rfc 2050 working group
DESCRIPTION
RFC 2050 Working Group. Presentation by Cathy Wittbrodt Packet Design Original presentation by Mark McFadden University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee. Background. Addressing policy is obviously important Documenting that policy is crucial Today’s Addressing policy is complex - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
RFC 2050 Working Group
Presentation by Cathy WittbrodtPacket DesignOriginal presentation by Mark McFaddenUniversity of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
![Page 2: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Background
Addressing policy is obviously importantDocumenting that policy is crucial
Today’s Addressing policy is complexBut not so complex that it can’t be described
Many more people are interested than in the mid-1990’s
Situation isn’t nearly the sameCIDR, IPv6, mobile
![Page 3: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
What Was RFC 2050?
“Internet Registry IP Allocation Guidelines”
Edited by Kim Hubbard, Mark Kosters, David Conrad, Daniel Karrenberg and Jon Postel
An IETF BCP describing the distribution of “globally unique IP addresses and registry operations”
![Page 4: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
What’s In RFC 2050?
A few major sectionsAn allocation framework
Describing CIDR and hierarchical allocationAn assignment framework
Describing assignment of blocks of addresses to non-registries – “end enterprises”
![Page 5: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
More of RFC 2050
Describes needed utilization rates25% initial and 50% utilization in first yearAlso described the documentation required
Short section on “operational Guidelines for Registries”
Also includes IN-ADDR.ARPA and a Right to Appeal
![Page 6: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Is RFC 2050 Up To Date?
Nobody seems to think soDisagreement about how out of date it
really isClearly not current in key areas
IPv6How further policy is developedRegistry operations and organizationAssignment windowsSpecial cases
![Page 7: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Is There a Problem?
Maybe not!Just ignore RFC 2050 and move on!
Does anyone really care?Seems like the answer is yesDisagreement about what to do to replace
RFC 2050
![Page 8: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Should RFC 2050 be Updated?
Landscape has been changed dramaticallyNot just IETF and IANA anymore
Never really was this way
Updating is would be difficultMany more constituentsOther registries, ASO AC etc
![Page 9: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Has Anything Happened?
Active discussions in Taipei in August 2000
Proposal made at ICANN ASO meeting in Stockholm June 2001
Discussion surroundsWhat would be a replacementHow they would be edited
And by whom!How they would be published
![Page 10: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
What Should be Done?
ARIN sponsors a working groupTo discuss inside the ARIN regionWhat should be done about RFC 2050Propose alternatives
And come to consensus within the region
![Page 11: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Pertinent Quote
“Did you hate your life?”
David ConradRFC 2050 contributor
![Page 12: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
RFC 2050 Working Group
The objective of the RFC 2050 Working Group is to address the issues relating to relevance of RFC 2050 to the needs of today's Internet registry system
The group will evaluate RFC 2050 and propose a method of replacing it with a new document or documents
Once consensus has emerged on the process that will be used to replace RFC 2050, the working group will cooperatively develop its replacement
The working group will work in coordination with the other Regional Internet Registries who will conduct a similar review process in their respective regions
![Page 13: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Mailing List
As usual Working Group activity is coordinated through a mailing list
Available in the usual wayhttp://www.arin.net/members/mailing.htmOr
Send SUBSCRIBE 2050-WGTo [email protected]
![Page 14: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Working Group Milestones I
Working group formed (10 Sep 2001)Provide inventory of issues and policies
that RFC 2050 addresses (5 October 2001)
RFC 2050 Working Group Open Meeting in Miami (29-30 October 2001)
NOTE: These have been completed.
![Page 15: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Working Group Milestones II
Draft requirements document for rewrite (25 January 2002) A set of principles are complete A draft of proposed replacement documents is
about to be circulated
Draft process for meeting document requirements (25 January 2002) Proposing a group of small editorial teams to edit
proposed documents Looking for input on this model on the mailing list
![Page 16: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Working Group Milestones III
Begin to draft the components of the replacement (March 2002)
Work in coordination with the other Regional Internet RegistriesThis is already taking place
Public progress report at ASO general assembly meeting (2Q 2002)
![Page 17: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Next Step
Answer the musical question “Any document or documents that purports
to replace RFC 2050 must have . . .”A requirements document
To be completed prior to RIPE meeting in Amsterdam
January 2002
![Page 18: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Since We Started
RFC 2050 inventory has been published on the list
RIPE met in PragueSignificant developmentRather than have 3 or 4 registries
discussing RFC 2050 separatelyUse a single listCooperation and coordination between
regions
![Page 19: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Other Progress
RFC 2050 Discussions have also taken place in:Amsterdam RIPE Meeting in January 2002NANOG, IETF, etc.
Concrete proposal for moving forward with the process (principles, document requirements and editorial team strategy) is now in discussion
![Page 20: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
What Next
Anyone who is interested in addressing should be involvedThis means you!
Join the mailing listParticipate in the discussions in other
settingsGet as many other people involved as
possibleGoal: building a useful consensus
![Page 21: RFC 2050 Working Group](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062407/56812dfd550346895d935dc1/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Finally
Food for thought Have you ever looked at RFC 2050? What should be in a document that describes how
addressing works in the internet? Are some of the premises of RFC 2050 out of date? How should the documents look? Who should write them? What should be in them?
And, what shouldn’t be?