IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Topic IPv6

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 21 November 2016 13:58 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA088129604 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 05:58:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] 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 dj1E_rpo0xMq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 05:58:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (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 AD462129A56 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 05:58:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id ED765280140; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 14:58:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E837128010A; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 14:58:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (unknown [192.134.7.106]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6AB4B38003; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 14:58:00 +0100 (CET)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DFB4840787; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 14:58:00 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 14:58:00 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Alexander Nevalennyy <avnevalenniy@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Topic IPv6
Message-ID: <20161121135800.hj773gvjquay7ka5@nic.fr>
References: <CAGxDXJ9L-Zfu+Wn8MogOn_yKgDKKuUVyqNp5mxNYaJZd-371qA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAGxDXJ9L-Zfu+Wn8MogOn_yKgDKKuUVyqNp5mxNYaJZd-371qA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux stretch/sid
X-Kernel: Linux 4.7.0-1-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161014 (1.7.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/8dUDVAiUwwyGp_-iVRarRwH9lHA>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:58:34 -0000

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 04:49:02PM +0300,
 Alexander Nevalennyy <avnevalenniy@gmail.com> wrote 
 a message of 45 lines which said:

> Thank you for your opinion and fast support, Jordi.

Jordi tried to patiently explain, I'm not sure you can call his
message "support".

> 1. I am not sure that about privacy. Nobody need your IP while you do not
> do something wrong.

Usual argument from the police ("if you want privacy, it means you are
a criminal trying to hide something"). You will have a hard time
convincing people to buy it.

> 3. I meant usage of SLAAC for all ip-addresses (now it is optional).

And why? I mean, servers typically use static non-SLAAC addresses. Why
should they change?

> Link is below:
> http://www.slideshare.net/phdays/ipv6-35204784

6 slides can hardly be regarded as a proposal worth of IETF time.

> Should I try to write to WG called ipsecme?

Please first learn to respond to emails (instead of starting a new
thread each time).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email