IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-addr-notification-08.txt

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 17 January 2024 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D1AC1519A7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:13:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.407
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.407 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id guSXxv0hqYCG for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:13:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E96EC151990 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:13:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C8681800E; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:13:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id WJbQJIXmjxBS; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:13:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60EA21800C; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:13:20 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1705511600; bh=1ciY1FsW1WDKekrRH3sxhUZXloxe1fjhdvjwwg7Li4M=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=hyNu44h5Q4rpDk4nl9qn1x9LHnH0AL+No9OcyX/Ps6yfR/LYtRoV9yWWyrxxxH4QO X7ouSKVQCVm65EuRh8WTLufuWq0RObqGGtDF25fc6f9IzaPmecMUsUzXq7BWOsYCCa mIEdsOc8QU3D+o/0Ya++hJn5USD9wm2D+6XPZenGeMLcv+VH3dCLAeCyRd74NMG5RF axRO2JLEhjYkC3nfuckIysCvmwxe8Jy/K0iiLdAKzscMLhLdLoQYD8cfdf+gN0xLPE FoCMRAmPMJEHxp8CP/kyER7BpgSzi4e8op7kPIC13SsqYj2+8WCDTH/atshe2PA6HV Zqvuounrjrd4w==
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58930132; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:13:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BAT3wbQgm7id93X=B4su51SzV-LNooDCv9Jx4xPdVXYtrg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <170541340158.26672.7745073446465845999@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAFU7BAT3wbQgm7id93X=B4su51SzV-LNooDCv9Jx4xPdVXYtrg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:13:20 -0500
Message-ID: <3231.1705511600@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/9abU6apdot8rMWwF_guEm_zj_aQ>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-addr-notification-08.txt
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dynamic Host Configuration <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: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:13:27 -0000

}           If revealing other hosts addresses and
} 	   alllowing onlink peer-to-peer communication is undesirable for a
} 	   given network segment, then layer2 (link-layer) isolation shall be
} 	   used.

I think you'll get a BCP14 query on "shall" here from the IESG.
(And I hate putting BCP14 into Security Considerations, so upcasing that
would not be my choice)

Is there a document that already says this?   Can we just write:

}           If revealing other hosts addresses and
} 	   alllowing onlink peer-to-peer communication is undesirable for a
} 	   given network segment, then the recommendations of [RFCXXXX] apply.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email