[Politicas] Lacnic IV Working Groups

Jeff Williams jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Tue Feb 11 00:54:24 BRST 2003

German and all,

  I did not see on Lacnics home page where and exactly how one may
subscribe to any or the Working Groups properly.  Is there such a
link?  Are the names of these Working Groups listed in your
post below?  If so what are they exactly so one may subscribe

German Valdez wrote:

> 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
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Politicas mailing list
> Politicas at lacnic.net
> http://www.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/politicas


Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801

More information about the Politicas mailing list