ITU-T activities Numbering, Naming and Addressing (ENUM, IDN, Ipv6, ccTLD)

ITU-T activitiesNumbering, Naming and Addressing (ENUM, IDN, Ipv6, ccTLD) Greg Jones ITU Telecommunication Standardization Bureau greg.jones@itu.int

Why is this ENUM important? • Mapping of telephone numbers onto Internet. • Could allow conventional telephones to call IP terminals (PCs). • Should telephone numbers used in this way be subject to government oversight and regulation? • Who should exercise control over telephone numbers used in this way?

Issues of Convergence • Problems of addressing calls that pass from one network service to another: • Now widely possible to originate calls from IP address-based networks to other networks • But uncommon to terminate calls from other networks to IP address-based networks • To access a subscriber on an IP address-based network, some sort of global addressing scheme across PSTN and IP address-based networks needed • ENUM may be solution…

Caveats • Complex topic • Focused on E.164 infrastructure and policy issues, not ENUM services • Work in progress

Some Complexities • In telecommunication numbering, regulatory tradition with strong government involvement (e.g., number portability,consumer protection) • In the Internet, management of naming and addressing has been left to “industry self-regulation” • National numbering/regulatory authorities involved in coordinating ENUM servers & services for their portion of E.164 resources in respective countries

Roles and Responsibilities • Most ENUM service and administrative decisions are national issues under purview of ITU Member States, since most E.164 resources are utilized nationally • ITU will need to ensure that Member State has specifically authorized inclusion of geographic country code in the DNS • In integrated numbering plan, each ITU Member State within plan may administer their portion of E.164 resources mapped into DNS as they see fit

ITU Responsibilities • Define and implement administrative procedures that coordinate delegations of E.164 numbering resources into the agreed DNS name servers • Draft Recommendation E.A-ENUM is being prepared by Study Group 2

National Consideration Issues • Consultation process with interested communities • National deployment Issues • How do you authenticate the identity of the subscriber for ENUM services? • Who are ENUM Registrars and what are they responsible for? • How do you validate ENUM data for potential users(Add - Modify – Delete) NAPTR list of services and preferences? • How is data provisioned in the country code name servers? • Competition issues

ITU Past Activities • Preparation and circulation of tutorial papers • ITU-T SG 2 Supplement on issues that need to be addressed by national and international authorities • ITU-T SG 2 Meetings in 2001 and 2002 • Discussion with IETF and RIPE NCC on roles and responsibilities

ITU Future Activities • Cooperate with IAB/IETF to make final choice of TLD, registry, requirements for registry operations • Interim administration • Determine E.A-ENUM See also: itu.int/ITU-T/inr/enum and itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/enum

Demand for Multilingualism • For example, largest percentage of Internet users now in the Asia-Pacific region • Consequence of the Internet “globalization” is growing number of users not familiar with ASCII • Domain namesin ASCII characters poses significant linguistic barrier • Native speakers of Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Russian, Tamil, Thai and others who use non-ASCII scripts at considerable disadvantage • Requirement for “internationalization” of the Internet’s Domain Name System

IDN is… • Abbreviation for “Internationalized domain name” • Refers to a domain name where one or more characters not in historical subset of Latin LDH set (a-z), digits (0-9) and hyphen (LDH) used in the DNS • Associated with Unicode (ISO 10646)-based labels • Major transition from 38 characters to more than tens of thousands possible Unicode “code points”

Arabic (Arabic) Arabic (Persian) Armenian Bengali Cyrillic (Russian) Devanagari (Hindi) Georgian Greek Gujarati Gurmukhi Han (Chinese) Hangul Hebrew Hiragana ゆにこおど Khmer Malayalam Syriac Tamil Thai “Unicode” Examples

APT-ITU Joint Workshop on ENUM and IDN25-26 August 2003, Bangkok, Thailand • The APT-ITU Joint Workshop on ENUM and IDN was held in Bangkok, Thailand, from 25 to 26 August 2003. • For further information, please visit:www.aptsec.org/seminar/APT-Seminar.htm

Future ITU Activities • IDN implementation experiences discussions in number of ITU forums (future IDN workshops (e.g., pan-Arab region, IP symposium in CIS states, IP policy manuals) • Bring together experts so that they can share experiences for the benefit of others • Build knowledge base of materials and implementations available to ITU Member States • Discuss role of national administrations of ITU Member States and possible policy role they may wish to consider • Discuss further cooperative measures at both regional and international levels, particularly with regard to assisting developing countries in their consideration of these new technologies? • Ideas?

A Policy Look at IPv6Outline • What is IPv6 • Address space exhaustion • Relationship to topology • Alternatives to IPv6 • Network problems • Space allocation policy • Deployment difficulties • Roadblocks and solutions • ITU and IPv6 Based on a paper by John Klensin, available at:http://web/itudoc/itu-/com2/infodocs/015.html

What is IPv6 • IPv6 (Internet Protocol, version 6) was developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), starting in 1993, • in response to a series of perceived problems, • primarily exhaustion of the current, IP version 4 (IPv4), address space

Address space exhaustion (1/3) • Rate and scale of Internet growth was underestimated • In 1970’s, 32-bit address space was thought to be adequate for long term • Class system (A, B, C) • Internet routing is closely tied to the separation of routing within a network and routing between networks

Address space exhaustion (2/3) • Routing within large networks became complex • Sub netting introduced • Advent of PCs meant that each host could no longer have a unique fixed IP address • dynamic address assignment(reachability?) • private address spaces(leakage if connected to public network)

Address space exhaustion (3/3) • In 1995, classless system was introduced • RIRs became more conservative with respect to address allocation • Some believe IPv4 addresses will be exhausted in 2-3 years, others in 10 years, others sooner, others much later. • Rate of exhaustion influenced by technology (e.g. NATing) and RIR policies as well as growth • Under-use of certain class A, B allocations

Relationship to topology (1/3) • An IP address is not similar to a telephone number • An IP address is a routing address • In telephony terms: • a telephone number is more like a domain name • an IP address is more like a SANC

Relationship to topology (2/3) • But analogies are imperfect • Telephone numbers identify a circuit, a wire going somewhere,but are now portable • IP addresses identify a terminal device, a computer,but can be: • dynamically assigned • translated (NATing)

Relationship to topology (3/3) Back to the basics of Internet: • Any host can access any other host through uniform protocols and addresses • Network is dumb • Intelligence at the edges • Applications independent of network • Network does not change content These differences are more important than the packet vs. switched models

Alternatives to IPv6 • Application servers at boundary of public network, translate to private network, but these gateways can limit functionality • NATing, VPNs, private spaces,but may force re-numbering • NATing limits peer-to-peer applications • IPsec requires end-to-end

Network Problems Expanding address space raises certain issues • Routing table growth (IPv6 may help or hinder) • Blocks allocated to ISPs to optimize routing limit portability across ISPs • Security may or may not be improved

Space allocation policies • RIRs allocate to LIRs (optimizes routing) • If IPv6 policies are conservative, this may slow the adoption of IPv6 • If IPv6 policies are loose, this may lead to routing table problems and early exhaustion

Deployment difficulties • Dual stack: v4 and v6 in devices • Tunnels: encapsulate v4 in v6 or v6 in v4 • Conversion gateways • Convert networks • from the edges • from the core • by islands, either geographic or by application (3G)

Potential roadblocks and solutions • Cost of conversion • Lack of confidence in v6 software • Policies (will) Consensus is that conversion is needed, but when and how will depend on many factors

ITU and IPv6 • ITU’s mission includes providing information on new technologies to its membership, IPv6 is a good example • A Tutorial Workshop was held in Geneva on 6 May 2002, see: itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/ipv6 • Further events are being considered

ITU-T and ICANN ReformccTLD issuesOutline • Some issues regarding ICANN Reform • Proposals • Conclusion

Some ICANN Reform issues The President of ICANN has stated that ICANN cannot fulfill its mission and has called for reform and for: • Greater government involvement • Increased funding Among the specific problems identified, we mention: • ICANN has been too slow to address and resolve issues • ICANN lacks clear, stable, and accepted processes and procedures • ICANN has not yet created an adequate industry-government partnership

Specific ccTLD issues • Most ccTLD managers have not signed the contracts proposed by ICANN • Some ccTLD managers have stated that they are not satisfied with the services provided by ICANN • There are tensions between some ccTLD managers and their governments (mostly outside Europe) • Conversely, some governments feel that the ccTLD manager does not act in the interest of the country (particularly when the ccTLD appears to have been “high-jacked” by a foreign company) The above is not intended to be a criticism of ICANN, but merely a reflection of the current situation.

Workshop on Member States' Experiences with ccTLDsGeneva, 3-4 March 2003 • The purpose of this open workshop was to begin to work with Member States and Sector Members, recognizing the activities of other appropriate entities, to review Member States' ccTLD and other related experiences, in accordance with Resolution 102 as revised at the Plenipotentiary Conference in Marrakesh (2002) • The convening letter (TSB Circular 135) is available at: itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/circ/01-04_1/135_ww9.doc and Add.1 at: itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/cctld/135add1e.doc • Open to ccTLD operators and any other interested parties • For additional information on this workshop, please visit: itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/cctld

Proposals • ccTLDs and governments could work together to agree ITU-T Recommendations related to ccTLD issues, in particular re-delegation issues • Issue for open discussion: local vs. global boundaries • The management teams of CENTR and other ccTLD forums could engage in dialog with ITU-T to explore this and other areas for cooperation

Conclusions on ccTLD • ITU-T could help ICANN to achieve the ccTLD-government consensus that appears to be missing today, by using ITU-T’s well-proven processes and procedures.

ITU-T activities Numbering, Naming and Addressing (ENUM, IDN, Ipv6, ccTLD)