Re: [homenet] IPv6 & firewall config in a home net

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Fri, 06 September 2019 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 354B3120071 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 23:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 MP9f9_B5NrzI for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 23:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (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 0A8DA12002E for <homenet@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 23:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 10242B0; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 08:59:11 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1567753151; bh=zl4cN5/zT6cRgZo5Hvn8AcdUgC9ogv2tp38RJBsyvKk=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=FdZXptmq77UHyH1KxJubB6eMIHEkWQwF0TQSpjwKxIofEl0MNfqO5VKwhSK332xtZ b8FwS1bsWHa6SJPcTKJbz4vyE9e1wksvhTNy0ELxx/cnKmoXQRWulFPZcZ3+AI3t8x 6w24z29hax5XB6O8uCL5yO7H1mPd7u/4slFVXpxw=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E0039F; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 08:59:11 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 08:59:11 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: "Ray Hunter (v6ops)" <v6ops@globis.net>
cc: homenet@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <8aab1064-9782-d5dd-e2db-41a5248b5c37@globis.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1909060837060.21167@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <ca32dd0fca31411588917d55556e2a91@rew09926dag07b.domain1.systemhost.net> <8aab1064-9782-d5dd-e2db-41a5248b5c37@globis.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/hUc8IvNxVU_bavti-kUFAv_kroY>
Subject: Re: [homenet] IPv6 & firewall config in a home net
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 06:59:16 -0000

On Thu, 5 Sep 2019, Ray Hunter (v6ops) wrote:

> IMHO Expected behavior. Many European data protection people consider an 
> IP(v6) address to be privacy-sensitive personal data. That will likely 
> mean regular renumbering of IA PD by ISP's as the norm rather than the 
> exception.

This is the first time I've seen anyone make this claim (I guess related 
to GDPR). I've gone through GDPR review and talked to others who have done 
the same, and I from a GDPR point of view there is no reason to renumber 
on a regular basis. From what I can tell, renumbering at some frequency 
makes no difference from a GDPR point of view. The addresses are privacy 
sensitive regardless if you change them frequently or not.

My experience is that the frequent renumbering is a local market practice 
that people in that market got used to. As a swedish user, I hadn't heard 
of this practice until I started talking about these things with people 
that ran/experienced ISPs in other nations. The defaults are also 
different.

Some markets have frequent renumbering (some even reset the PPPoE session 
once per day, which is a flash renumbering eevent), some never renumber 
unless there is a big network change (I've had the same IPv6 prefix now 
for a year).

The conclusion is that we need to create solutions that handle both these 
cases.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se