected] | | To promote the Internet's benefits and uses, and protect its potential. | | | On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Masato Yamanishi <[email protected]> wrote: | > Dear SIG members | > | > The Problem statement "Registration of detailed assignment information | > in whois DB" has been assigned a Policy Proposal number following the | > submission of a new version sent to the Policy SIG for consideration. | > | > The proposal, "prop-115-v001: Registration of detailed assignment | > information in whois DB" now includes an objective and proposed solution. | > | > Information about this and earlier versions is available from: | > | > http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-115 | > | > You are encouraged 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? | > | > | > | > Regards, | > | > Masato | > | > | > | > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | > prop-115-v001: Registration of detailed assignment information in | > whois DB | > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | > | > Proposer: Ruri Hiromi | > [email protected] | > | > Tomohiro Fujisaki | > [email protected] | > | > | > 1. Problem statement | > -------------------- | > | > Recently, there are some cases need to get IP address assignment | > information in more detail to specify user IP address. | > | > With out this information, operators cannot filter out specific | > address range, and it might lead to 'over-filter' (i.e. filtering | > whole ISP's address range). | > | > For example: | > | > 1) 'Port' range information in IPv4 | > | > ISPs are using 'CGN' or other kinds of IPv4 address sharing | > technology with assignment of IP address and specified port | > range to their users. | > | > In this case, port information is necessary to specify one user. | > | > ex) 192.0.2.24/32 1-256 is for HomeA | > 192.0.2.24/32 257-511 is for HomeB | > | > or 192.0.2.0/24 1-65536 is shared address of ISP-X | > minimum size is /32 | > | > 2) address assignment size information in IPv6 | > | > The IPv6 address assignment size may be different from ISP to | > ISP, and address ranges in one ISP. Address assignment prefix | > size will be necessary. | > | > ex) 2001:db8:1::0/56 is for HomeA | > 2001:db8:1:1::0/48 is for HomeB | > | > or 2001:db8:1::/36's minimum size is /56 | > | > | > 2. Objective of policy change | > ----------------------------- | > | > Lots of operators look a record when harmful behavior coming to | > their network to identify its IP address confirming it can be | > filtered or not. | > | > The goal is providing more specific information to support these | > actions. | > | > | > 3. Situation in other regions | > ----------------------------- | > | > No same regulation/discussion can be seen in other regions. | > | > | > 4. Proposed policy solution | > --------------------------- | > | > Provide accurate filtering information generated from whois DB. | > | > For IPv4, propose to add 'port range' information to IP address | > entry. | > | > For IPv6, propose to provide 'assignment prefix size' information | > for specific IPv6 address. | > | > | > 5. Advantages / Disadvantages | > ----------------------------- | > | > Advantages: | > | > - operators can set filtering by IP address based on correct assignment | > information base. | > | > - users who share same address space can be avoid to be including bulk | > filtering. | > | > Disadvantages: | > | > - registration rule will move to more strict manner. | > | > - strict watch and control in registration of database records. | > | > - additional record or option will be considered. | > | > - privilege for withdrawing detailed information will be set for these | > records. | > | > | > 6. Impact on APNIC | > ------------------ | > | > This might be beyond the scope of using whois DB. | > | > | > 7. Other Consideration | > ---------------------- | > | > For the security reason, this detailed records may be able to see | > only by operators.(some kind of user control/privilege setting is | > needed) | > | > For hosting services, /32 in IPv4 and /128 in IPv6 registration | > should be discussed based on its operability and possibility. But a | > harmful activities to filter by IP addresses are coming from hosting | > services as well. Here it seemed to be some demands. | > | > | > References | > ---------- | > | > TBD | > | > | > * 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 | * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
