This document proposes adding additional assignment information to WHOIS database records to help network operators better identify traffic sources. It suggests including an "Assignment-size" field for IPv6 prefixes and a "ports-per-user" field for IPv4 address sharing ranges. This would allow more precise filtering than blocking whole address blocks. The changes would require updates to WHOIS database formats and records. While helping avoid over-filtering, it may increase registration work and require more frequent database checks.

1. prop-­‐115:
Registra0on
of
detailed
assignment
informa0on
in
whois
DB
Ruri
Hiromi
(INTEC
Inc.)
*Tomohiro
Fujisaki
(NTT)
APNIC
40
Open
Policy
Mee0ng
Jakarta,
Indonesia
Thursday,
10
September
2015
hMp://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-­‐115

2. Problem
statement
To
specify
individual
user
or
organiza0on,
addi0onal
informa0on
to
current
registered
informa0on
is
needed.
– Without
this
informa0on,
operators
cannot
filter
out
specific
address
range
properly
• it
might
lead
to
'over-­‐filter'
(i.e.
filtering
whole
ISP's
address
range).

3. Problem
statement
(con0nued)
192.0.2.24/32
1-­‐256
is
for
Home
A
257-­‐511
is
for
HomeB
192.0.2.0/24
1-­‐65536
is
shared
address
of
ISP-­‐X
512-­‐767
is
for
HomeB
768-­‐1023
is
for
HomeB
Case1)
network
using
IPv4
address
sharing
technology
How
to
filtered
out
Home
A
?

4. Problem
statement(con0nued)
2001:db8:1::0/56
is
for
HomeA
2001:db8:1::/32
allocated
for
ISP-­‐Y
Case2)
address
assignment
size
informa0on
in
IPv6
The
IPv6
address
assignment
size
to
users
may
be
different
among
ISPs.
Currently,
few
assignment
size
informa0on
are
available.

5. Objec0ve
of
policy
change
• To
provide
more
detailed
assignment
informa0on
to
network
operators
to
iden0fy
individual
organiza0on
or
user.
– Lots
of
operators
check
whois
DB
record
when
harmful
traffic
is
coming
to
their
network,
to
decide
if
they
can
filter
out
that
traffic
or
not.
– Our
goal
is
providing
more
specific
informa0on
to
support
these
ac0ons.
no
inten0on
to
expose
each
user’s
private
informa0on

6. Situa0on
in
other
regions
• No
same
regula0on/discussion
can
be
seen
in
other
regions.
– AFRINIC
– ARIN
– LACNIC
– RIPE
NCC

7. Proposed
solu0on
• Add
following
informa0on
to
whois
DB.
– For
IPv4,
'port
range'
informa0on
to
assigned
IP
address
entry.
– For
IPv6,
‘assigned
prefix
size’
informa0on
to
assignment
informa0on.

8. Proposed
solu0on
–IPv6-­‐
inet6num:
2001:db8:0100::/40
netname:
EXAMPLE-­‐0100
descr:
INFRASTRUCTURE-­‐CUSTOMER-­‐ASSIGNMENT-­‐BLOCK
country:
JP
admin-­‐c:
JP00001017
tech-­‐c:
JP00000593
Assignment-­‐size:
/56
remarks:
This
informa0on
has
been
par0ally
mirrored
by
APNIC
from
remarks:
JPNIC.
To
obtain
more
specific
informa0on,
please
use
the
remarks:
JPNIC
WHOIS
Gateway
at
remarks:
hMp://www.nic.ad.jp/en/db/whois/en-­‐gateway.html
or
remarks:
whois.nic.ad.jp
for
WHOIS
client.
(The
WHOIS
client
remarks:
defaults
to
Japanese
output,
use
the
/e
switch
for
English
remarks:
output)
changed:
apnic-­‐lp@nic.ad.jp
20050809
source:
JPNIC
Possible
to
use
“remarks”
object
for
register.

9. Proposed
solu0on
–IPv4-­‐
inetnum:
192.0.2.0-­‐
192.0.2.128
netname:
RENTALSV-­‐NET
descr:
Address
Sharing
by
MAP-­‐E
ports-­‐per-­‐user:
64
country:
JP
admin-­‐c:
JP00010938
tech-­‐c:
JP00010938
remarks:
This
informa0on
has
been
par0ally
mirrored
by
APNIC
from
remarks:
JPNIC.
To
obtain
more
specific
informa0on,
please
use
the
remarks:
JPNIC
WHOIS
Gateway
at
remarks:
hMp://www.nic.ad.jp/en/db/whois/en-­‐gateway.html
or
remarks:
whois.nic.ad.jp
for
WHOIS
client.
(The
WHOIS
client
remarks:
defaults
to
Japanese
output,
use
the
/e
switch
for
English
remarks:
output)
changed:
apnic-­‐lp@nic.ad.jp
20071204
source:
JPNIC
Possible
to
use
“remarks”
object
for
register.

10. Advantages
/
Disadvantages
• Advantages
– operators
can
configure
ACL
by
using
correct
assignment
informa0on
– users
who
share
same/neighbor
address
space
can
avoid
damage
of
over-­‐filtering
• Disadvantages
– need
to
check
registered
database
records
frequently
– addi0onal
record
or
op0on
should
be
considered
– addi0onal
registra0on
work
load
for
address
holders

11. Impact
on
APNIC/APNIC
members
APNIC
• Need
to
consider
whois
DB
format
and
system
change.
APNIC
members
• Members
need
to
update
their
records

12. Discussion
on
sig-­‐policy
ML
One
suppor0ve
message:
• First,
it
helps
law
enforcement
as
well
as
those
who
wish
to
report
network
abuse,
by
iden0fying
customers
who
share
an
ip
address.
• Second,
it
allows
for
more
targeted
spam
filtering.
• Third,
it
returns
to
the
original
Internet
tenet
of
a
central
database
capable
of
being
queried
for
contact
informa0on
of
any
ip
address.
• Not
to
mandate
to
register.
12

13. Summary
• Our
proposal
is
– Detailed
assignment
informa0on
can
be
seen
in
whois
DB
• Operators
can
set
filter
with
this
detailed
informa0on
and
avoid
‘over-­‐filtering’
which
filter
out
all
allocated
space.

14. Ques0ons?