home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group V. Cerf
- Request for Comments: 1174 CNRI
- August 1990
-
- IAB Recommended Policy on Distributing Internet Identifier Assignment
- and
- IAB Recommended Policy Change to Internet "Connected" Status
-
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This informational RFC represents the official view of the Internet
- Activities Board (IAB), and describes the recommended policies and
- procedures on distributing Internet identifier assignments and
- dropping the connected status requirement. This RFC does not specify
- a standard. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
-
- Table of Contents
-
- Status of this Memo............................................... 1
- Overview.......................................................... 1
- 1. Recommendation about Internet Identifiers..................... 2
- 1.1. Summary..................................................... 2
- 1.2. Introduction................................................ 2
- 1.3. Proposed Method of Operation................................ 2
- 2. Recommendation about Connected Status......................... 3
- 2.1. Summary..................................................... 3
- 2.2. Introduction................................................ 3
- 2.3. Recommendations............................................. 4
- 2.a.1. Attachment 1.............................................. 4
- 2.a.1.1. Summary................................................. 4
- 2.a.1.2. Background.............................................. 4
- 2.a.1.3. Recommendation.......................................... 6
- 2.a.1.4. Discussion.............................................. 7
- 2.a.2. Attachment 2.............................................. 8
- Security Considerations........................................... 8
- Author's Address.................................................. 9
-
- Overview
-
- This RFC includes two recommendations from the IAB to the FNC. The
- first is a "Recommended Policy on Distributing Internet Identifier
- Assignment", that is, a suggestion to distribute the function of
- assigning network and autonomous system numbers. The second is a
- "Recommended Policy Change to Internet 'Connected' Status", that is,
- a suggestion to drop the notion of connected status in favor of
- recording the acceptable use policy and traffic access policy for
- each network. Included in this second recommendation is the explict
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 1]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- suggestion that any registered network may be entered into the DNS
- database without regard to connected status.
-
- 1. Recommendation about Internet Identifiers
-
- To: Chairman, Federal Networking Council
- From: Chairman, Internet Activities Board
- CC: IAB, IESG
- Subject: Recommended Policy on Distributing Internet
- Identifier Assignment
-
- 1.1. Summary
-
- This document recommends procedures for distributing assignment of
- Internet identifiers (network and autonomous system numbers).
-
- 1.2. Introduction
-
- Throughout its entire history, the Internet system has employed a
- central Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) for the allocation
- and assignment of various numeric identifiers needed for the
- operation of the Internet. The IANA function is performed by USC
- Information Sciences Institute. The IANA has the discretionary
- authority to delegate portions of this responsibility and, with
- respect to numeric network and autonomous system identifiers, has
- lodged this responsibility with an Internet Registry (IR). This
- function is performed by SRI International at its Network Information
- Center (DDN-NIC).
-
- With the rapid escalation of the number of networks in the Internet
- and its concurrent internationalization, it is timely to consider
- further delegation of assignment and registration authority on an
- international basis. It is also essential to take into consideration
- that such identifiers, particularly network identifiers of class A
- and B type, will become an increasingly scarce commodity whose
- allocation must be handled with thoughtful care.
-
- 1.3. Proposed Method of Operation
-
- It is proposed to retain the centralized IANA and IR functions.
-
- The IR would continue to be the principal registry for all network
- and autonomous system numbers. It would also continue to maintain
- the list of root Domain Name System servers and a database of
- registered nets and autonomous systems.
-
- In addition, however, the IR would also allocate to organizations
- approved by the Coordinating Committee for Intercontinental Research
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 2]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- Networking (CCIRN) blocks of network and autonomous system numbers,
- as needed, and delegate to them further assignment authority.
-
- It is recommended that, at least initially, the IR serve as the
- default registry in cases where no delegated registration authority
- has been identified.
-
- Copies of the aggregate Internet registration database(s) should be
- maintained by the IR and copies provided to each delegated registry
- to improve redundancy and access to this information. Updates to the
- database, however, would still be centralized at the IR with complete
- copies redistributed by file transfer or other means on a timely
- basis.
-
- It is recommended that candidate delegated registries meet with the
- IANA and IR to review operational procedures and requirements and to
- produce documentation to be issued as RFCs describing the details of
- the proposed distributed mode of operation.
-
- It is recommended that host Domain Name registration continue in its
- present form which already accommodates distribution of this
- function.
-
- 2. Recommendation about Connected Status
-
- To: Chairman, Federal Networking Council (FNC)
- From: Chairman, Internet Activities Board
- CC: IAB, IESG
- Subject: Recommended Policy Change to Internet "Connected" Status
-
- 2.1. Summary
-
- This memorandum recommends a change in the current policy for
- associating "connected" status to a subset of networks which have
- been assigned an Internet identifier.
-
- 2.2. Introduction
-
- In the following, the term Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA)
- refers to the organization which has primary authority to allocate
- and assign numeric identifiers required for operation of the
- Internet. This function is presently performed by USC Information
- Sciences Institute. The term Internet Registry (IR) refers to the
- organization which has the responsibility for gathering and
- registering information about networks to which identifiers (network
- numbers, autonomous system numbers) have been assigned by the IR. At
- present, SRI International serves as the IR.
-
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 3]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- Attachments (1) and (2) outline the rationale for and implications of
- changing the current policy for associating "connected" status with
- only a subset of networks which have been assigned Internet
- identifiers.
-
- 2.3. Recommendations
-
- The following actions are recommended:
-
- 1. The Internet Registry should be instructed to drop all
- reference to "connected" status in its databases and in its forms
- for Internet network and autonomous system registration.
-
- 2. The Internet Registry should be instructed to request brief
- statements of acceptable network usage, access and transit policy
- for external traffic (i.e., traffic entering from or exiting to
- other networks) from each applicant for a network or autonomous
- system identifier. For example, some networks conform to the
- National Science Foundation acceptable use guidelines; other
- networks will carry any traffic (e.g., common carriers); others
- may prohibit transit use. Retrospective statements should be
- gathered by the IR for networks already registered. Such
- statements should be made available on-line and widely publicized.
-
- 3. The Internet Registry should be instructed to allow any
- registered networks to be entered into the Domain Name Server
- database without regard to "connected" status.
-
- Attachment: (1) Recommendation for replacement of "Connected" Status
- (2) Recommendation on DNS and Connectivity
-
- 2.a.1. Attachment 1
-
- Recommendation for Replacement of "Connected" Status
-
- 2.a.1.1. Summary
-
- A revision of the current Internet procedures controlling connection
- to the Internet is recommended to solve urgent problems caused by
- Internet growth both in the US and internationally. The
- recommendation involves relaxation of the present "connected" status
- rule and the creation of a policy database to guide network
- administrators.
-
- 2.a.1.2. Background
-
- With the demise of the ARPANET and the growth of a global Internet,
- the administration and registration of Internet network numbers has
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 4]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- outgrown its initially conceived client base: military, government
- and government-sponsored research organizations. Since the
- international growth has extended the Internet community to industry
- and a broad range of academic and research institutions, we must re-
- evaluate some of the criteria for assignment and use of Internet
- network numbers.
-
- In the early phases of the Internet research project, numbers were
- assigned only to networks of organizations that were participating in
- the research effort. Later, as the system became more stable and
- expanded into a widespread infrastructure, other organizations with
- networks were assigned network numbers and allowed to interconnect if
- they were parts of the U.S. Government or sponsored by a Government
- organization. To ensure global uniqueness, a single Internet
- Registry (IR) was designated: the Defense Data Net Network
- Information Center (DDN-NIC) at SRI International.
-
- As the Internet protocols became popular in the commercial
- marketplace, many organizations purchased and installed private
- networks that needed network number assignments but were not intended
- to be connected to the federally-sponsored system. The IR adopted a
- policy of assigning network numbers to all who requested them, while
- distinguishing networks permitted to link to the global Internet by
- assigning them "connected" status. Essentially, this meant that the
- network to which the number was assigned had the sanction of a U.S.
- Government sponsoring organization to link to the Internet.
-
- The present day Internet encompasses networks that serve as
- intermediaries to access the federally-sponsored backbones. Many of
- these intermediate networks were initiated under the sponsorship of
- the National Science Foundation. Some have been founded without
- federal assistance as consortia of using organizations. The
- Government has expressed a desire that all such networks be self-
- supporting, without the need for federal subsidy. To achieve this
- goal, it has been essential for the intermediate networks to support
- an increasingly varied range of users. A great many industrial
- participants can be found on the intermediate level networks. Their
- use of the federally-sponsored backbones is premised on the basis
- that the traffic is in support of academic, scholarly or other
- research work. The criteria for use of the intermediate level
- networks alone is sometimes more relaxed and, in the cases of the
- newly-formed commercial networks, there are no restrictions at all.
-
- In essence, each network needs to be able to determine, on the basis
- of its own criteria, with which networks it will interconnect and for
- which networks it will support transit service. There is no longer a
- simple binary correlation between "connected" status and acceptable
- use policy. The matter becomes even more complex as we contemplate
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 5]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- the large and growing number of non-U.S. networks joining the global
- Internet. It is inappropriate to require that all of these networks
- adhere to U.S. access and use criteria; rather, it can only be
- required that the traffic they send through the federally-sponsored
- networks be consistent with the federal criteria.
-
- 2.a.1.3. Recommendation
-
- Since the concept of a single, global "connected" status is no longer
- meaningful, it is recommended that it be retired and to define new
- characteristics that could be used by networks within the Internet to
- determine a specific network's eligibility to communicate with other
- networks.
-
- Some attributes which might be useful to track and could be used as
- criteria to determine the acceptability of Internet traffic for
- routing purposes include:
-
- 1) Country codes
-
- 2) Conformance to acceptable use policy for:
- NSFNET, MILNET, NSI, ESnet, NORDUnet, ...
-
- To implement this idea, the IR would update the current Internet-
- Number-Template to query applicants for the necessary information.
- This information would then be collected in a database containing,
- for instance, a matrix of network numbers over policies. Note that
- the policies might be presented in narrative form. In addition, the
- usage policies of the various networks must be publicly available so
- that applicants and other interested parties can be advised of policy
- issues as they relate to various networks.
-
- Under this proposal, the IR would be charged with the registration
- and administration of the Internet number space but not with the
- enforcement of policy. The IR should collect enough information to
- permit network administrators to make intelligent decisions as to the
- acceptability of traffic destined to or from each and every
- legitimate Internet number. Enforcement of policies is discussed
- below.
-
- At a later step, we anticipate that it will be desirable to
- distribute the IR function among multiple centers, e.g., with centers
- on different continents. This should be straight-forward once the IR
- function is divorced from policy enforcement.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 6]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- 2.a.1.4. Discussion
-
- It is already true in the current Internet that there are
- restrictions on certain traffic on particular networks. For example,
- two intermediate level networks that are willing to carry arbitrary
- traffic can link with each other but are barred from passing
- commercial traffic or any other traffic that is not for academic or
- scholarly purposes across the federally-sponsored backbones.
-
- Routing of traffic based upon acceptable-use policies requires a
- technical ability known as "policy-based routing" (PBR). At the
- present time, the PBR mechanism available in the Internet operates as
- the level of an entire network; all users and hosts on a network are
- subject to the same routes for a given destination. Using this PBR
- mechanism, a network maintains routes (and provides transit services)
- only for networks with compatible use policies. For an intermediate
- level network, for example, the routing decisions must be made on the
- basis of the network numbers assigned to the organizations; some
- might be considered to have traffic conformant with federal use
- policies and some might not.
-
- Although it is much more fine-grained than the current "on or off"
- rule of connected status, the use of PBR based on networks is still a
- very coarse measure of control. Since the decision on acceptability
- is made at the network level, one has to assign a set of
- characteristics to all traffic emanating from or entering into a
- given network to make this access control strategy work. Strict
- application of such controls could prevent a commercial organization
- from legitimately sending research or scholarly data across the
- federal backbone (e.g., IBM needs to communicate with MCI and MERIT
- about NSFNET, but other parts of IBM may need to communicate on
- commercial matters). Organizations with a variety of uses might have
- to artificially define several networks with which to associate
- different use policies.
-
- The practical result is that in order to support desirable usage
- patterns, government-sponsored networks will sometimes have to depend
- upon self-policing by traffic sources, rather than upon strict
- mechanical enforcement of acceptable use policies. Higher certainty
- on usage will have a cost in terms of limiting desirable access.
-
- An important project now underway in the Internet Engineering Task
- Force (IETF) is developing a more general mechanism for PBR that will
- allow control at the level of individual hosts and possibly even
- user. It will give an end host or user the ability to select routes,
- taking into consideration issues such as cost, performance and
- reliability of the transit networks.
-
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 7]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- 2.a.2. Attachment 2
-
- IAB Policy Recommendation on DNS and Connectivity
-
- The Internet Domain Name system (DNS) is an essential part of the
- networking infrastructure. It establishes a global distributed
- database for mapping host names into IP addresses and for delivering
- electronic mail. Its efficient and reliable functioning is vital to
- nearly all Internet users.
-
- Some DNS operations depend upon the existence of a complete database
- at certain "root" servers, in particular at the Internet Registry
- (IP) located at the Defense Data Net Network Information Center at
- SRI International (DDN-NIC). The past policy has been to tie
- inclusion in this database to approval of Internet interconnection by
- a U.S. Government agency. This "connected" status restriction is no
- longer viable, and recommendations for its replacement have been put
- forward.
-
- In any case, we believe that the DNS database is not the proper
- architectural level for enforcement of administrative access
- restrictions, e.g., controls over the announcement of networks in the
- routing protocols.
-
- The Internet Activities Board (IAB) therefore strongly endorses the
- following recommendation from the Federal Engineering Planning Group
- to the Federal Networking Council, to provide DNS service regardless
- of access control policies:
-
- "There has been a great deal of discussion about domain
- nameservers, the IN-ADDR domain, and "connected" status as the
- Internet has grown to include many more nations than just the
- United States. As we move to a more global Internet, it seems
- like it would be a good idea to re-evaluate some of the rules that
- have governed the naming and registration policies that exist.
-
- The naming and routing should be completely decoupled. In
- particular, it should be possible to register both a name/domain,
- as well as address servers within the IN-ADDR domain, independent
- of whether the client has "connected" status or not. This should
- be implemented immediately by the IR at the DDN-NIC. No U.S.
- Government sponsor should be required for domain name/address
- registration."
-
- Security Considerations
-
- Security issues are not addressed in this memo.
-
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 8]
-
- RFC 1174 Identifier Assignment and Connected Status August 1990
-
-
- Author's Address
-
- Vinton G. Cerf
- Corporation for National Research Initiatives
- 1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100
- Reston, VA 22091
-
- Phone: (703) 620-8990
-
- EMail: vcerf@nri.reston.va.us
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Cerf [Page 9]
-