Resources Are Assigned in a Unique and Exclusive Capacity

Original Language Español Date Published 23/04/2019 Last Modified 27/09/2019
Last Call for Comments Period Does not apply Date Ratified Does not apply Implementation Date Does not apply
Status Under discussion Download TXT PDF XML DOCX
See other versions 1.0 2.0 (compare)

Authors

Name: Jordi Palet Martinez
Email: jordi.palet@theipv6company.com
Organization: The IPv6 Company

Name: Carlos Friacas
Email: cfriacas@fccn.pt
Organization: FCT | FCCN

Name: Fernando Frediani
Email: fhfrediani@gmail.com
Organization: -

Proposal Data

Policy Type: LACNIC
Id: LAC-2019-6
Last version: 2
Presented at: LACNIC 32 Presentations:

Summary

This purpose of this proposal is to specify that resources are assigned in an exclusive capacity, as noted in various sections of the Policy Manual, and that this apples equally to all resources, not only to IPv4 addresses.

Rationale

It is important to make it clear that both IPv4 and IPv6 resources are assigned under the same conditions, and that any potential user of the Policy Manual understands that this applies equally to all resources, which is not currently the case.

Text

Current text:

2.2.2. - The Internet Registry System

The Internet registry system has been established with the aim of enforcing the objectives of exclusivity, preservation, routability and information. This system consists of hierarchically organized Internet registries (IRs). Typically, IPv4 address space is assigned to end users by ISPs or NIRs.

This IPv4 address space is previously assigned to NIRs and ISPs by Regional Internet Registries.

Under this system, end users are organizations that operate networks that use IPv4 address space. Just as LACNIC, NIRs maintain IPv4 address space for making assignments to end users or allocations to Internet Service Providers. Assigned IPv4 address space is used to operate networks, whereas allocated IPv4 address space is kept by Internet Registries for future assignment to end users.

New text:

Note (not part of the policy proposal):
Section 2.2.2 is eliminated (and the following sections are renumbered) as it applies exclusively to IPv4. The proposed text replaces this section, but would be located in the Definitions section, wihch is generic and applies to all resources. We suggest placing the text after item 1.9 (Assign) and renumbering the subsequent sections. However, given that this is an editorial decision, the exact location is left up to LACNIC.

1.x. The Internet Registry System

The Internet registry system has been established with the aim of enforcing the objectives of exclusivity, preservation, routability and information. This system consists of hierarchically organized Internet registries (IRs). Internet number resources (addresses, ASNs, others) are typically assigned to end users by ISPs or NIRs.

These resources are previously allocated to NIRs and ISPs by the Regional Internet Registries.

Under this system, end users are organizations that operate networks that use the resources. Just as LACNIC, NIRs maintain resources for making assignments to end users or allocations to Internet Service Providers. Assigned resources are used to operate networks, whereas allocated resources are kept by Internet Registries for their future assignment to end users.

Note that the resources allocated or assigned by LACNIC or by the NIRs are to be used exclusively by their recipient or by third parties authorized by the recipient, provided that the policies currently in force allow such use. We recommend that such authorizations can be verified using RPKI.

Additional Information

The author believes that this proposal should become a new section of the Policy Manual, possibly located before the appendixes. However, given the editorial nature of these decisions, the exact location and numbering will be left up to the LACNIC staff.

Timetable

Immediate implementation

References

Other RIRs are working on similar proposals. If necessary, equivalent proposals will be presented in each one.

Public Comments by LACNIC Staff

LACNIC STAFF´S IMPACT ANALYSIS - Proposal LAC-2019-6 - versión 2

LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal
---------------------------------------------

Applicability
------------
This proposal would apply to organizations using resources assigned by LACNIC.

Modifications to the current text
---------------------------------
This proposal
- Eliminates subsection 2.2.2 and renumbers subsequent sections.
- Places the eliminated subsection in section 1.9. Assign as general definitions. Adds this section to the text:

“Note that the resources allocated or assigned by LACNIC or by the NIRs are to be used exclusively by their recipient or by third parties authorized by the recipient, provided that the policies currently in force allow such use. We recommend that such authorizations can be verified using RPKI.”

LACNIC Staff Comments
------------------------
1. The text currently included in the Manual is located in the section on IPv4 policies.
“2.2.2. - The Internet Registry System
The Internet registry system has been established with the aim of enforcing the objectives of exclusivity, preservation, routability and information.
2.3.2.10. Validity of IPv4 Address Allocations
IPv4 address allocations are valid as long as the objectives of exclusivity, preservation, routability and information continue to be met.
The goal of this proposal is that the text will apply to all types of resources, not only to IPv4 addresses.

2. LACNIC staff interprets that the term “use of a resource” includes:
- A resource published via BGP originating in the network that received the resource using its own ASN,
- A block re-assigned in LACNIC's whois database to a client of the receiving organization.
- A resource published via BGP originating in an ASN that belongs to another organization, provided that prior authorization has been granted.

Impact of the policy on the registration system
----------------------------------------------
This proposal would not require any changes to the registration system.

LACNIC STAFF´S IMPACT ANALYSIS - Proposal LAC-2019-6 - versión 1

LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal
---------------------------------------------

Applicability
-------------
This proposal would apply to organizations using resources assigned by LACNIC.

Modifications to the current text
---------------------------------
This proposal would add subsection “1.8. Resources Are Assigned in a Unique and Exclusive Capacity” within Policy Manual section “1. Definitions.” Subsequent subsections would be re-numbered.

LACNIC assigns Internet resources in a unique and exclusive capacity. Standards do not allow simultaneous or duplicate uses of the same resource on different networks that are under different administrative control, except for explicit cases such as anycast.

Therefore, only the original recipient may decide that such resources will be used in other networks and/or under the administrative control of a different entity, in strict observance of the policies in force and maintaining the consistency of the registry information.

LACNIC Staff Comments
--------------------------
1. The text currently in the Manual is included in the section corresponding to IPv4 policies.
“2.2.2. The Internet Registry System
The Internet registry system has been established with the aim of enforcing the objectives of exclusivity, preservation, routability and information.
2.3.2.10. Validity of IPv4 Address Allocations
IPv4 address allocations are valid as long as the objectives of exclusivity, preservation, routability and information continue to be met.”

2. An organization to which certain resources were not assigned and which uses such resources without the consent of their recipient would be in breach of this policy and would cause the resources to be revoked. This would affect the organization to which the resources were indeed assigned, in this case, the victim.

3. LACNIC would be able to verify that the numbers are unique in its database but would not be able to guarantee that a receiving organization does not use these resources more than once.

4. As for the text stating that “only the original recipient [of the resources] may decide that such resources will be used in other networks and/or under the administrative control of a different entity...” LACNIC understands that the way to prove that the original recipient of a resource has decided that the resource is to be used in different networks and/or under the administrative control of a different entity is by registering the corresponding sub-delegation in the LACNIC database. Likewise, it is important to note that up to fifteen /24 blocks may be sub-assigned to a third party with prior authorization from LACNIC (as stated in section 2.3.2.12.1. Assignment Window).

Recommendations
---------------------------
1. LACNIC staff interprets that the term “use of a resource” includes:
a. A resource published via BGP from the network that received the resource;
b. A block re-assigned in LACNIC's whois to a client of the receiving organization.

Impact of the policy on the registry system and address management
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal would not require any changes to the registration system.

Privacy Policy