The growth continues. 9911 domains were registered in April 1995. Close to zero B's have been allocated between February and May 1995. 32% of all natural Class C's have been allocated as of May 1995. See ftp://rs.internic.net/netinfo/ip_network_allocations for more information.
Phone calls have gone down. Hostmaster mail is at 18,000 messages. Whois queries are at 2,000,000 per month in May 1995.
Thre are now multiple rs.internic.net machines. A www server is running. A trouble ticket system is running. Registration software is now improved. A new domain template is now available.
There was some discussion about how the InterNIC will define ISP. Peter Ford is concerned that the provider's provider will not be workable. Daniel from RIPE-NCC points out that it does work. Kent England brings up the concern that the shorter estimate may cause problems. Mark said that there is often a problem when a new ISP attempts to estimate things as far as two years in the future. Andrew Partan from Alternet said that it is a good thing to limit the initial allocation to insure that the requesting organizations are able to make allocations affectively. Daniel and Kent both argue that it is important for allocations that have a 19-bit mask are routeable. Daniel requests that the providers establish their policy publically, so other folks will know what the risks are. There was a suggestion that the MLPA be designed to unify the policies on what masks will remain routable.
Dually home providers can get address space from the InterNIC. Dually home customers should use the one of the providers space in preference to going to the InterNIC.
There was a comment that some large origanizations that are end-users are able to project their long-term use of the space. Mark said that those are issues that can be looked at and worked on.
RFC1466bis is being worked on to address issues like the length of time an allocation is valid before being revoked for non-use.
Kent askes if holes can still be punched in CIDR space. 1466bis will hopefully discuss this. Daniel says that 1466bis will attempt to avoid discussion of routing issues. It will suggest that reclaiming address space is an appropriate thing to do, but it will not insist that be the case. 1466bis is supposed to address registration issues.
SWIP and RWHOIS will be used to evaluate the effectivness of allocations. They will be using an 80% watermark. If the provider has 80% allocated, then more space will be allocated.
Peter Ford argues that the policy as discussed is incomplete. He argues that the notion of decoupling address and routing is specious. This should be directly addressed and RFC1466bis.
Bill would like to see RFC1466bis (in draft). There are three components. Two have been written and the third is being developed. He also is curious about the effort to reclaim retired or unused IPv4 space. Mark said that there is some work done to reclaim domain space.
Vince Fuller argues that some of the domain registration policies also need reworking. He cites some examples where servers at BARRNET have been named as primary or secondary for domains that BARRNET has no knowledge of.
Is there a deallocation policy? Mark said that the InterNIC considers itself a registry and not a policy making board. However, the InterNIC has found that it needs to make interim procedures that have the impact of policy because some policy development takes too long to occur.