Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


Network Working Group C. Topolcic Request for Comments: 1467 CNRI Obsoletes: 1367 August 1993

             Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet

Status of this Memo

 This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
 not specify an Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is


 This document describes the current status of the development and
 deployment of CIDR technology into the Internet. This document
 replaces RFC 1367, which was a schedule for the deployment of IP
 address space management procedures to support route aggregation.
 Since all the milestones proposed in RFC 1367 except for the delivery
 and installation of CIDR software were met, it does not seem
 appropriate to issue an updated schedule. Rather, this document is
 intended to provide information about how this effort is proceeding,
 which may be of interest to the community.

1. Background

 The Internet's exponential growth has led to a number of difficulties
 relating to the management of IP network numbers.  The administrative
 overhead of allocating ever increasing volumes of IP network numbers
 for global users has stressed the organizations that perform this
 function.  The volume of IP network numbers that are reachable
 through the Internet has taxed a number of routers' ability to manage
 their forwarding tables.  The poor utilization of allocated IP
 network numbers has threatened to deplete the Class A and Class B
 address space.
 During the past few years, a consensus has emerged among the Internet
 community in favor of a number of mechanisms to relieve these
 problems for the mid-term.  These mechanisms are expected to be put
 into place in the short term and to provide relief for the mid-term.
 Fundamental changes to the Internet protocols to ensure the
 Internet's continued long term growth and well being are being
 explored and are expected to succeed the mid-term mechanisms.
 The global Internet community have been cooperating closely in such
 forums as the IETF and its working groups, the IEPG, the NSF Regional
 Techs Meetings, INET, INTEROP, FNC, FEPG, and other assemblies in

Topolcic [Page 1] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

 order to ensure the continued stable operation of the Internet.
 Recognizing the need for the mid-term mechanisms and receiving
 support from the Internet community, the US Federal Agencies proposed
 procedures to assist the deployment of these mid-term mechanisms.
 These procedures were originally described in RFC 1366 [1], which was
 recently made obsolete by RFC 1466 [2].  In October 1992, a schedule
 was proposed for the implementation of the procedures, described in
 RFC 1367 [3].

2. Milestones that have been met

 Most of the milestones of the proposed schedule were implemented on
 time. These milestones are shown below, essentially as they appear in
 [3], but with further comment where appropriate:
    1) 31 October 92:
       The following address allocation procedures were continued:
       a) Initial set of criteria for selecting regional address
          registries were put into place, and requests from
          prospective regional registries were accepted by the
          The Reseaux IP Europeens Network Coordination Centre
          (RIPE NCC) requested to become a regional registry.
          As per the addressing plan of RFC 1366, the RIPE NCC
          was given the block to to
          administer for the European Internet community. The RIPE
          NCC had previously and independently obtained the block
 to Although this block had been
          allocated before RFC 1366, the RIPE NCC was able to manage
          it according to the guidelines in RFC 1366.
       b) Class A network numbers were put on reserve for possible
          future use. The unreserved Class A numbers became very
          difficult to obtain.
       c) Class B network numbers were issued only when
          reasonably justified.  Whenever possible, a block of C's
          was issued rather than a B. The requirements for
          allocating a Class B became progressively more constrained
          until the date in step (3).

Topolcic [Page 2] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

       d) Class C network numbers were allocated according to the
          addressing plan of [1], now obsoleted by [2].  Allocation
          continued to be performed by the Internet Registry (IR)
          for regions of the world where an appropriate regional
          registry had not yet been designated by the IANA.
    2) 14 February 93:
       The schedule in [3] was re-evaluated, and there appeared to
       be no reason to readjust it, so it was continued as
       originally set out.
    3) 15 April 93:
       a) The IR began to allocate all networks according to the
          addressing plan of [1], now obsoleted by [2], in
          appropriately sized blocks of Class C numbers.
       b) Class B network numbers became difficult to obtain,
          following the recommendation of the addressing plan and
          were only issued when justified.
 Furthermore, throughout this time period, network service providers
 have requested blocks of network numbers from the Class C address
 space for the purpose of further allocating them to their clients.
 The network service providers were allocated such space by the RIPE
 NCC or the IR, acting for North America and the Pacific Rim. This
 process has started to distribute the function of address
 registration to a more regional level, closer to the end users. The
 process has operated as hoped for, with no major problems.

3. Milestone that has not been met

 The proposed schedule of [3] stated that 6 June 1993 was the date
 when an address aggregation mechanism would be generally available in
 the Internet. Although this target date was based on the plans as
 stated by the router vendors and was reasonable at the time the
 schedule in [3] was formulated, it has slipped.  Nevertheless, the
 continuation of that schedule has so far not added significantly to
 the problems of the Internet. The rest of this document looks at the
 current situation and what can be expected in the near future.

4. Current status of address aggregation mechanisms in commercial

 Although RFCs 1366, 1466, and 1367 do not depend on any specific
 address aggregation technology, there is consensus in the Internet
 community to use Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) [4]. CIDR is

Topolcic [Page 3] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

 supported by BGP-4 and IDRP. Most router vendors are working on BGP-
 4, first, and there is a consensus to use BGP-4 to support the
 initial deployment of CIDR in the Internet.
 The following paragraphs describe the implementation status and plans
 of software to support CIDR in various router vendors' products,
 listed in alphabetical order.  Some speculation is necessarily
 involved in deriving these projections.  See also the minutes of the
 July 1993 meeting of the BGP Deployment Working Group of the IETF
 3Com's BGP-4 code has been tested internally. They have code that
 accepts, forwards and manages aggregated routes properly, and they
 are ready to test it for interoperability with other vendors. They
 have yet to implement the code that forms the route aggregates. They
 expect to have Beta code done by September, and full release code
 shortly thereafter. The initial implementation will not support de-
 aggregation.  Their plans here are not yet formulated. They will
 support de-aggregation if necessary.
 ANS has a BGP-4 implementation that is being tested internally.  It
 is stable enough to begin testing for interoperability with other
 vendors' implementations.  Depending of the results of
 interoperability testing, this code could be deployed into the ANSNET
 by August.  This delay is primarily because some routers are running
 older code, and they all need to be upgraded to GATED before they can
 all support BGP-4 internally. So the ability to support CIDR looks
 like it is about one to two months away. This code will not support
 controlled de-aggregation, but de-aggregation will be supported if
 BBN plans to complete it's development of BGP-4 by early Summer 1994.
 Initial plans are to implement both aggregation and controlled de-
 aggregation with an early release of the software.
 Cisco's BGP-4 implementation is under development at this time.
 There is pre-Beta code available for people to begin testing.  It is
 expected that the code will be stable sometime during the summer of
 1993 and will be made available for limited deployment at that time.
 This BGP-4 code will implement aggregation. It will not be part of
 the normal release cycle at this time.  It will be available in a
 special software release based on the 9.21 release. This initial
 BGP-4 code will not implement controlled de-aggregation, but Cisco
 plans on implementing de-aggregation.
 Proteon's BGP-4 code has been tested internally. They are ready to
 test it for interoperability with other vendors. If this works out
 reasonably well, then it is reasonable to expect that they can start

Topolcic [Page 4] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

 to deploy this as Beta code by August, with a target of full release
 in the fall. This initial implementation will not support aggregation
 or de-aggregation. Aggregation will be implemented soon thereafter,
 but their plans for de-aggregation are not yet formulated.  They will
 implement de-aggregation if necessary.
 Wellfleet is aiming at having beta code implementing BGP-4 roughly in
 early 1994. This code will include controlled de-aggregation.

5. Rate of growth

 MERIT periodically publishes the number of networks in the
 NSFNET/ANSNET policy routing database.  Analysis of this data
 suggests that the number of entries in this database is growing at
 approximately 8% per month, or doubling every nine or ten months [6].
 Although there are currently over 13K networks in the NSFNET/ANSNET
 policy routing database, a number of them are not active. That is,
 they are not announced to the NSFNET/ANSNET Backbone. The 10K active
 network point was passed in late June. Assuming that the number of
 active networks continues to grow at the same rate as in the past, it
 can be projected that the 12K active network point will be reached
 sometime in approximately late September 1993 and that the 25K active
 network point will be reached sometime in mid-94 (two high water
 marks whose relevance will become apparent below).
 The NSFNET/ANSNET routing database includes only those networks that
 meet the NSF Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) or the ANSNET CO+RE AUP.
 There are a number of networks connected to the Internet that do not
 meet these criteria. Although they are not in the NSFNET/ANSNET
 routing database, they are in the forwarding tables of a number of
 network providers. Currently, the number of networks that are
 connected to other known service providers but are not in the
 NSFNET/ANSNET routing database is significantly smaller than (less
 than 25% of) the number that are in the NSFNET/ANSNET database. There
 is no estimate available for the rate of growth of the number of such
 non-NSFNET/ANSNET networks. It is assumed here that the growth rate
 of these networks is approximately the same as that of AUP networks
 in the NSFNET/ANSNET routing database.
 Analysis of the more than 13K networks in the NSFNET/ANSNET routing
 database, as well as the allocated but unconnected networks, suggests
 that CIDR deployment should have a significant impact on the number
 of forwarding table entries that any router needs to maintain, and
 its rate of growth.  However, an in-depth study was begun at the July
 1993 meeting of the BGP Deployment Working Group of the IETF [5] to
 (among other goals) evaluate the impact of CIDR on the growth rate of
 router forwarding tables.

Topolcic [Page 5] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

6. Capacity of deployed networks

 The following paragraphs describe the current occupancy of the
 forwarding tables of the routers of several transit network providers
 and their expected capacities and an estimate of the time when that
 capacity would be reached if the growth rate were to continue as
 today. This list is a subset of all relevant providers, but is
 considered approximately representative of the situation of other
 network providers. It is shown in alphabetical order.
 ALTERNET nodes are Cisco routers, and currently carry approximately
 11K to 12K routes, both AUP and non-AUP. With their current
 configuration, they have enough memory so that they are expected to
 support up to approximately 35K routes.  If the rate at which the
 number of these routes is expected to grow is approximately the same
 as the rate that the NSFNET/ANSNET policy routing database is
 growing, then this number may be reached in late 1994.  However, if
 the growth rate continues unchecked, it is expected that the
 processing capacity of the routers will be surpassed before their
 memory is exhausted. It is expected that CIDR will be in place long
 before this point is reached.
 All ANSNET routers have recently been upgraded to AIX 3.2. This
 version supports up to 12K networks.  These routers currently carry
 only the active networks in the NSFNET/ANSNET routing database.  It
 is anticipated that the next version of router code will be deployed
 before September 1993, the projected date for when there will be 12K
 active networks.  This version will support 25K active networks.
 Although there are no current plans for a version of router code that
 supports more than 25K networks, it is believed that CIDR will help
 this situation.
 EBONE nodes are Cisco routers. They currently carry approximately 10K
 to 11K routes. With their current configuration, they may be able to
 support approximately 40K routes. However, the number of paths may be
 very relevant. The memory required for the BGP table (rather than the
 forwarding table) is a function of the number of paths.  If a new
 transatlantic link were to be added, EBONE could receive all the
 North American routes through it. This would add a new set of paths.
 Each such transatlantic link would increase the memory required by
 approximately 20%. Due to the network topology between North America
 and Europe, new transatlantic links tend to result in new paths, and
 therefore significant memory requirements. It is very difficult to
 predict the addition of future transatlantic links because they
 result from business or political requirements, not bandwidth

Topolcic [Page 6] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

 ESNET uses Cisco routers. However, it is already in trouble, but not
 because of the size of the forwarding tables. The problem is its need
 to maintain considerable configuration information describing which
 networks it should or should not accept from its neighbors, and the
 fact that this information must be stored in a non-volatile memory of
 limited size. CIDR aggregation is expected to help this problem.
 Also, ESNET plans to deploy BGP-4 and CIDR only after it is in a full
 release, so does not plan to participate in the initial BGP-4
 deployment. ESNET will upgrade their nodes to Cisco CSC-4's in the
 All SPRINTLINK and ICM nodes have recently been upgraded to Cisco
 CSC-4 routers with 16MB of memory. They will carry full routing,
 including not only the routes that the NSFNET/ANSNET carries, but
 also routes to networks that do not comply with the NSF or CO+RE
 AUPs. The SPRINT routers currently carry approximately 11K to 12K
 routes, and it is expected that they will be able to support up to
 approximately 25K routes, as currently configured. The 25K announced
 network point may be reached in approximately mid-1994. Again, it is
 expected that CIDR deployment will have a significant impact on this
 growth rate, well before this time.

7. Acknowledgements

 This report contains information from a number of sources, including
 vendors, operators, researchers, and organizations that foster
 cooperation in the Internet community. Specific organizations include
 the Intercontinental Engineering and Planning Group (IEPG), the BGP-4
 Deployment Working Group of the IETF, the Federal Networking Council
 (FNC), and the FNC Engineering and Planning Group (FEPG). Specific
 individuals include, in alphabetical order, Arun Arunkumar, Tony
 Bates, Mary Byrne, Bob Collet, Mike Craren, Dennis Ferguson, Tony
 Hain, Elise Gerich, Mark Knopper, John Krawczyk, Tony Li, Peter
 Lothberg, Andrew Partan, Gary Rucinski, Frank Solensky, and Jessica
 Yu. This report would not have been possible without the willingness
 of these people to make their information public for the good of the

8. References

 [1] Gerich, E., "Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space",
     RFC 1366, Merit, October 1992.
 [2] Gerich, E., "Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space",
     RFC 1466, Merit, May 1993.
 [3] Topolcic, C., "Schedule for IP Address Space Management
     Guidelines", RFC 1367, CNRI, October 1992.

Topolcic [Page 7] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

 [4] Fuller, V. et al, "Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR): an
     Address Assignment and Aggregation Strategy", working draft
     obsoleting RFC 1338, BARRNet, February 1993.
 [5] Yu, J., "Minutes of the BGP Deployment Working Group
     (BGPDEPL)", MERIT, July 1993.
 [6] Solensky, F., Internet Growth Charts, "big-internet" mailing

9. Other relevant documents

     Huitema, C., "IAB Recommendation for an Intermediate Strategy
     to Address the Issue of Scaling", RFC 1481, Internet
     Architecture Board, July 1993.
     Knopper, M., "Minutes of the NSFNET Regional Techs Meeting",
     working draft, MERIT, June 1993.
     Knopper, M., and Richardson, S., " Aggregation Support in the
     NSFNET Policy-Based Routing Database", RFC 1482, MERIT, June
     Topolcic, C., "Notes of BGP-4/CIDR Coordination Meeting of 11
     March 93", working draft, CNRI, March 1993.
     Rekhter, Y., and Topolcic, C., "Exchanging Routing Information
     Across Provider/Subscriber Boundaries in the CIDR Environment",
     working draft, IBM Corp., CNRI, April 1993.
     Rekhter, Y., and Li, T., "An Architecture for IP Address
     Allocation with CIDR", working draft, IBM Corp., cisco Systems,
     February 1993.
     Gross, P., and P. Almquist, "IESG Deliberations on Routing and
     Addressing", RFC 1380, IESG, November 1992.

Topolcic [Page 8] RFC 1467 Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet August 1993

10. Security Considerations

 Security issues are not discussed in this memo.

11. Author's Address

 Claudio Topolcic
 Corporation for National Research Initiatives
 895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100
 Reston, VA  22091
 Phone: (703) 620-8990
 EMail: topolcic@CNRI.Reston.VA.US

Topolcic [Page 9]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc1467.txt · Last modified: 1993/08/05 23:08 by

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki