IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] [Int-area] Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 23 September 2020 12:32 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 B7DE43A108F; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 05:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 OfM301gAhGiX; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 05:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE4673A107E; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 05:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAD6138996; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:11:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id JA3I-oZL1DbD; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:11:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:103c:9eff:fecb:2eac]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D38B38993; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:11:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 089FB4E7; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 08:32:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de>
cc: captive-portal@ietf.org, homenet@ietf.org, int-area@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <25515603-B04E-40F8-884C-49D818BE4C07@fl1ger.de>
References: <A8BB4316-BCAE-4E3C-AC3B-441D2ECB0338@comcast.com> <86fbabc6-ecec-fe9e-593e-e6ef87f67173@sandelman.ca> <25515603-B04E-40F8-884C-49D818BE4C07@fl1ger.de>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
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, 23 Sep 2020 08:32:30 -0400
Message-ID: <29235.1600864350@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/xIMJ5eFM8lDi_aFFxYoIcyKRLqI>
Subject: Re: [homenet] [Int-area] Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications
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: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:32:41 -0000

Ralf Weber <dns@fl1ger.de> wrote:
    >> While I don't object to a BOF, I don't know where it goes.
    >> What I see is that much of this problem needs to be resolved through
    >> increased use of 802.1X: making WPA-Enterprise easier to use and setup,
    >> this changing core identity from MAC Address to IDevID.
    >>
    >> My understanding is that Apple intends to randomize MAC every 12 hours,
    >> even on the same "LAN" (ESSID), and that they will just repeat the WPA
    >> authentication afterwards to get back on the network.

    > I of course don’t know Apples intentions, but what you are describing is the
    > behaviour of early iOS 14 beta versions. However this behaviour has changed
    > in later beta versions and the released iOS 14.0 version to have a random Mac
    > per ESSID and not change that over the lifetime of the device (at least no so
    > far on my devices at home), which I think is more in line what the rest of
    > the industry does.

That's interesting news.
Why did they try something different in the beta?  Maybe they thought that
the industry was ready for this, but were wrong?
I heard about this change from Tiru Reddy.

It would be great if this BOF elicited public statements and/or public policies about
Google and Apple's intentions in this space.  If it's their goal to go in the
direction I outlined, then it would be good to know.

--
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