Meeting
Plan
Attendees
List
Connectivity
Dinner
Venue
EOF
Event
Sponsorship
General
Info
Hostmaster
Centre
Hotel
Information
Meeting
Venue
Minutes
New
LIR
Plenary
Agenda
Presentations
Registration
Tutorials
& Courses
Webcasting
WG
Agendas
Contact
Meeting
RIPE 46 Meeting
Minutes from the Plenary Session
Date: Thursday and Friday, 4 and 5 September 2003
Location: Grand Hotel Krasnapolsky Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Scribe: Rob Allen
The RIPE 46 presentations can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/#plenary
Several sessions at RIPE 46 were webcast live. Archived recordings can be found on the RIPE NCC web site up to one year from webcast at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/webcast-archive.html
Meeting commenced at: 14:00
Agenda:
- Opening
- Agenda RIPE 46
- Minutes RIPE 45
- From the Chair
- Report from the RIPE NCC
- Reports from Other RIRs:
- Report from ICANN
- ASO/AC Election
- IPv4 Address Lifetime Revisited (Geoff Huston)
- Reports from the RIPE Working Groups
- RIPE NCC Open Forum
- RIPE Open Forum
- Secret Working Group
- Next RIPE Meetings
- AOB
- Close
1.) Opening & Welcome
Presented by: Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair
The Chair welcomed the attendees and reviewed the RIPE 46 meeting agenda.
The Chair asked for comments. There were none.
2.) Agenda
Agenda was adopted as published.
3.) Minutes of RIPE 45 Meeting
The minutes were approved without comment.
4.) From the Chair
The Chair introduced the new RIPE NCC Services Working Group. He noted that the new Working Group does not replace the RIPE NCC General Meeting (GM) and is not about financial policy. If members wish to discuss financial issues, the GM is still the place to do this.
The Chair also stated that it was time to ensure that all working groups still have charters that are up-to-date. Some charters need to be slightly updated to better reflect the activities of the working group.
After this is done, the community needs to look at the length of RIPE Meetings and the frequency with which they are held. The Chair noted that other Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) have two meetings per year.
The Chair also raised the possibility of an annual global meeting, where participants could meet for a few days to discuss global issues that affect them.
5.) Report from the RIPE NCC
Presented by: Axel Pawlik, Managing Director of the RIPE
NCC
The report detailed updates at the RIPE NCC including:
- organisational structure,
- actions identified from the RIPE NCC 2002 Membership Survey,
- member/community involvement,
- webcasting core events at RIPE Meetings,
- investigation of real-time stenography,
- investigation of document and web site translations
- starting regional membership support,
- investigation of new training formats,
- information provision, new projects update (including changing scope of TTM to an open project),
- database (operationally solid, clean up of unreferenced person objects),
- technical operations
- registration services (response times stable at one to two days, documentation improved, continued improvement to LIR portal),
- Training courses (around 110 attendees per month, 71 courses in 2003),
- Membership liaison (RIPE NCC Regional Meeting, Middle East, Dubai, 7 – 9 December 2003),
- RIPE NCC communication,
- RIR co-ordination.
This presentation can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-ncc-update.pdf
6.) Reports from Other RIRs
APNIC
Presented by Anne Lord, APNIC
This presentation can be found online at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-apnic.pdf
ARIN
Presented by Ray Plzak, ARIN
This presentation can be found online at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-arin.pdf
LACNIC Report
Presented by Raúl Echeberría, LACNIC
This presentation can be found online at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-lacnic.pdf
BREAK
AfriNIC Status Update
Presented by Adiel A. Akplogan, AfriNIC
This presentation can be found online at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-afrinic.pdf
7.) Report from ICANN
Presented by: John Crain, Manager, ICANN Technical Operations
Crain noted that the processes for how to choose new generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs) in the future are still ongoing.
He said that ICANN was continuing to look at their internal processes, and spending a lot of time looking at how the organisation is run and making it more responsive to user needs. He noted that they were hiring a business manager.
He mentioned a recent document concerning the definition of how IANA relates to the RIRs.
Crain stated that ICANN were keen to revamp the web site to make it more readable and make things easier to find. He asked meeting attendees that use the website to write to ICANN webmaster with any suggestions.
He mentioned the ICANN meetings in Carthage, Tunisia (October 2003) and Rome, Italy (March, 2004).
The Chair opened the floor to questions for Crain.
- Question about the ICANN annual meeting and if there is one planned for
this year?
- Crain said that the annual meeting will probably take place in Tunisia.
8.) ASO/AC Election
Presented by: Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair
The Chair detailed the process of the ASO Address Council elections and explained how to participate. He noted that Sabine Jaume-Rajaonia’s term on the Council had expired and that Sabine was the sole candidate nominated for the open seat. He asked for a vote and, by a unanimous show of hands, Sabine was re-elected for another three-year term. The Chair thanked Sabine for doing this job.
The Chair then mentioned the RIRs relationship with ICANN.
He said that ICANN has gone through a reform process that triggered a re-thinking
of the relationship between the RIRs and ICANN. He noted that this work has
been going on for one and a half years, and he asked that a member of the
RIPE NCC Executive Board give a short update of where we are in the process
and when can we expect documents.
Frode Griesen, RIPE NCC Executive Board member, noted that the RIRs had signed an MoU with ICANN and that they were close to signing a contract with ICANN a couple of years ago. However, this process was stopped by the re-organisation of ICANN.
The RIRs published a jointed reaction to this in 2002 and then published a paper about setting up a new organisation, the Number Resource Registry (NRR).
Frode stated that a new proposal is currently being developed. He explained that the RIRs want to more clearly establish the contractual obligations and this has to be done carefully.
He said that the thought behind this is that the RIRs will work more closely and that they hope to have a document ready to publish and for comments in between two to six weeks. The RIRs and ICANN will be the two parties to this agreement that will be presented for comment to the Internet community.
9.) IPv4 Address Lifetime Revisited
Presented by: Geoff Huston, Telstra
Huston spoke on analysing the rate of allocation of IPv4 addresses. He noted that a number of views can be used to make forward projections regarding the eventual exhaustion of the unallocated address pool:
- The rate at which IPv4 number blocks are passed from IANA to the RIRs.
- The rate at which RIRs undertake assignments of IPv4 address blocks to LIRs and end users.
- The growth of the number of announced addresses in the BGP routing table.
The presentation can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-IPv4-lifetime.pdf
The Chair opened the floor to questions for Huston.
- Question on whether this data referred to particular /8s.
Huston replied that the project was not focused on investigating a particular /8, but at looking at the macro level of all of them.
- Question on whether the project is extrapolating 20 years into the future based on three years data.
Huston replied that the future has a lot of patterns in it that are based on the past. The best we can do is to say that the pattern is constant and this is how we can extrapolate it. If RIRs change their policies, they will notice a change in what happens with this data.
-Comment that the data is reliable but the interpretation is unreliable. Drawing conclusions three decades into the future seems a little exaggerated based on three years of data.
Huston replied that any predictive exercise relies on the assumption that tomorrow will behave in a similar way to today.
-Question regarding reclamation and what has happened to black space and legacy space. These both have the potential to be reclaimed. How would this affect the model?
Huston replied that, in this model, extensive reclamation could prolong IPv4 space for a decade. Unlike AS Numbers, in this case reclamation is a valuable exercise.
-Question on whether reclamation was included in the model.
Huston replied yes.
-Question on possible ways of differentiating the BGP data.
Huston replied that this is very hard given the amount of statistical noise.
Part 1 of the Plenary closed at 17:30.
Part 2, Friday 5 September 2003
Meeting commenced at 9:32
The Chair welcomed attendees to the second half of the Plenary.
The Chair noted that, in a slight change to the agenda, the reports from the
RIPE Working Groups would come at the start of the day’s session.
10.) Reports from the RIPE Working Groups
Database Working Group
Presented by: Wilifried Woeber, Database Working Group Chair
There were 68 attendees and 50 attendees in the two sessions.
Topics included status attribute changes, PKI / X.509, RPSS compatible authorisation, RIPE Database structure, cross-registry consistency, RIPE Database architecture and assumptions document, review of Working Group mission statement to be approved at RIPE 47.
The Working Group Chair asked RIPE NCC to note community approval for sub-allocation and for RIPE NCC to spend resources on further investigating and implementing PKI.
Presentations from this Working Group session can be found at:
Routing Working Group
Presented by: Joao Damas, Routing Working Group Co-Chair
There were 89 attendees and 49 attendees in the two sessions.
Topics included verification of Zebra as a BGP measurement instrument, Oregon Route views and AMSIX, Routing Information Service, The Netlantis Project and geographical aggregation in IPv6.
The Working Group Chair’s report from this session can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-routing.pdf
Anti-Spam Working Group
Presented by: Rodney Tillotson, Anti-Spam Working Group Chair
There were 38 attendees.
Topics included developments in UBE, developments in anti-spam, legislation, products, technical measures (presentation on camram), interactions (with RIRs) and a review of the Anti-Spam Working Group.
The Working Group Chair’s report from this session can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-anti-spam.pdf
DN* Working Group
Presented by: Patrik Fältström, DNS Working Group Chair
There were 135 attendees at the three sessions.
Topics included that latest news from Top-Level Domains (TLDs), reports on progress at IEFT on standards, reports on various deployments and tests of practical measures, presentations on DNS deployment on four different root servers.
It was noted that attendees liked the range of short reports on industry trends and standards.
Jaap Akkerhuis, DNS Working Group Chair, was appointed to collect comments
from the community regarding a document detailing the deployment of DNS.
Olaf
Kolkman reported that there are other DNS- related documents in other fora
that would be useful to review.
There was discussion of how to move forward with DNR and DNS. The consensus was that one working group was sufficient to deal with DNS issues in RIPE.
It was noted that attendees were happy with the set-up of this group at the meeting.
- Question on whether the working group should be called DNS WG from now on and have a charter related to DNS issues but excluding naming policy.
Patrik Fältström, DNS Working Group Chair, replied that this is a good idea but that it needs the approval of the Working Group. He also noted that a draft charter should be developed by RIPE 47 and requested immediate input from community on this.
Presentations from this Working Group session can be found at:
Test-Traffic Measurement (TTM) Working Group
Presented by: Alex Tudor, Test-Traffic Measurement Working Group Chair
There were 14 and 28 attendees in the two sessions.
Topics included making TTM a publicly available service, open source network monitoring (nTop), PingER, bandwith estimation, mapping IP addresses to AS Numbers and an update on DNS monitoring.
Pim van Pelt proposed opening up TTM and allowing the code itself to be open source or publicly accessible so that various people in the community could contribute measurements. The Working Group Chair requested feedback from the community via the mailing list.
Presentations from this Working Group session can be found at:
--BREAK –
Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair, thanked FLAG Telecom and KPN Eurorings for their evening socials, BIT for their technical assistance and the staff at the RIPE NCC involved in RIPE 46.
TechSec Working Group
Presented by Daniel Karrenberg, Chief Scientist, RIPE NCC
There were 40 attendees.
Topics included a DISI report, Internet draft draft-jones-opsec-01.txt, TF-CSIRT, update on Fonkey and PKI-related developments at IETF.
It was noted that there was a shortage of ISP engineers attending this Working Group.
The Fonkey project will be discontinued by Nlnet Labs unless there is more input from the community.
Presentations from this Working Group session can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/#techsec
EIX Working Group
Presented by: Mike Hughes, EIX Working Group Co-Chair
There were 108 and 113 attendees in the two sessions.
Topics included IXP reports, IPv6 status, EURO IX presentation, Inter-Provider Traffic Analyser (MIX), Anycast developments of root servers and PCH IXP database
It was noted that a similar format will be kept for this Working Group at
RIPE 47.
The topics of the first session will include brief news reports from IXPs and
the second session will focus on in-depth presentations and discussions.
It was noted that efforts will be made to prevent a clash with the Address Policy Working Group at future meetings.
The Working Group Chair’s report from this session can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-eix.pdf
IPv6 Working Group
Presented by: David Kessens, IPv6 Working Group Chair
There were 119 attendees.
Topics included the status of the 6bone, reports from the IETF, update on TTM progress, global IPv6 routing table status, reports about actual IPv6 traffic volume, developments/initiatives regarding IPv6, input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan.
- Question on why the IPv6 Working Group agenda has remained the same for previous meetings?
David Kessens replied that he has tried to develop the agenda, but it is difficult to arrange presentations from people with new IPv6 products (e.g. vendors). He is very interested in new IPv6 products coming to market place and he invited people to approach him with agenda points for next IPv6 Working Group at RIPE 47.
- Question on why the RIPE NCC Activity Plan is hard to find. There should be prominent link to it from the www.ripe.net homepage, and from the RIPE NCC Services Working Group page.
Axel Pawlik replied that the RIPE NCC Activity Plan is available on the site and the RIPE NCC will make sure it is prominently linked from the homepage.
Presentations from this Working Group session can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/#ipv6
Address Policy Working Group
Presented by: Hans Petter Holen, Address Policy Working Group Chair
There were 113 attendees.
Topics included the policy development process, RIR-IANA relationship and procedures, PI Address Policy and initial IPv4 allocation size, review of RIPE 152 (‘Charging by Local Internet Registries’), final revised IPv4 policy, actions for WG and chairs of WG.
The new charter for the Working Group was approved with no objections.
- Question on whether the working group has addressed the issue of how/when policies to reclaim unused address space will be established?
Geoff Huston commented that there is a lot of address space that pre-dates RIR structure. In this context, reclaim may not be the best word. Normalisation is more appropriate. It is not known where these historical addresses are. He noted that the integrity of the network depends on the integrity of network space.
The Chair commented that ISPs have handed this address space out to customers so it is difficult to get it. Personally think that some of this address space will reappear if an End User goes to a new ISP and renumbers or when the addressed space is re-announced on the routing table.
- Comment that in the interest of conserving address space it would be good, if we can prove that the address space is not currently used, to get this address space back into the system. Looking back at AS Number transfer and the amount of resources spent on RIR and End Users I would be reluctant to task the RIRs to do something on this unless it is clear what we want to do and who is going to pay for it. Why should we spend money at this point of time when there is 10-15 years of IPv4 address space left? People who advocated fierce reclamation of unused address space need to provide estimates of cost, purpose and benefits.
Geoff Huston noted that the underlying basis of the network is addresses and routing. If this is undermined than this undermines the network. There is not a clear claim today that the network has integrity and will have integrity tomorrow. Part of clearing up spam and other problems is how we can clear up the system regarding allocations made over a decade ago. Why should we spend money doing this (cleaning up records) now? Because if we don’t, we will have to spend more money to improve the integrity of the network and establish trustable routing.
- Comment that legacy space does not have contractual obligations that are well defined.
Hans Petter Holen noted that he will circulate the Working Group agenda well in advance of the next RIPE meeting so that some of these points can be incorporated into the agenda.
The Working Group Chair’s report from this session can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/ripe46-plenary-addresspolicy.pdf
RIPE NCC Services Working Group
Presented by: Kurt Erik Lindqvist, RIPE NCC Working Group Chair
There were 148 attendees.
Topics included the direction of RIPE NCC Services, RIPE NCC Information Services, presentation on X.509 and how each of the RIRs have approached this and DNS Services (modification plans and proposals from the community).
The Working Group charter was approved with no objections.
It was decided that the RIPE NCC Services Working Group is for the discussion
of the activities and service levels of the RIPE NCC.
The Working Group Chair mentioned that he would like to have a co-chair for
the Working Group.
It was mentioned that, at future RIPE Meetings, it would be helpful to have the first RIPE NCC Services Working Group session devoted to discussing written proposals submitted by the community and one session where the Working Group discusses the services of the RIPE NCC.
Presentations from this Working Group session can be found at:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/presentations/#ncc
The RIPE Chair commented on the high level of the working group chair presentations at this RIPE Meeting.
Presented by Axel Pawlik, RIPE NCC Managing Director
Axel mentioned a new link on the www.ripe.net homepage that links to RIPE NCC General Meeting 2003 and all supporting documentation (including the proposal for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan 2004).
- Comment that there seems to be little going on to provide scientific information and statistics about IPv4 address space and what will happen to it in the next few years. This information will help the RIPE NCC in its planning.
Axel replied that the RIPE NCC is focused on its core services and Registration Services’ response time. He agreed there was also a need to provide the type of information that has been suggested. This is why the RIPE NCC has proposed Information Services.
Geoff Huston replied that it is not the RIR’s job to make predictions. This is work for third parties to focus on and to develop models. It is the RIR’s job to publish these findings.
- Comment that there is a need for quantitative data about minimal allocation size and how changes to this will this affect the routing table. There is a need for more authoritative data about how policies will actually affect things. APNIC are doing these kind of activities. Having more data will help at both an intra-RIR level and with developing policies.
- Comment that predictions are already being reported by RIRs, e.g. short-term predictions on take up of IPv4 address space.
- The RIPE Chair noted that the RIPE NCC Services Working Group has created a much better defined channel for discussing RIPE NCC services at meetings and on the mailing list in between meetings.
12.) RIPE Open Forum – EOF & Working Groups
Presented by Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair
The RIPE Chair noted that the European Operators Forum (EOF) was resurrected at RIPE 45. He said that Daniel Karrenberg has done a great job with the programme committee and more active participation of the community was now required to help put the EOF programme together.
Daniel Karrenberg requested ideas for EOF content from the community (especially service provider and IXP content). He noted that it is possible for speakers to make short presentations. He said he was keen to have more involvement from ISP engineers and added that, if necessary, they can get help with their presentations.
The Chair noted that there is a need to develop the EOF or there may be a need to discuss stopping it.
The Chair also noted that the new DN* Working Group was much more efficient and had resulted in a higher quality of presentations and community participation.
Presented by: Olaf Kolkman, RIPE NCC
The RIPE Chair mentioned that before the next RIPE Meeting it is important for Working Group Chairs to go through their Working Group charter and to make sure that it is still relevant.
He noted that it was also a good for Working Group Chairs to organise co-chairs if none exist for that particular working group.
The Chair asked whether we should review the RIPE Meeting format. He asked whether it was necessary to meet for a week, three times a year. He suggested the possibility of having two RIPE Meetings per year.
Hans Petter Holen replied that he thought it would be good to make the overall RIPE Meeting commitment less than three weeks a year. He also noted that better advance preparation (e.g. concrete proposals in advance) would allow for more work to be done in less time. This would require more structure from the Working Group Chairs.
There was no other business.
The Chair thanked the staff of the RIPE NCC and the organisations that supported the meeting.
Thanks to: FLAG Telecom and KPN Eurorings for their evening socials. BIT for their technical assistance.
The Chair thanked everyone for attending and invited attendees to attend RIPE 47:
Meeting closed at: 12:40