5-8 Report on Renewal and Implementation of IPv4 Rules

(JPNIC Secretariat)

New rules related to IP addresses were introduced and its related documents were revised on January 29, 2000, after being in preparation since last year. We are not able to present it in the form of statistical data yet since it is only one month after the enforcement, but we would like to report some of the points that have arisen during operations.

Under the previous rules, JPNIC evaluation was not necessary if the total volume of addresses allocated to a single internet connected organization was under /21. Under the new rules, even existing members are subject to deliberations if the assignment window sizu is over /25, which is the size of the Assignment Window determined for existing members. On the other hand, there are two main points of the changes: only the volume for assignment will subject to evaluations, regardless of the total volume of addresses the organization maintains. Also, an evaluation for assignment for use by the member itself will be conducted only at the time of allocation.

Because many assignment reports were sent at the end of January, there were few evaluations at the beginning of February. Evaluations increased gradually over the following weeks, and the total number of requestedevaluations reached approximately 100 by the beginning of March. About half of them were applications for /24; 35% were for assignment over /24; 15% were for under /24. It remains the case that most applications are for /24. We are not sure if the reason for this is because a network size of /24 is the most common size, or if it is for other reasons, but reports from other registries also indicate that applications for /24 are the most common. Desoite this phenomenon, since assignments are made based on the amount required by each network, careful and detailed examinaions are carried out.

With the introduction of the new rules, members were concerned about the amount of time required for evaluations. The main point of concern seems to be regarding the number of times that questions and confirmations may be requested before evaluation has finished, which affects the evaluation period.

In the case of under /24 assignments, questions or confirmation may be requested is approximately 0-3 times. However, for over /24 assignments, there may be as many as five or six such requests. If the member does not respond promptly, it will take up more time. JPNIC will do the best to respond within five working days to any applications, queries or confirmations submitted by members.

The number of exchanges necessary for each evaluation varies widely. For the same types of questions and confirmations, some members collect information in advance in preparation for the next evaluation, while others simply continue to forward evaluation requests sent from their applicant. In the latter case, evaluation staff must repeat the same questions, which will not shorten the evaluation period.

Introduction of the Assignment Window will change the mechanism of this point in particular. In the former case, members will be judged that they fully understood the evaluaion policy. The Assignment Window size for the member will increase and members can handle more assignments at their own discretion. This will not be the same in the latter case. They will continue to be a subject of evaluaion even if it is an application for the same size.

Some members have already received a larger Assignment Window size by satisfying policy requirements for the smaller size. An increase of Assignment Window means enlarging the range of assignments that can be made at the member's discretion, in accordance with how they understand the evaluaion policy. In other words, assignment authority will be increasingly delegated. We believe that this system should improve efficiency of each member's operations, so we would like to ask for your cooperation.

The SIGs that APNIC held during APRICOT in Korea, explained in another section of this newsletter, made us feel that evaluation for address administration has become more strict globally. For example, Cable TVs, part of a recently-growing segment, can only assign one address for one customer. Assignment of more than two addresses is not allowed unless technically justified, such as placement of a server. Furthermore, it was confirmed that they must submit customer lists in order to prove necessity of the requested address size.

Half of the IPv4 addresses (2 billion) have already been assigned. It was emphasized that registries must take responsibility for how effectively and carefully the other half is utilized. Considering that Japan uses the most addresses in Asia, JPNIC has an extremely responsibility.

The new evaluation procedures probably still have some points for improvements, and we will make efforts for sound development of the Internet. We would like to ask for cooperation and understanding from each and every one of you.