Internet Registry allocations guidelines
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
IESG Note: By approving this document as a Best Current Practice,the IESG asserts its belief that this policy described herein is an accurate representation of the current practice of the IP address registries with respect to address assignment.
This does not constitute endorsement or recommendation of this policy by the IESG. The IESG will reevaluate its approval of this document in December 1997 taking into consideration the results of the discussions that will be take place in the IRE Working Group between now and then.Abstract This document describes the registry system for the distribution of globally unique Internet address space and registry operations. Particularly this document describes the rules and guidelines governing the distribution of this address space. This document describes the IP assignment policies currently used by the Regional Registries toimplement the guidelines developed by the IANA. The guidelines and these policies are subject to revision at the direction of the IANA. The registry working group (IRE WG) will be discussing these issues and may provide advice to the IANA about possible revisions. This document replaces RFC 1466, with all the guidelines and procedures updated and modified in the light of experience.
This document does not describe private Internet address space and multicast address space. It also does not describe regional and local refinements of the global rules and guidelines. This document can be considered the base set of operational guidelines in use by all registries. Additional guidelines may be imposed by a particular registry as appropriate.
Table of Contents
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Allocation Framework
- 2.1 Guidelines for Internet Service Providers
- 2.2 Submission of Reassignment Information
- 3. Assignment Framewo rk>
- 3.1 Common Registry Requirements
- 3.2 Network Engineering Plans
- 3.3 Previous Assignment History
- 3.4 Network Deployment Plans
- 3.5 Organization Information
- 3.6 Expected Utilization Rate
- 4. Operational Guidelines for Registries
- 5. In-Addr.Arpa Domain Maintenance
- 6. Right to Appeal
- 7. References
- 8. Security Considerations
- 9. Authors' Addresses
The addressing constraints described in this document are largely the result of the interaction of existing router technology, address assignment, and architectural history. After extensive review and discussion, the authors of this document, the IETF working group that reviewed it and the IESG have concluded that there are no other currently deployable technologies available to overcome these limitations. In the event that routing or router technology develops to the point that adequate routing aggregation can be achieved by other means or that routers can deal with larger routing and more dynamic tables, it may be appropriate to review these constraints. Internet address space is distributed according to the following three goals:
The Internet Registry system In order to achieve the above goals the Internet Registry (IR) hierarchy was established. The Internet Registry hierarchy consists of the following levels of hierarchy as seen from the top down: IANA, Regional IRs, Local IRs. IANA The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority has authority over all number spaces used in the Internet. This includes Internet Address Space. IANA allocates parts of the Internet address space to regional IRs according to its established needs. Regional IRs Regional IRs operate in large geopolitical regions such as continents. Currently there are three regional IRs established; InterNIC serving North America, RIPE NCC serving Europe, and AP- NIC serving the Asian Pacific region. Since this does not cover all areas, regional IRs also serve areas around its core service areas. It is expected that the number of regional IRs will remain relatively small. Service areas will be of continental dimensions.
RFC 2050 Internet Registry IP Allocation Guidelines November 1996 Regional IRs are established under the authority of the IANA. This requires consensus within the Internet community of the region. A consensus of Internet Service Providers in that region may be necessary to fulfill that role. The specific duties of the regional IRs include coordination and representation of all local IRs in its respective regions. Local IRs Local RIRs are established under the authority of the regional IR and IANA. These local registries have the same role and responsibility as the regional registries within its designated geographical areas. These areas are usually of national dimensions.
2. Allocation Framework
2.1 Guidelines for Internet Service Providers (ISPs)
This document makes a distinction between the allocation of IP addresses and the assignment of IP addresses. Addresses are allocated to ISPs by regional registries to assign to its customer base. ISPs who exchange routing information with other ISPs at multiple locations and operate without default routing may request space directly from the regional registry in its geographical area. ISPs with no designated regional registry may contact any regional registry and the regional registry may either handle the request or refer the request to an appropriate registry. To facilitate hierarchical addressing, implemented using Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR), all other ISPs should request address space directly from its upstream provider. ISPs only request address space directly from regional registries if their immediate requirement, when satisfied with a contiguous block allocation, has a reasonable probability of being routable on the Internet, and they meet one or more of the following conditions.
a) the ISP is directly connected to a major routing exchange (for purposes of this document, a major routing exchange is defined as a neutral layer 2 exchange point connecting four or more unrelated ISPs.)
b) the ISP is multi-homed, that is, it has more than one simultaneous connection to the global Internet and no connection is favored over the other
Note that addresses issued directly from the IRs (non-provider based), are the least likely to be routable across the Internet. The following are the IP allocation guidelines for ISPs:
Organizations considering the use of static IP address assignment are expected to investigate and implement dynamic assignment technologies whenever possible.
2.2 Submission of Reassignment Information It is imperative that reassignment information be submitted in a prompt and efficient manner to facilitate database maintenance and ensure database integrity. Therefore, assignment information must be submitted to the regional registry immediately upon making the assignment.
The following reasons necessitate transmission of the reassignment information:
No additional CIDR blocks will be allocated by the regional registry or upstream providers until approximately 80% of all reassignment information has been submitted.
3. Assignment Framework
An assignment is the delegation of authority over a block of IP addresses to an end enterprise.
The end enterprise will use addresses from an assignment internally only; it will not sub-delegate those addresses. This section discusses some of the issues involved in assignments and the framework behind the assignment of addresses. In order for the Internet to scale using existing technologies, use of regional registry services should be limited to the assignment of IP addresses for organizations meeting one or more of the following conditions:
Note that addresses issued directly from the IRs,(non-provider based), are the least likely to be routable across the Internet
3.1 Common Registry Requirements
Because the number of available IP addresses on the Internet is limited, the utilization rate of address space will be a key factor in network number assignment. Therefore, in the best interest of the Internet as a whole, specific guidelines have been created to govern the assignment of addresses based on utilization rates.
Although topological issues may make exceptions necessary, the basic criteria that should be met to receive network numbers are listed below: 25% immediate utilization rate 50% utilization rate within 1 year
The utilization rate above is to be used as a guideline, there may be be occasions when the 1 year rate does not fall exactly in this range. Organizations must exhibit a high confidence level in its 1 year utilization rate and supply documentation to justify the level of confidence. Organizations will be assigned address space based on immediate utilization plus 1 year projected utilization. A prefix longer than /24 may be issued if deemed appropriate.
Organizations with less than 128 hosts will not be issued an IP address directly from the IRs. Organizations may be issued a prefix longer than /24 if the organization can provide documentation from a registry recognized ISP indicating the ISP will accept the long prefix for injection into the global routing system.
Exceptions to the criteria will not be made based on insufficient equipment without additional detailed justification. Organizations should implement variable length subnet mask (VLSM) internally to maximize the effective utilization of address space. Address assignments will be made under the assumption that VLSM is or will be implemented. IP addresses are valid as long as the criteria continues to be met.
The IANA reserves the right to invalidate any IP assignments once it is determined the the requirement for the address space no longer exists. In the event of address invalidation, reasonable efforts will be made by the appropriate registry to inform the organization that the addresses have been returned to the free pool of IPv4 address space.
3.2 Network Engineering Plans
Before a registry makes an assignment, it must examine each address space request in terms of the requesting organization's networking plans. These plans should be documented, and the following information should be included:
The subnetting plans should include:
If subnetting is not being used, an explanation why it cannot be implemented is required. Care must be taken to ensure that the host and subnet estimates correspond to realistic requirements and are not based on administrative convenience.
3.3 Previous Assignment History
To promote increased usage of address space, the registries will require an accounting of address space previously assigned to the enterprise, if any. In the context of address space allocation, an "enterprise" consists of all divisions and/or subsidiaries falling under a common parent organization.
The previous assignment history should include all network numbers assigned to the organization, plus the network masks for those networks and the number of hosts on each (sub-)network. Sufficient corroborating evidence should be provided to allow the assigning registry to be confident that the network descriptions provided are accurate. Routing table efficiency will be taken into account by the regional registries and each request will be handled on a case by case basis.
3.4 Network Deployment Plans
In order to assign an appropriate amount of space in the required time frame, a registry may request deployment plans for a network. Deployment plans should include the number of hosts to be deployed per time period, expected network growth during that time period, and changes in the network topology that describe the growth.
3.5 Organization Information
A registry may request that an organization furnish a published description verifying that the organization is what it claims to be. This information can consist of brochures, documents of incorporation, or similar published material.
3.6 Expected Utilization Rate
As stated in the foregoing text, one of the key factors in determining how much address space is appropriate for an organization is the expected utilization rate of the network. The expected utilization rate is the number of hosts connected to the network divided by the total number of hosts possible on the network.
In addition, the estimated number of hosts should be projected over a reasonable time frame, i.e., one in which the requesting enterprise has a high level of confidence. The minimal utilization rate is set by the IANA and may be changed at any time. New utilization rates may be enforced by the regional registries prior to updating the written policy.
4. Operational Guidelines For Registries
8. Security Considerations Security issues are not discussed in this memo.
9. Authors' Addresses
InterNIC Registration Services
c/o Network Solutions
505 Huntmar Park Drive
Herndon, VA 22070 Phone: (703) 742-4870
InterNIC Registration Services
c/o Network Solutions
505 Huntmar Park Drive
Herndon, VA 22070 Phone: (703) 742-4795
Asia Pacific Network Information Center
c/o United Nations University
53-70 Jingumae 5-chome,
Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 150
JP Phone: +81-3-5467-7014
SJ Amsterdam NL-1098
NL Phone: +31 20 592 5065
USC/Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Phone: 310-822-1511
- Registration services
- Resources Transfer
- Return Resources
- Resource management
- Registration documents
- Revocation of resources
- RIPE Atlas in Latin America and the Caribbean