APNIC Member Meeting Seoul, Korea, 3 March 2000

APNIC Open Address policy Meeting

Discussion Paper: The future of ISP confederations

Problem definition

In practice, the current ISP confederation framework does not consistently apply APNIC policies across the APNIC membership. Moreover, there are different implementations of the model across the confederation membership, which is contrary to the primary goals of APNIC. Does this matter, and if so, what should be done?

1. Motivation

In December 1998 the APNIC Executive Council supported the decision to suspend the formation of any new confederations. More than a year has elapsed from the time of that decision and APNIC is now seeking feedback from the community on this matter.

[Note: At the time of the EC decision, the term 'confederation' applied both to the now-called National Internet Registries (NIRs) (for the organisations that serve the ISP community within a particular country), and to ISP Confederations (whose 'membership' is defined by the structure of the ISP itself). This document is concerned only with the case of the ISP confederations.]

2. Background

NIRs have long existed within the APNIC structure and fulfil an important role in distributing address space to organisations within the boundaries of their respective countries. NIRs reflect APNIC's acknowledgement of the need to support procedures that take account of local cultural differences. However, it is important to note that neutrality, fairness, and equitable application of APNIC's policy framework remain essential qualities.

The ISP confederation structure arose in response to the globalisation of ISP networks through mergers and acquisitions - where an ISP network may span many countries - and have operated along the same structural lines as NIRs.

The organisations involved demonstrated a need to maintain independent network address allocation pools. Usually this would be across variously connected but independently routed networks. For example, a confederation may have independent business units with ISP operations in Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia, and Thailand. Equally, organisations may operate autonomous business units within their organisation, meaning several networks may exist within the one company or country.

The specific characteristics of NIR and ISP confederations are, however, very different and attempting to apply the same model results in different request and evaluation processes. While the NIR model is largely consistent with that of the regular APNIC membership, the ISP confederation model for the most part is not. In the sections below the significant differences are highlighted.

[Note: multiple independent allocations are not ordinarily permitted within an APNIC membership. If they are required, the organisation should take out multiple memberships.]

3. Current status (including other RIRs)

The following table compares the procedures applied to ordinary APNIC members, members of NIRs, and members of ISP confederations.

[* An allocation window defines the amount of address space that an NIR or ISP confederation may allocate to a member without a second opinion from APNIC. Typically this starts at greater than a /19.]

Both ISP and NIR confederations follow identical procedures in obtaining a /19 address block for each of their members. However, before allocating that space to their members, NIRs collect and evaluate information documenting the member's requirement for address space in a format similar to the APNIC isp-address-form (APNIC-065). On the other hand, for ISP confederations, there is no requirement to use APNIC-065, and currently only one ISP confederation does so.

As a result, in the current model, ISP confederations do not need to declare the address space used by their members for infrastructure. Instead, the ISP confederations apply their own internal procedures and this can lead to address space going largely undocumented.

Furthermore, while the majority of NIRs now apply an assignment window mechanism to their members, the ISP confederations (with one exception) do not. Similarly, while many NIRs use an allocation window, the ISP confederations (again with one exception) are not restricted in the amount they can allocate to their members.

ARIN and RIPE NCC
The NIR structure does not exist in either ARIN or RIPE NCC.

There are a number of questions for the membership to consider in discussing this topic.

i) Should APNIC continue with the ISP confederation structure, but with modifications to bring the process into line with both RIR and NIR principles (that is, implementing assignment and allocation windows and using APNIC-065)?

ii) If yes to i), what should be the criteria for an organisation that wishes to form a ISP confederation?

iii) If no to i) (meaning that APNIC would formally eliminate the ISP confederation model from its membership structure), existing confederation members could be offered the chance to transition to a multi-membership structure or to remain as they are but to implement assignment windows and use apnic-065 with an allocation window.

5. Recommendations

APNIC recommends that the ISP confederation membership category be suspended, but that the existing ISP confederations be given the choice to either convert to multiple memberships or to remain as they are. If they choose to remain as ISP confederations, they must agree to implement the assignment and allocation window systems, and to use the apnic-065 form (or equivalent) with their members.

Top  |  SIGs