[Anuncios] Lacnic IV Working Groups

[German Valdez]

Latin America Internet Community

In preparation for the Forum for the Discussion of Public Policies for 
Internet Resource Allocation to be held during LACNIC IV in Santiago de 
Chile between April 23 and 25, we invite the creation of Work Groups to 
analyze possible modifications to current policies. These work groups are 
the result of the concerns of Latin America's Internet community, as well 
as the result of LACNIC III meeting held in Mexico City during November, 2002.

We cordially invite you to join any of these Work Groups under the 
following mechanics.

E-mail wg at lacnic.net describing the work groups in which you would like to 
participate ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF YOUR PREFERENCE.

The Work Groups shall have a maximum of seven members, and registrations 
shall be entered according to the date e-mails are received.

There is no limit on the number of Work Groups in which you may 
participate. However, an applicant will only be able to participate in more 
than two groups if the inscription form for a third group does not already 
have seven members. This is why it is important to send the order of 
priority for inscription in different groups, as the third option may be 
discarded in case the group is complete, no matter when the application 
e-mail is received.

Inscription deadline: Friday, February 14th, 2003, 11:59 PM - 7H GMT.

The names of the members of each group shall be announced on Monday, 
February 17th.

Description of Work Groups

* Lame Delegations

Current Status: Nonexistent.

One of LACNIC's fundamental responsibilities is to aide the efficient 
operation of Internet within the region. One of the aspects that must be 
considered is the correct delegation of DNS servers for inverse resolution 
within the region covered by LACNIC. This Work Group shall evaluate the 
possibility of creating policies that will ensure the correct delegation of 
DNS servers once IP address blocks have been delegated to organizations 
applying for them.

* IPv6 Micro Allocations

Current Status: Nonexistent.

Currently, there are criteria for allocating blocks shorter than /20 to 
support the correct operation of infrastructure that is critical for 
Internet within LACNIC's region. This policy only applies to IPv4 blocks. 
This Work Group shall evaluate the feasibility of assigning IPv6 blocks 
shorter than /32 to this type of organization.

* Allocation Windows

Current Status: LACNIC has defined for ISPs an allocation window of 
suballocations of blocks with prefixes shorter than or equal to /23 (larger 
size blocks). These suballocations must be consulted with LACNIC or the 
corresponding NIR.

This Work Group shall be in charge of furthering the discussion of this 
policy. The feasibility of using dynamic windows is still to be defined. 
This means that those organizations that have proven appropriate use of 
size /23 may enlarge this window to /22, /21, etc. The Work Group shall put 
forth recommendations on criteria for evaluating the appropriate use of 
said window, enlargement limits, etc.

* Microallocations for Multi-Homed UF

Current Status: Nonexistent.

This Work Group is oriented to putting forth recommendations for the 
allocation of IPv4 address blocks smaller than /20 to end users that are 
currently multi-homed organizations or planning to be multi-homed 
organizations. The Work Group shall discuss the feasibility of this policy, 
the size of the block that shall be assigned; define the concepts of 
multi-homed, end user, etc.

* Bulk whois

Current Status: Nonexistent.

Many institutions dedicated to investigation and commercial organizations 
need and use IP address allocation information in their research or 
products. This information may be obtained by consulting LACNIC's WHOIS 
database. However, in many cases this is not feasible due to the large 
number of queries that must be made through Internet.

For example, some Firewall or antivirus developers need to identify which 
organization received a certain IP address, which may be the origin of a 
virus distribution or attack.

Another example are universities or institutions dedicated to investigation 
that use IP address allocation information in order to catalogue Internet 
traffic received by their networks. In both preceding examples, the number 
of queries to LACNIC's WHOIS database may be too high.

The possibility of these organizations having copies of LACNIC's WHOIS 
complete database (bulk copy) aims at avoiding a large number of queries to 
LACNIC's WHOIS database, but also to facilitate and expedite the response 
of products and/or investigations making use of this information.

The aim of this Work Group is to study the feasibility of having copies of 
LACNIC's WHOIS database available in "bulk" format. The Work Group shall 
consider the type of information that may be made available, proposals for 
preparing an agreement on acceptable use of the information and criteria to 
decide who can and who cannot have access to this information.

* NAP Micro-Allocations

Current Status: It is possible to grant micro-allocations in case of 
infrastructure that is critical for Internet stability within the region 
(IXP, NAP, ccTLD, etc.). Section 3.3.3 of current policies.

Speaking of Section 3.3.3, it is specifically mentions that NAPs apply for 
this policy. However, this policy should be broadened or else a new policy 
should be created for the particular case of NAPs, as these require 
provider-independent addresses although it is not convenient to publicize 
them. It would be LACNIC's responsibility to establish a segment reserved 
for these cases that would facilitate the management of filters on routers. 
The responsibility of this Work Group is to evaluate this consideration and 
propose changes or ratify the current policy.

* Experimental Allocations (ASN, IPv4, IPv6)

Current Status of the Policy: Nonexistent.

Currently, LACNIC has no elements to justify Internet resource allocation 
to organizations that may use these for academic purposes, research, 
experimental use, etc. This Work Group shall be in charge of evaluating the 
justification of an Internet resource allocation policy to this end, 
evaluating allocation criteria, defining whether allocations would be 
temporary of final, etc.



German Valdez
LACNIC