Re: [Ila] [5gangip] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-herbert-ipv6-prefix-address-privacy-00.txt

[Mikael Abrahamsson <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018, Tom Herbert wrote:

> This draft discusses issue of privacy in IPv6 network prefix assignment. 
> Specifically the privacy problems of an assigned network prefix becoming 
> a persistent identifier for devices (e.g. /64 assignment to devices in 
> mobile networks).  The use of identifier/locator split is suggested as a 
> solution.

Current state of available address for a PDN is /64. In most 
implementations I am aware of, if the PDN is brought down, and then up 
again, a new /64 will be used. The host can therefore control this part of 
"privacy", cycle PDN when it feels it's appropriate to get new address 
space to avoid tracking. I am supportive of this approach and any spatial 
overlap of multiple PDNs/address space approach, so that connections can 
be moved over to use the new address, gracefully.

I consider anything that gives the host less than /64 worth of addresses a 
regression from current situation. We can always discuss if /80 is enough 
etc, but anyhow, it's a regression that should be presented front and 
center by any proposed change to current state of affairs.

I have now read section 6 twice, and I still have no idea how many usable 
addresses the host has available to itself according to 
draft-herbert-ipv6-prefix-address-privacy-00.

Can you please enlighten me?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [e-mail]