<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd">
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc toc="no"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<rfc category="info" docName="draft-wilson-class-e-02.txt" ipr="full3978">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="240.0.0.0/4 Private Use">Redesignation of 240/4 from "Future Use" to "Private Use"</title>

    <author fullname="Paul Wilson" initials="P." surname="Wilson">
      <organization abbrev="APNIC">Asia Pacific Network Information
      Centre</organization>
      <address>
        <email>pwilson@apnic.net</email>
        <uri>http://www.apnic.net</uri>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="George Michaelson" initials="G." surname="Michaelson">
      <organization abbrev="APNIC">Asia Pacific Network Information
      Centre</organization>
      <address>
        <email>ggm@apnic.net</email>

        <uri>http://www.apnic.net</uri>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Geoff Huston" initials="G." surname="Huston">
      <organization abbrev="APNIC">Asia Pacific Network Information
      Centre</organization>

      <address>
        <email>gih@apnic.net</email>

        <uri>http://www.apnic.net</uri>
      </address>
    </author>


    <date year="2008" />

    <area>Internet Area</area>

    <workgroup>Individual Submission</workgroup>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document directs the IANA to designate the block of IPv4
      addresses from 240.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255 (240.0.0.0/4) as
      unicast address space for Private Use.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section anchor="intro" title="Redesignation of 240.0.0.0/4">
      <t>This document directs the IANA to designate the block of IPv4
      addresses from 240.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255 (240.0.0.0/4) as
      unicast address space for Private Use.</t>

      <t>The address block spanning 240.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255
      (240.0.0.0/4), formerly designated as "Class E", and noted as
      being "Reserved" in the IANA IPv4 address registry, is no longer
      to be held in reserve by IANA for the IETF.</t>

      <t>IANA is directed to redesignate the address block 240.0.0.0/4
      as unicast address space intended for Private Use. While the
      particular form of private use is not specified here, it is
      envisaged that this address prefix would have use in large
      private Internets that require more address space than is
      available in the private use address space designated by <xref
      target="RFC1918"></xref> during the dual stack transition to
      IPv6.</t>

      <t>Potential users of this address space need to ensure that
      their envisaged deployment can satisfy the caveats noted
      here.</t>

    </section>
    <section anchor="caveats" title="Caveats of Use">

      <t>Many implementations of the TCP/IP protocol stack have the
      240.0.0.0/4 address block marked as experimental, and prevent
      the host from forwarding IP packets with addresses drawn from
      this address block.</t>

      <t>For this reason, it is strongly suggested that private
      network addressing requirements which can be fulfilled from the
      private use address space designated by <xref
      target="RFC1918" /> should continue to use that space.
      Network administrators with very large scale requirements for
      private use address space who wish to use addresses drawn from
      240.0.0.0/4 are advised to conduct appropriate tests to ensure
      that such addresses can be used in their envisaged private use
      context.</t>

      <t>[Note: not for publication. It is suggested that in order to
      assist with verification of equipment compatibility, a separate
      informational RFC or other mechanism be developed to assist with
      the recording of specific test results, upgrade status, etc.]</t>

    </section>
    <section anchor="considerations" title="Considerations">
    <t>
    Note: This section is to assist in the discussion of the
    recommendation proposed in this draft. It is intended that this
    section would be removed prior to publication.
    </t>

    <t>
    The option of using this "top part" of the IPv4 address space as a
    means of mitigating to some extent the issues related to the
    exhaustion of the IPv4 unallocated address pool date back to at
    least 1998, if not earlier <xref target="Lear" />.</t>

    <t>A related internet-draft, <xref target="ID.240space" />,
    advocates changing the designation of this addres prefix to that
    of a "useable" unicast address block, without specifying whether
    the designation should be for private or public use, so the
    "reserved" status was proposed in this draft for the
    240.0.0.0/address block. This proposal differs from <xref
    target="ID.240space" /> in advocating that the address block not
    be used for publically routed address space, but is to be limited
    to private use contexts. The reason for this decision to propose a
    designation of Private Use is that for public use the entire
    installed base of IPv4 hosts un the public Internet, as well as
    associated private Internet realms that are attached to the public
    internet via NATs need to be able to generate and forward IPv4
    packets that are addressed to 240.0.0.0/4 addresses. The set of
    changes to host systems may not be undertaken to a generally
    useful extent within any reasonable timeframe. The alternative
    approach is to limit its intended useof 240.0.0.0/4 to private
    network realms where the population of end devices and forwarding
    systems that need to support the use of 240.0.0.0/4 address space
    is limited. In private use contexts the utility of using this
    space in a private context is a local decision that is not
    impacted by any external factors of private use elsewhere.</t>

    <t>It has been noted that many end host operating system protocol
    stacks do not support the use of 240.0.0.0/4 address
    space. However, <xref target="ID.240space" /> reported in March 2008
    that: <vspace blankLines="1" /><list><t> "Apple OSX has been confirmed to support the use
    of 240.0.0.0/4 as unicast address space.  Changes have been
    incorporated into recent versions of Sun Solaris and have been
    submitted for inclusion in the Linux kernel tree.  No plans have
    been announced for modifications to any version of Microsoft
    Windows, in part because of uncertainty over how to perform 6-to-4
    tunneling in the absence of a definitive statement on whether
    240.0.0.0/4 is "public" or "private" space.<vspace blankLines="1"
    /></t>
    </list>
    This draft advocates the adoption of a definitive statement in the
    IPv4 address registry that 240.0.0.0/4 is Private Use space to
    allow transitonal tunnelling mechanisms to perform correctly in
    the context of use of 6to4 <xref target="RFC3056" />, Teredo <xref
    target="RFC4380" />, and similar forms of IPv6 transitional
    mechanisms that use IPv6 tunnelling as an overlay on an IPv4
    substrate.</t>

    <t>It has been commented that this draft requires a similar level
    of effort in terms of deployment overheads to that involved in the
    deployment of IPv6 itself. This observation has been used to argue
    against adopting this proposal and instead reiterate the calls for
    the adoption of IPv6 and avoid any unnecessary distaction of
    effort in articifially prolonging the useful lifespan of IPv4. In
    response to such arguments it is noted that the adoption of IPv6
    in an orderly transition context requires the exctended use of
    dual stack support in networks where both IPv6 and IPv4 is
    available for use. The problem is that the transition phase is now
    anticipated to last for far longer than the remaining lifetime of
    the unallocated address pool of IPv4 addresses, and in supporting
    the dual stack IPv6 transition, there is a need for additional
    IPv4 addresses in any case. The 240.0.0.0/4 address block allows
    service provider infrastructure to be numbered in a manner that
    would not conflict with either customer private address space use
    from <xref target="RFC1918" /> space, or public address space.</t>

    <t>This private use address pool is intended to assist in the IPv6
    transition of larger networks who are using IPv4 in the context of
    a dual stack deployment. In such contexts it is reported to be the
    case that the reuse of network 10.0.0/8 is not an option because
    of existing use and potential address clashes <xref
    target="ID.1918bis" />. The use of 240.0.0.0/4 offers a more
    conventional method to interconnect CPE NATs and network border carrier
    NATs without having to use more involved solutions such as <xref
    target="ID.DualStackLite" /> or <xref target="ID.NAT464" />.</t>
    </section>
    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <t>Equipment deployed on the public Internet is configured by
      default to treat addresses in the block 240.0.0.0/4 as
      experimental addresses that cannot be forwarded. This implies
      that accidental leakage of packets destined to such addresses
      would conventionally be discarded.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="IANA Considerations">

      <t>The IANA is directed to redesignate the block of IPv4
      addresses from 240.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255 as unicast address
      space reserved for "Private Use".</t>

    </section>
    <section title="Acknowledgements">

    <t>The authors would like to acknowledge the thoughtful assistance
    of David Conrad, Andy Davidson and Robert Seastrom in the
    preparation of this document. </t>

    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">

      <?rfc include='./rfcs/bibxml/reference.RFC.1918.xml'?>
    </references>
    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include='./rfcs/bibxml/reference.RFC.3056.xml'?>
      <?rfc include='./rfcs/bibxml/reference.RFC.4380.xml'?>

   <reference anchor="Lear" target="http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/multimedia/misc/tcp_ip/8813.mm.www/0146.html">
        <front>
          <title>"Re: Running out of Internet addresses?"</title>

          <author fullname="E. Lear" initials="E" surname="Lear">
            <organization></organization>
          </author>

          <date day="27" month="November" year="1988" />
        </front>
 <seriesInfo name='TCP/IP Mailing List' value='' />
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="ID.240space">
        <front>
          <title>Reclassifying 240/4 as usable unicast address space</title>


          <author fullname="Vince Fuller" initials="V." surname="Fuller">
            <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Eliot Lear" initials="E." surname="Lear">
            <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
          </author>
          <author fullname="Dave Meyer" initials="D." surname="Meyer">
            <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
          </author>
          <date month="March" year="2008" />
        </front>

        <seriesInfo name="Work in progress: Internet Drafts"
                    value="draft-fuller-240space-02.txt" />
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="ID.DualStackLite">
        <front>
          <title>Dual-stack lite broadband deployments post IPv4 exhaustion</title>
          <author fullname="Alain Durand" initials="A." surname="Durand">
            <organization>Comcast</organization>
          </author>
          <date month="July" year="2008" />
        </front>

        <seriesInfo name="Work in progress: Internet Drafts"
                    value="draft-durand-dual-stack-lite-00.txt" />
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="ID.NAT464">
        <front>
          <title>Non dual-stack IPv6 deployments for broadband providers</title>
          <author fullname="Alain Durand" initials="A." surname="Durand">
            <organization>Comcast</organization>
          </author>
          <date month="November" year="2007" />
        </front>

        <seriesInfo name="Work in progress: Internet Drafts"
                    value="draft-durand-v6ops-v4v6v4nat-00.txt" />
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="ID.1918bis">
        <front>
          <title>Expanded Address Allocation for Private Internets</title>
          <author fullname="Tony Hain" initials="T." surname="Hain">
            <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
          </author>
          <date month="January" year="2005" />
        </front>

        <seriesInfo name="Work in progress: Internet Drafts"
                    value="draft-hain-1918bis-01.txt" />
      </reference>
    </references>

  </back>
</rfc>
