Movatterモバイル変換

Network Working Group                                          E. GerichRequest for Comments: 1366                                         Merit                                                            October 1992Guidelines for Management of IP Address SpaceStatus of this Memo   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does   not specify an Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is   unlimited.Abstract   This document has been reviewed by the Federal Engineering Task Force   (FEPG) on behalf of the Federal Networking Council (FNC), the co-   chairs of the International Engineering Planning Group (IEPG), and   the Reseaux IP Europeens (RIPE).  There was general consensus by   those groups to support the recommendations proposed in this document   for management of the IP address space.1.0  Introduction   With the growth of the Internet and its increasing globalization,   much thought has been given to the evolution of the network number   allocation and assignment process.RFC 1174, "Identifier Assignment   and Connected Status", dated August 1990 recommends that the Internet   Registry (IR) continue as the principal registry for network numbers;   however, the IR may allocate blocks of network numbers and the   assignment of those numbers to qualified organizations.  The IR will   serve as the default registry in cases where no delegated   registration authority has been identified.   The distribution of the registration function is desirable, and in   keeping with that goal, it is necessary to develop a plan which   manages the distribution of the network number space.  The demand for   network numbers has grown significantly within the last two years and   as a result the allocation of network numbers must be approached in a   more systematic fashion.   This document proposes a plan which will forward the implementation   ofRFC 1174 and which defines the allocation and assignment of the   network number space.  There are three major topics to be addressed:      1) Qualifications for Distributed Regional Registries      2) Allocation of the Network Number Space by the Internet RegistryGerich                                                          [Page 1]

RFC 1366     Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space  October 1992      3) Assignment of the Network Numbers2.0  Qualifications for Distributed Regional Registries   The major reason to distribute the registration function is that the   Internet serves a more diverse global population than it did at its   inception.  This means that registries which are located in distinct   geographic areas may be better able to serve the local community in   terms of language and local customs. While there appears to be wide   support for the concept of distribution of the registration function,   it is important to define how the candidate delegated registries will   be chosen and from which geographic areas.   Based on the growth and the maturity of the Internet in Europe,   Central/South America and the Pacific Rim areas, it is desirable to   consider delegating the registration function to an organization in   each of those geographic areas.  Until an organization is identified   in those regions, the IR will continue to serve as the default   registry.  The IR remains the root registry and continues to provide   the registration function to all those regions not covered by   distributed regional registries.  And as other regions of the world   become more and more active in the Internet, the IANA and the IR may   choose to look for candidate registries to serve the populations in   those geographic regions.   It is important that the regional registry is unbiased and and widely   recognized by network providers and subscribers within the geographic   region.  It is also important that there is just a single regional   registry per geographical region at this level to provide for   efficient and fair sub-allocation of the address space.  To be   selected as a distributed regional registry an organization should   meet the following criteria:      a) networking authorities within the geographic area         legitimize the organization      b) the organization is well-established and has         legitimacy outside of the registry function      c) the organization will commit appropriate resources to         provide stable, timely, and reliable service         to the geographic region      d) the commitment to allocate IP numbers according to         the guidelines established by the IANA and the IR      e) the commitment to coordinate with the IR to establish         qualifications and strategies for sub-allocations ofGerich                                                          [Page 2]

RFC 1366     Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space  October 1992         the regional allocation.   The distributed regional registry is empowered by the IANA and the IR   to provide the network number registration function to a geographic   area.  It is possible for network subscribers to contact the IR   directly.  Depending on the circumstances the network subscriber may   be referred to the regional registry, but the IR will be prepared to   service any network subscriber if necessary.3.0  Allocation of the Network Number Space by the Internet Registry   The Class A portion of the number space represents 50% of the total   IP numbers; Class B is 25% of the total; Class C is approximately 12%   of the total.  Table 1 shows the current allocation of the IP network   numbers.                   Total           Allocated       Allocated (%)   Class A           126               49              38%   Class B         16383             7354              45%   Class C       2097151            44014               2%             Table 1: Network Number Statistics (June 1992) [1]   Class A and B network numbers are a limited resource and therefore   the entire number space will be retained by the IR.  No allocations   from the Class A and B network numbers will be made to distributed   regional registries at this time.   The Class C network number space will be divided into allocatable   blocks which will be reserved by the IANA and IR for allocation to   distributed regional registries.  In the absence of designated   regional registries in geographic areas, the IR will assign addresses   to networks within those geographic areas according to the Class C   allocation divisions.   A preliminary inspection of the Class C IP network numbers shows that   the number space with prefixes 192 and 193 are assigned.  The   remaining space from prefix 194 through 223 is mostly unassigned.   The IANA and the IR will reserve the upper half of this space which   corresponds to the IP address range of 208.0.0.0 through   223.255.255.255. Network numbers from this portion of the Class C   space will remain unallocated and unassigned until further notice.   The remaining Class C network number space will be allocated in a   fashion which is compatible with potential address aggregation   techniques. It is intended to divide this address range into eight   equally sized address blocks.Gerich                                                          [Page 3]

RFC 1366     Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space  October 1992      192.0.0.0 - 193.255.255.255      194.0.0.0 - 195.255.255.255      196.0.0.0 - 197.255.255.255      198.0.0.0 - 199.255.255.255      200.0.0.0 - 201.255.255.255      202.0.0.0 - 203.255.255.255      204.0.0.0 - 205.255.255.255      206.0.0.0 - 207.255.255.255   Each block represents 131,072 addresses or approximately 6% of the   total Class C address space.   It is proposed that a broad geographic allocation be used for these   blocks.  At present there are four major areas of address allocation:   Europe, North America, Pacific Rim, and South & Central America.   In particular, the top level block allocation be designated as   follows:   Multi-regional          192.0.0.0 - 193.255.255.255   Europe                  194.0.0.0 - 195.255.255.255   Others                  196.0.0.0 - 197.255.255.255   North America           198.0.0.0 - 199.255.255.255   Central/South    America                200.0.0.0 - 201.255.255.255   Pacific Rim             202.0.0.0 - 203.255.255.255   Others                  204.0.0.0 - 205.255.255.255   Others                  206.0.0.0 - 207.255.255.255   It is proposed that the IR, and any designated regional registries,   allocate addresses in conformance with this overall scheme.  Where   there are qualifying regional registries established, primary   responsibility for allocation from within that block will be   delegated to that registry.   The ranges designated as "Others" permit flexibility in network   number assignments which are outside of the geographical regions   already allocated.  The range listed as multi-regional represents   network numbers which have been assigned prior to the implementation   of this plan.  It is proposed that the IANA and the IR will adopt   these divisions of the Class C network number space and will begin   assigning network numbers accordingly.4.0  Assignment of the Network Number Space   The exhaustion of the IP address space is a topic of concern for the   entire Internet community. This plan for the assignment of Class A,   B, or C IP numbers to network subscribers has two major goals:Gerich                                                          [Page 4]

RFC 1366     Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space  October 1992      1) to reserve a portion of the IP number space so that it may be      available to transition to a new numbering plan      2) to assign the Class C network number space in a fashion which      is compatible with proposed address aggregation techniques4.1  Class A   The Class A number space can support the largest number of unique   host identifier addresses and is also the class of network numbers   most sparsely populated.  There are only approximately 77 Class A   network numbers which are unassigned, and these 77 network numbers   represent about 30% of the total network number space.   The IANA will retain sole responsibility for the assignment of Class   A network numbers. The upper half of the Class A number space will be   reserved indefinitely (IP network addresses 64.0.0.0 through   127.0.0.0). While it is expected that no new assignments of Class A   numbers will take place in the near future, any organization   petitioning the IANA for a Class A network number will be expected to   provide a detailed technical justification documenting network size   and structure. Class A assignments are at the IANA's discretion.4.2  Class B   Previously organizations were recommended to use a subnetted Class B   network number rather than multiple Class C network numbers.  Due to   the scarcity of Class B network numbers and the under utilization of   the Class B number space by most organizations, the recommendation is   now to use multiple Class Cs where practical.   The IANA and the IR will maintain sole responsibility for the Class B   number space.  Where there are designated regional registries, those   registries will act in an auxiliary capacity in evaluating requests   for Class B numbers.  Organizations applying for a Class B network   number should fulfill the following criteria:      1) the organization presents a subnetting plan which         documents more than 32 subnets within its organizational         network      AND      2) the organization has more than 4096 hosts.   These criteria assume that an organization which meets this profile   will continue to grow and that assigning a Class B network number to   them will permit network growth and reasonable utilization of theGerich                                                          [Page 5]

RFC 1366     Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space  October 1992   assigned number space. There may be circumstances where it will be   impossible to utilize a block of Class C network numbers in place of   a Class B.  These situations will be considered on a case-by-case   basis.4.3  Class CSection 3 of this document recommends a division of the Class C   number space.  That division is primarily an administrative division   which lays the groundwork for distributed network number registries.   This section deals with how network numbers are assigned from within   those blocks. Sub-allocations of the block to sub-registries is   beyond the scope of this paper.   By default, if an organization requires more than a single Class C,   it will be assigned a bit-wise contiguous block from the Class C   space allocated for its geographic region.   For instance, an European organization which requires fewer than 2048   unique IP addresses and more than 1024 would be assigned 8 contiguous   class C network numbers from the number space reserved for European   networks, 194.0.0.0 - 195.255.255.255.  If an organization from   Central America required fewer than 512 unique IP addresses and more   than 256, it would receive 2 contiguous class C network numbers from   the number space reserved for Central/South American networks,   200.0.0.0 - 201.255.255.255.   The IR or the registry to whom the IR has delegated the registration   function will determine the number of Class C network numbers to   assign to a network subscriber based on the following criteria:           Organization                            Assignment   1) requires fewer than 256 addresses    1 class C network   2) requires fewer than 512 addresses    2 contiguous class C networks   3) requires fewer than 1024 addresses   4 contiguous class C networks   4) requires fewer than 2048 addresses   8 contiguous class C networks   5) requires fewer than 4096 addresses  16 contiguous class C networks   The number of addresses that a network subscriber indicates that it   needs should be based on a 24 month projection.   The maximal block of class C nets that should be assigned to a   subscriber consists of sixteen contiguous class C networks which   corresponds to a single IP prefix the length of which is twelve bits.   If a subscriber has a requirement for more than 4096 unique IP   addresses it should most likely receive a Class B net number.Gerich                                                          [Page 6]

RFC 1366     Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space  October 19925.0  Conclusion   This proliferation of class C network numbers may aid in preserving   the scarcity of class A and B numbers, but it is sure to accelerate   the explosion of routing information carried by Internet routers.   Inherent in these recommendations is the assumption that there will   be modifications in the technology to support the larger number of   network address assignments due to the decrease in assignments of   Class A and B numbers and the proliferation of Class C assignments.   Many proposals have been made to address the rapid growth of network   assignments and a discussion of those proposals is beyond the scope   and intent of this paper.   These recommendations for management of the current IP network number   space only profess to delay depletion of the IP address space, not to   postpone it indefinitely.6.0  Acknowledgements   The author would like to acknowledge the substantial contributions   made by the members of the following two groups, the Federal   Engineering Planning Group (FEPG) and the International Engineering   Planning Group (IEPG). This document also reflects many concepts   expressed at the IETF Addressing BOF which took place in Cambridge,   MA in July 1992. In addition, Jon Postel (ISI) and Yakov Rekhter   (T.J.  Watson Research Center, IBM Corp.) reviewed this document and   contributed to its content. The author thanks those groups and   individuals who have been sighted for their comments.7.0  References   [1] Wang, Z., and J. Crowcroft, "A Two-Tier Address Structure for the       Internet: A Solution to the Problem of Address Space Exhaustion",RFC 1335, University College London, May 1992.   [2] "Internet Domain Survey", Network Information Systems Center, SRI       International, July 1992.   [3] Ford, P.,"Working Draft - dated 6 May 1992", Work in Progress.   [4] Solensky F., and F. Kastenholz, "A Revision to IP Address       Classifications", Work in Progress, March 1992.   [5] Fuller, V., Li, T., Yu, J., and K. Varadha, "Supernetting: an       Address Assignments and Aggregation Strategy",RFC 1338, BARRNet,       cisco, Merit, OARnet, June 1992.Gerich                                                          [Page 7]

RFC 1366     Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space  October 1992   [6] Rekhter, Y., and T. Li,"Guidelines for IP Address Allocation",       Work in Progress, August 1992.   [7] Cerf, V., "IAB Recommended Policy on Distributing Internet       Identifier Assignment and IAB Recommended Policy Change to       Internet 'Connected' Status",RFC 1174, CNRI, August 1990.Security Considerations   Security issues are not discussed in this memo.Author's Address   Elise Gerich   Merit Computer Network   1075 Beal Avenue   Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2112   Phone: (313) 936-3000   EMail: epg@MERIT.EDUGerich                                                          [Page 8]