Re: [ietf-privacy] [Int-area] NAT Reveal / Host Identifiers

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Thu, 05 June 2014 20:11 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833AC1A0249; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 13:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
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 Ic8vAuDjV1U2; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 13:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D18A21A0305; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 13:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.166] (abc.isi.edu [128.9.160.166]) (authenticated bits=0) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s55KAnUX016437 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 5 Jun 2014 13:10:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5390CEC9.3000005@isi.edu>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 13:10:49 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>, int-area@ietf.org
References: <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF628724B2C@eusaamb107.ericsson.se> <539016BE.3070008@gmx.net> <53906711.5070406@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <53906711.5070406@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-privacy/fVdo6z_cfeuX57fsOeimT6hIhcI
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 08:11:56 -0700
Cc: "ietf-privacy@ietf.org" <ietf-privacy@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ietf-privacy] [Int-area] NAT Reveal / Host Identifiers
X-BeenThere: ietf-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Privacy Discussion List <ietf-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-privacy>, <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy>, <mailto:ietf-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 20:11:45 -0000


On 6/5/2014 5:48 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> I share those concerns. And adopting this without any consideration
> of BCP188 would fly in the face of a very recent, very thoroughly
> discussed, IETF consensus.

That BCP thankfully includes zero RFC2119 language except the single 
word "should" (not capitalized) in the abstract, thus every new document 
is trivially compliant with its recommendations.

(I really wish the IETF community cared as much about technical 
correctness and protocol robustness as they did about issuing that IMO 
largely political statement, which "flies in the face" of 40+ years of 
using globally-assigned, globally-unique IP addresses as endpoint 
identifiers as the basis of the Internet architecture).

Joe