IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-6man-default-iids Section 4 & 6.9 (DHCPv6)

Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> Wed, 10 August 2016 08:29 UTC

Return-Path: <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
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 90B3712B014; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.999, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Sdmw3MDZCP31; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x22d.google.com (mail-ua0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::22d]) (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 70A7612D1B8; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id n59so57978262uan.2; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:29:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TeXgGsXWh9hTA4mzttn/0wEG/LY3UnxWpvQVKv9EOtE=; b=cpLWWsJdXdIRVGI2ZdomjggxoamtBSpqybXtsQWx61gHqwcwseVd4mjHk4eS1HiZHc z33mQwucmZS1zEjP/J0UOu6DproGofSoBPaHJ4FtW/dkAfeftmxH5a0tsLtddV5ckxnJ zo5MP9957J4D4xdbnCVmyKOX/zzzAFE873xdvHZnikNGyYDSPhV6/Sc3b30Sqx+/lyal sV8Fa8QJGiuS4mpe1bh3h97XdMbJLTtyd3fcwhRvDE6kFXduou2HkM1g6s55CxxKwZRt +gRg84N11HepomNqYSfCoM4/TB1J0egUm2epF3j49XZceUAoQUemWu4IWQyMa2juv+Sk qOxA==
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-transfer-encoding; bh=TeXgGsXWh9hTA4mzttn/0wEG/LY3UnxWpvQVKv9EOtE=; b=fODZF8f6WhtZWF3fm/EsNv1Tn7JD2cbB4DzBXPUFmNVucJHEn6uxK8ojAaqXCkFhPt 0TTUFxHSZFFxT9w3LoKpa19pxtQc5b+NGsRyE3XQkWQWi+vY9r0HFShwZ1rPKiVvCnyz UPgY1KnoEIps38hGB1+lH8fHh+s1oh+BTsjzO7YHXzZA/0Giu+G8ISBTt1qJB6U1CmDd Db2q874I0WDtQ88dRC0t4j2ZloUUZRj1zh22VKcokdOU4H2bb5Q0EQ92SXfQGhmiXmp5 9XXBKP3uJM7UtzqL+bJ9rUfV6GKDwgf/kr1JDNVf2lo0M0r2tn6TLkybkYSYKkk1kqu7 srYQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoousVLaQcM60AGohRNKZIPAKV+PKd/H/HVxlUvPKBpiUSaAP2SwbTMJmoWJ4uy+/OiB8vLTE8y08XU9HWsA==
X-Received: by 10.176.0.211 with SMTP id 77mr1348456uaj.75.1470817766578; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.176.1.165 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <A3200A86-B59B-4AD4-9CF2-D2C7F50AE4C8@employees.org>
References: <D3B60069.31262%volz@cisco.com> <43CE5CAD-2D98-4A75-BF33-E5B415B1013C@employees.org> <D3B605F6.31290%volz@cisco.com> <4FA70E3F-1AED-4662-AEA9-1BCA107F87AD@cooperw.in> <9fb468f9-7f8f-0c0f-ad3e-6d6ff31f3521@si6networks.com> <CAO42Z2z55B5WHR=Oaa=WF1tM4i4LFmFxWC5pe1opqQ46ZOWdtA@mail.gmail.com> <A3200A86-B59B-4AD4-9CF2-D2C7F50AE4C8@employees.org>
From: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 18:28:56 +1000
Message-ID: <CAO42Z2yaLjBesCFRqYVZ10Vm0W+HMtNRXj+bPYqOQYm3zVqEmA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/g16DCOZfBkj0_lwTEz5PT2nbw9w>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, "dhcpv6bis@ietf.org" <dhcpv6bis@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-6man-default-iids@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-default-iids@ietf.org>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-6man-default-iids Section 4 & 6.9 (DHCPv6)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 08:29:30 -0000

On 10 August 2016 at 18:16,  <otroan@employees.org> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> [...]
>
>> I argued for that because I think privacy is a primary property of an address, not the method used to configure it. However, since the different methods of configuring the address can effect the resulting address's privacy properties, I think it is necessary to discuss how to achieve privacy for the three different configuration methods we have in the one place.
>
> And you don't think RFC7721 is enough?
>

Yes, got this draft and that RFC mixed up! I think I missed that RFC
getting published, which is why I thought that sort of text was in a
draft somewhere.

Apologies for the noise!

Regards,
Mark.



> Cheers,
> Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email