Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-stable-privacy-addresses (Respond by Aug 11, 2015)
Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Fri, 31 July 2015 13:35 UTC
Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09E811A882D for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 06:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TjStlqSqvMxd for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 06:35:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web01.jbserver.net (web01.jbserver.net [IPv6:2a00:8240:6:a::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C38D91A87EE for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 06:35:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [84.47.113.16] (helo=[192.168.0.6]) by web01.jbserver.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from <fgont@si6networks.com>) id 1ZLASp-0000f3-5R; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 15:35:07 +0200
Message-ID: <55BB7978.3030805@si6networks.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 15:34:48 +0200
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
References: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1CB90384@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <55B91127.9020403@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <55B91127.9020403@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/3zafJN6mZ5-j09BFp_1D49p2pmU>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-stable-privacy-addresses (Respond by Aug 11, 2015)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:35:18 -0000
Tomek, On 07/29/2015 07:45 PM, Tomek Mrugalski wrote: > > With my co-chair hat off, I think this draft could have been useful > couple years ago. It defines an allocation strategy that could be > beneficial in certain cases. Some modern DHCP servers allow multiple > allocation strategies and this could have been one of them. The text > suggested that the algorithm specified is the only right way to do it. > It is not. Could you please point what's the offending text? -- i.e., the text that claims that this is the only way to generate IIDs with DHCPv6? > But my strongest objection to it is that privacy and stable do not mix > well. It all depends on what you mean by privacy. Here were *aiming* to allow to activity correlation within the same network. It's a goal, not a flaw. If what bothers you is the use of "privacy" in the title, please say so. > The general consensus seems be that changing MAC addresses and all > associated identifiers over time is the way to go. That's what the > anonymity profile and other associated work in other WGs is proposing. > Had we published this draft, it would be confusing for vendors what the > recommendation for privacy is: randomize MAC addresses or go with stable > privacy addresses. Based on that I'm in favor of dropping this work. Has anyone really assessed everything that could go wrong with randomized MAC addresses? -- THink of SAVI and other first-hop-secuity mechanisms, issues with the ND cache, etc. IMO, while probably desirable, I'd flag MAC address randomization as "experimental" rather than "the way to go". Thanks, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
- [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-stable… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Tomek Mrugalski
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… 神明達哉
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Christian Huitema
- [dhcwg] Security/Privacy & Addressing (was: Re: I… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Loganaden Velvindron
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Tomek Mrugalski
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Liushucheng (Will)
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Linhui Sun
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… 神明達哉
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Linhui Sun
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Chuck Anderson
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Fernando Gont
- Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-st… Lorenzo Colitti