Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-stable-privacy-addresses (Respond by Aug 11, 2015)

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Fri, 14 August 2015 05:29 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 C17851ACCDE for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.388
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 uwqOU_dAPQpR for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yk0-x22c.google.com (mail-yk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A06121ACCDC for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ykdt205 with SMTP id t205so60577765ykd.1 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=RF/CiFnQQ7RetM5h4QH4uvUHZ9qEBDY0pu90m/Gz58w=; b=ROsm60rpKfNl+tOcFcBHxuofOF9Lbet9kCsth72y5fsi1zLoSxqt3KkYx3jSWLOz3c v8lY1ZU83bzmnfiji1GQ47jdIoe8OLsdj/r2fZiP2wigbej53uQxS3cbZDHJXLG8RVZs ha7WYqKwJN4+sDyV2pG4Q24zfJMjE8+UFHW/60F8AHv6N6vLnhGM9BME5782yXVvxWSP U5Pt5Spg1hCsyiJGrxgc++qECa6w2wxo7xXz3Eqg3H5pidVs8LB6UHgYYhyQXf6Q6SxU yVMKLwgQu8QWXea+q7L9TkUc3oxKfDIJ6nX1tdNMbL398Uo7vRxQ5zLIJpEI27AuG4hw Ah0w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=RF/CiFnQQ7RetM5h4QH4uvUHZ9qEBDY0pu90m/Gz58w=; b=lSeEuHQoNHuiUbW+RU/h4mYg+6DATOjJxt7TB489p0NopbfBLPTmnkz4mSByoPyory +5/CtoxVzK0GYHTekZWbxkevbBwS65Gkv7y9hfZDfWsu/X4p1J11ZyYeDV4f8fR6OXM9 KNapf9d+MpdX+yN0yGG/a2Rt8SAb4vzNhdWSgVL7XfhZI63g5zQcqm3Dp6zzQNaamfFu x9+lLOqy7oeywofy32vbAMdBDLPCI7EwW4psBhBrLL0J1L6mjEY/nkN1oTV7oo+M5JLw 3WZ6o9h0UtihJJdIkN3R4fFgDZ/qGIThOC84S/YhLoPpDKjoKxdSQCW0H8qowJAoQF5B oODg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmdiGr5p6aaonZfTbrlu921rpvakMkWQEXQeSEQp44ulW5pNC6vd+I7su/axiaLhN6ag+ad
X-Received: by 10.13.254.70 with SMTP id o67mr45079152ywf.88.1439530141879; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.116.147 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55CCF3FC.2070407@si6networks.com>
References: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1CB90384@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <20150811141557.GG23262@angus.ind.WPI.EDU> <CAKD1Yr0wkAsZbM6wcWmFMnB8TLmF4Fmy=xbJB6dx8dW2wgiZZg@mail.gmail.com> <55CCF3FC.2070407@si6networks.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:28:42 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr2=Vre6F0C1mTqMi9p88o9j=wsHqoNiLFFV5AQ4sGuv0A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c07e726c073a4051d3eba5c
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/T800BcOIagprjjfxVLuLUSh8iUA>
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
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, 14 Aug 2015 05:29:03 -0000

On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 4:46 AM, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
wrote:

> > This is a fundamental flaw in this scheme which I believe cannot be
> fixed.
>
> IMO, this is similar to saying that the automobile design is flawed
> because they cannot operate on water.
>
> This ID assumes that the address pool enough such that address
> collisions are (probabilistically speaking) extremely unlikely.


Then you need to change all occurrences of "stateless" to
"probabilistically stateless" and "stable" to "probabilistically stable"
properly document what happens in this case.

Charis, what is the outcome of this consensus call? If your call is that
there is rough consensus for this to cease to be a WG document, then we can
stop having these discussions.

It is not my role to call consensus, but I count a handful of people
supporting this document in this thread; given the hum level and the number
of attendees at the meeting, that certainly doesn't seem to constitute
rough consensus that we should *keep* this document active.