diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc1174.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc1174.txt | 507 |
1 files changed, 507 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc1174.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc1174.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..db9ed16 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc1174.txt @@ -0,0 +1,507 @@ + + + + + + +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] +
\ No newline at end of file |