CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Peter Ford/LANL Minutes of the Joint Session of the BGPDEPL Working Group and CIDRD BOF The BGP/CIDR deployment meeting was held on November 3, 1993 and was chaired by Jessica Yu and Vince Fuller. The first order of business was a brief status report on BGP-4 implementations: o ANS (Guy Almes): The ANS test network mid-November. Deployment in the ANS production network during December. o cisco (Paul Traina): In beta. Get the image from ftp.cisco.com. Please join the beta list; mail to pst@cisco.com. o Wellfleet (John Krawczyk): Full product in 8.0 by Spring/Summer 1994 test version in by January/February. o 3Com (Tracy Mallory): Beta available. o BBN: Under development. o Europanet testing in progress, deployment by end of the year. o Rainbow Bridge (Rob Coltun): Status? Peter Lothberg and Andrew Partan reported on their BGP-4 test network. It is a virtual test network which is accessible to anyone who wished to participate. The current players are predominantly cisco-based, and many use cisco GRE tunnels to obtain connectivity with the test network. There are currently 15K IP networks sloshing around. The following participants are on the test network and ANS is expected to be soon. o 3Com o Alternet o cisco o Ebone o ESnet o ICMnet o IIJ o NEARnet o RIPE NCC o STUPI Peter Lothberg reports that he has converted the EBONE over to using BGP-4 (nine routers). Static aggregates have been injected into EBONE from the regionals and passed over to other regionals and the ICM. He also reported that the ICM system has also been cut over to BGP-4 (four routers). Andrew reported a similar cut over of the Alternet routing system. It was noted that the current BGP-4 code is beta code and one has to carefully test their current configuration and operation prior to deploying this code in full operation. Join the beta list at cisco for more details. Andrew reported that Alternet uses IGRP within their system and Peter Lothberg reports that he is using IS-IS. Merit Routing Registry - Dale Johnson From the network operators' point of view, there is a need to be able to validate the aggregate routes received via CIDR. One approach is to register aggregate routes in a database with its creator AS information and the contact information of the AS could be obtained from various existing databases such as the InterNIC, RIPE and Merit. Merit, RIPE and the InterNIC will work together on this. Another approach mentioned at the meeting is to use BGP's AGGREGATOR field to carry such information. Guidelines for Block Assignment Marten Terpstra gave a presentation on Guidelines for block assignment. The RIPE people have worked with the European network community to build a distributed operational model for Internet Registries (IRs). They currently work with a model of: Global IR, Regional IR, Local IR. The RIPE NCC allocates addresses to Local IRs based on the following guidelines: o Get two year estimate of address usage. Make sure blocks are CIDRable. CIDR enforced to end sites. Can claim unused reserve block. o The RIPE NCC has been assigning the CIDR way, since June 1992. The procedures are documented in RIPE 72 which can be obtained via anonymous FTP or Gopher from ns.ripe.net. o The RIPE DNS scheme for 193.in-addr.arpa is to try to delegate zones to providers. RIPE 84 documents policy (customer shifts, preserve mapping, etc.). o Dennis Ferguson asked about the current efficiency of use of IP address space from the European side. It is estimated to be 3.8%. o RIPE only allocates for Europe and would like to advocate that regional registries do the same. o Marten noted that assignments do not really count as allocated unless they submit detailed information to the network, ensuring that the RIPE NCC is kept up-to-date. BARRNet Allocation of Addresses Jessica asked Vince to report on how Barrnet allocates addresses. Vince indicated that this is a manpower intensive process. They sit down with customers to get an estimate for two years out, then they work on a subnetting scheme and do a crystal ball gaze. InterNIC Allocation of Addresses Mark Kosters of the InterNIC reviewed how they allocate addresses, which was similar in spirit to the Barrnet and the RIPE NCC. Tony Bates, Mark Kosters and Vince volunteered to write an allocation policy document which can be used as guidance for providers. The InterNIC will be doing block in-addrs. When the InterNIC allocates a CIDR block to a provider, assignments are requested to be sent back to the InterNIC who will register the assignments to the InterNIC database. The Shared WHOIS Project (SWIP) is working on getting many of the InterNIC-related electronic updates done in a timely manner. The RIPE NCC does all their updates electronically and are happy with the results to date. There were several suggestions from the working group to the InterNIC with regard to policy. It is felt that the InterNIC needs to do more preallocation of blocks for IRs that are to be delegated. Marten suggested the InterNIC look into swapping CIDRable Cs for Bs that are already allocated, but not heavily utilized. ``Greening of the Internet'' Vince led a discussion on ``Greening of the Internet.'' The outline of the talk was: o Class A usage with CIDR o Subnets and CIDR o Renumbering issues and tools o Politics of CIDR---block sizes, provider responsibility o CIDR Analysis discussion and question and answer Class A Usage with CIDR has a few small problems: o There is a DNS issue, which relates to how providers delegate the in-addr namespace. o Dumb multihomed host problem. Using older BSD systems as routers. It is felt that if a system can not handle variable length subnet masks they are obsolete. VLSM needs to be better documented, and their use, made simpler by better tools and education. It is observed that most sites simply use 8-bit subnets since they are the easiest thing to read, use, etc. Charley Kline who is in charge of networks at UIUC, described how they allocate subnets. Following methods described in RFC 1219, and implementing software to help administer the address space, UIUC has been able to manage 13K hosts and 324 subnets in a single Class B network. Charley illustrated the methodology using binary trees. Tom Easterday and Charley Kline volunteered to work on a document describing the use of VLSM and better utilization of subnets in a single address block. Havard Eidnes agreed to help and offered the use of his INET '93 paper as a starting point. Havard's paper is available in the INET '93 proceedings via anonymous FTP and Gopher from cnri.reston.va.us. There was a unanimous vote in favor of using the IP addr/len syntax for representing prefixes. Scott Bradner stated that it is important for the ALE and CIDRD Working Groups to establish goals and objectives for address space usage. Vince presented a ``pain and anguish'' slide which went into the issue of renumbering sites. The discussion focused on better uses of the already allocated Class A network addresses. Vince pointed out that CIDR does not require one to renumber when a site leaves one provider for another, but to maintain a minimal state of routing information is a good idea. To support this activity we need tools and documentation on renumbering. The use of DHCP can help reduce the effort in converting from one IP address block to another. Barrnet has helped to renumber several sites and has used the following procedure: o Add new DNS NS addresses at the InterNIC. o Add new addresses on the primary server, wait for propagation. o Reconfigure the network. o Delete old addresses from the primary server. o Delete old NS addresses at the InterNIC. Barrnet customers have not had problems with renumbering, provided the customers are given a good set of instructions. Transitions must be gradual if they are to work. Secondary addresses are needed to facilitate transition, and most routers support this. Yakov Rekhter volunteered to discuss dynamic updates of DNS with the Domain Name Systems Working Group (DNS). Several other ideas to conserve address space came up during discussion including ARP being changed to be like ES-IS for IP, dynamic prefix updating, etc. Tony Li put up a prototype charter of the proposed ALE Working Group. The primary purpose is to watch utilization numbers. Andrew Partan used Alternet data to show how much CIDR can buy you. The number of networks from AS701 shrinks from 2100 to 650 today. There was a brief report on how big an Internet can be routed today: o 28-29K routes in a 16 MB cisco. o 25K routes in the ANS routers. Tony Bates volunteered to help continue the monitoring mode. Tony Bates, Marten, David Conrad and Vince will document how to better use address space within sites. Attendees Susie Armstrong susie@mentat.com Jules Aronson aronson@nlm.nih.gov William Barns barns@gateway.mitre.org Tony Bates tony@ripe.net Erik-Jan Bos erik-jan.bos@surfnet.nl Rebecca Bostwick bostwick@es.net Jim Bound bound@zk3.dec.com Rich Bowen rkb@ralvm11.vnet.ibm.com Scott Bradner sob@harvard.edu Al Broscius broscius@bellcore.com Jeffrey Burgan jeff@nsipo.nasa.gov Enke Chen enke@merit.edu Henry Clark henryc@oar.net Michael Collins collins@es.net Rob Coltun rcoltun@ni.umd.edu John Curran jcurran@nic.near.net Michael Davis mike@dss.com Taso Devetzis devetzis@bellcore.com Christopher Dorsey dorsey@es.net Tom Easterday tom@cic.net Havard Eidnes havard.eidnes@runit.sintef.no Robert Enger enger@seka.reston.ans.net Stefan Fassbender stf@easi.net Dennis Ferguson dennis@ans.net Robert Fink rlfink@lbl.gov Dale Finkelson dmf@westie.mid.net Peter Ford peter@goshawk.lanl.gov Catherine Foulston cathyf@rice.edu Vince Fuller vaf@barrnet.net Vincent Gebes vgebes@sys.attjens.co.jp Herluf Hansen hha@tbit.dk Denise Heagerty denise@dxcoms.cern.ch Matt Hood hood@nsipo.nasa.gov David Jacobson dnjake@vnet.ibm.com Dale Johnson dsj@merit.edu Matthew Jonson jonson@ddn.af.mil Jeanine Kamerdze kamerdze@nsipo.nasa.gov Akira Kato kato@wide.ad.jp Hiroshi Kawazoe kawazoe@trl.ibm.co.jp Sean Kennedy liam@nic.near.net Charley Kline cvk@uiuc.edu Mark Kosters markk@internic.net John Krawczyk jkrawczy@wellfleet.com Walter Lazear lazear@gateway.mitre.org Tony Li tli@cisco.com Robin Littlefield robin@wellfleet.com Kim Long klong@sura.net Peter Lothberg roll@stupi.se Bill Manning bmanning@rice.edu Glenn Mansfield glenn@aic.co.jp Jun Matsukata jm@eng.isas.ac.jp Stephen Miller smiller@bbn.com Pushpendra Mohta pushp@cerf.net Dennis Morris morris@altair.disa.mil Jun Murai jun@wide.ad.jp Michael O'Dell mo@uunet.uu.net Vijayaragavan Pandian vjp@proteon.com Andrew Partan asp@uunet.uu.net Brad Passwaters bjp@eng.umd.edu Michael Patton map@bbn.com David Piscitello wk04464@worldlink.com Kenneth Rehbehn kjr@netrix.com Yakov Rekhter yakov@watson.ibm.com Isil Sebuktekin isil@nevin.bellcore.com Paul Serice serice@cos.com Erik Sherk sherk@sura.net Timon Sloane timon@timonware.com Frank Solensky solensky@ftp.com Bernhard Stockman boss@ebone.net Larry Tepper ltepper@compatible.com Marten Terpstra marten@ripe.net Claudio Topolcic topolcic@cnri.reston.va.us Jerry Toporek jt@mentat.com Paul Traina pst@cisco.com Keisuke Uehara kei@cs.uec.ac.jp William Warner warner@ohio.gov Chris Wheeler cwheeler@cac.washington.edu Jane Wojcik jwojcik@bbn.com David Woodgate David.Woodgate@its.csiro.au Jessica Yu jyy@merit.edu