1 / 22

Emerging Registry Criteria

Emerging Registry Criteria. ASO General Assembly Budapest, 19 May 2000. Emerging Registry Criteria. APNIC presentation on behalf of APNIC, ARIN and RIPE NCC Background ASO and ASO MoU Emerging Registry document Evaluation criteria Feedback. ASO and ASO MoU. ASO

edwint
Download Presentation

Emerging Registry Criteria

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Emerging Registry Criteria ASO General Assembly Budapest, 19 May 2000

  2. Emerging Registry Criteria • APNIC presentation on behalf of APNIC, ARIN and RIPE NCC • Background • ASO and ASO MoU • Emerging Registry document • Evaluation criteria • Feedback

  3. ASO and ASO MoU • ASO • Proposal submitted by RIRs to ICANN in July 1999 • Recognised by ICANN 26 August 1999 • ASO MoU signed by current RIRs and ICANNon 18 October 1999 • ASO MoU • Signatories include ICANN and “RIRs” • Designed to accommodate new signatories, which must be approved by ICANN • Provides basic requirements for new RIRs

  4. ASO MoU (1) Purpose and Scope (c) The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to establish a set of principles that ICANN and the regional IP address registries (RIRs) who have signed below (the Signing RIRs) will use in forming and operating the ASO. Additional RIRs may join in signing the MOU after they have been approved by ICANN.

  5. ASO MoU (9) Regional IP Address Registries The initial signatories to this MOU shall include ICANN and the Signing RIRs who have signed below. ICANN will develop requirements and policies for the approval of additional RIRs. This MOU assumes that these requirements will include at least: (a) … (g) The MOU also assumes that the RIRs have to continue to meet these requirements.

  6. ASO MoU (a) broad support of ISPs in its region (b) region meets scale defined by ICANN (c) membership includes a significant percentage of the ISPs within the RIR's region (d) clearly defined procedures open to all interested parties for the development of policies (e) policies include at least one open annual policy development meeting (f) clearly defined procedures for open policy development process (g) capability to implement global policies

  7. ASO MoU • ICANN request to RIRs to assist with further development of criteria outlined in the MoU • November 1999 • Drafting process to date • via “aso-policy” mailing list • Draft 0.1: 22 December 1999 • Draft 0.2: 4 May 2000 • Draft 0.3: due after input from this meeting

  8. Emerging Registry Criteria • Document is not a set of strict rules • RIR intentions... • To provide more detailed considerations/guidelines/principles for evaluation • To provide assistance to ICANN in making a good decision, based on agreed criteria • To assist emerging RIRs in how to present their case not only to ICANN but to the regional and global communities (LACNIC has done this, informally)

  9. Emerging Registry Criteria • Region of coverage • Community support • Bottom-up self-governance • Neutrality and impartiality • Technical expertise • Adherence to global policies • Activity plan • Funding model • Record keeping • Confidentiality

  10. Region of coverage • The proposed RIR must operate internationally in a large geographical region of approximately continental size • Under one management in one location • “Distributed RIR” not supported • Competition between multiple RIRs in one region would threaten conversation goal • Distribution may cause confusion, fragmentation

  11. Community support • Clear consensus must be demonstrated within the community that a very substantial majority of the ISPs in the region are prepared to support the new RIR. • Community should show commitment through participation and financial support • RIR must demonstrate efforts to contact existing LIRs/ISPs to ensure support • Eventually, the entire region should be served by the new RIR...

  12. Bottom-up self-governance • The new RIR needs ... defined procedures for the development of resource management policies which may be implemented regionally, [or] as global policies • Procedures must be open and transparent • Must include holding at least one annual [open] policy development meeting • Must be capable of hosting ASO GA [in line with MoU requirements]

  13. Neutrality and impartiality • All organisations that receive service from the new RIR must be treated equally. • The policies and guidelines proposed and implemented by the RIR need to ensure fair distribution of resources, and impartial treatment of the members/requestors. • The new RIR should be established as an independent, not-for-profit and open membership association.

  14. Technical expertise • The new RIR must be technically capable of providing the required allocation and registration services to the community in its region. • Requirements include: Internet connectivity, DNS servers, internal infrastructure, sufficient technically-capable staff

  15. Adherence to global policies • Policies of the new RIR must be established to ensure that the main goals of the registry system, in particular conservation of IP address space and aggregation of routing information, are respected. • Local policies that are developed in addition to established global policies need to be consistent with these and other global policy goals

  16. Activity plan • … the new RIR should provide a published activity plan containing activities that are clearly within the purview of an RIR, and which is explicitly supported by the community of organisations supporting the new RIR. • It is recommended that new RIRs should not restrict activities exclusively to IP address allocations and assignments (registration services).

  17. Funding model • … the new RIR should be established as a not-for-profit association • A budget related to the activity plan must be drawn up and published, and should [be approved by] the community of organisations supporting the new RIR

  18. Record keeping • All RIRs must maintain proper records of all registry activities, including the archiving of all information collected from LIRs in the process of making IP address space assignments • needed for internal purposes, and also to maintain the audibility of RIR operations, essential in demonstrating responsible and neutral operations • All archival information should be kept in English

  19. Confidentiality • Information collected by a RIR in the registration process must be kept in strict confidence, and used for registration purposes only • It must be transmitted only to another RIR or IANA upon request, but will not be transmitted to any other party unless explicitly agreed • RIRs may establish their own local standards and policies for confidentiality

  20. Draft 0.2 • Minor drafting changes only

  21. Draft 0.3 - Due shortly • Remaining issues • “Europe and Middle-East” region • RIR branch offices • Simply state that admin structure must not cause competition or fragmentation • Language of RIR archives • Proposal to maintain registration records in English, but internal archives in original language • Any issues identified during this meeting

  22. Emerging Registry Criteria • Feedback?

More Related