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

Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Wed, 23 September 2020 14:26 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F23013A0FFD for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.308
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.308 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
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 5QaQ2ILYG-mO for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-4.web-hosting.com (server217-4.web-hosting.com [198.54.116.98]) (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 49BD93A0FF5 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Rg9GjzE8oGh0x28hWF17M4ZeCgrC61v1PLJimN8Gzlw=; b=WhaQPB0Va3rfya6AcoCX+Q/Qo Xzkn+jIbMqm4VzfpjihROcCkxpGnzuCQLPPSQjmdbdZjcpVLPtBuZSuB7aVBMv7rDQZLrZ3deJ0I8 jj7uuBEDAOqoh635wjJpKGEDEw6YGYHTyZWOXSZcg2jeAuD/yDaNgsh154UR0vJOoGwObL/msZMWn PzG/A4dE790rO4alI0zpAFw+mNzvGNYABnZ9oJb3dWkIoBd1rQP47cSftg5rw6vmV7Q5XfU/Ow4XW WT1FpHbaRw3+W6CyvECnviMkdDfya39RpDdMlcGzcjC9S4hqVr2HmJ0691Eqa3lCJ7Ye2ZV/PSDf+ kBV45LxrA==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:63261 helo=[192.168.1.14]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1kL5jB-000aoM-IU; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 10:26:42 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_38AA5443-66AA-4A27-9028-42EDA7463B92"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
From: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <4749067E-A5E1-4D22-AF80-744FA4EB8679@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:26:36 -0700
Cc: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, Andy Smith <ajsphila@gmail.com>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <2FCC9A66-3DB3-4792-A5CC-4B6E59FFBB58@strayalpha.com>
References: <A8BB4316-BCAE-4E3C-AC3B-441D2ECB0338@comcast.com> <71B286E5-EAF7-4B66-A637-8EFE061D2451@gmail.com> <0F483D3B-C82B-4D00-8F0E-252CE027AE1C@gmail.com> <4749067E-A5E1-4D22-AF80-744FA4EB8679@cisco.com>
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/BeH-ddV1di3m6BcnUCE01nyuvkw>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 14:26:45 -0000

FWIW, 802 MAC addresses may be “set at birth” but also have long required support for multiple MAC addresses per interface, setting other MAC addresses, and disabling the “birth” address.

Long as in 25+ yrs.

Joe

> On Sep 23, 2020, at 7:02 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> In another century, DECnet phase 4 was also changing the MAC address (and if not mistaken IBM SNA also) but flipping the universal/local bit of the MAC address
>  
> -éric
>  
> From: Int-area <int-area-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com <mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, 23 September 2020 at 12:38
> To: Andy Smith <ajsphila@gmail.com <mailto:ajsphila@gmail.com>>
> Cc: "int-area@ietf.org <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>" <int-area@ietf.org <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Evaluate impact of MAC address randomization to IP applications
>  
> So I am curious, and probably out of touch.
>  
> MAC addresses are supposed to be unique hardware device addresses  that ultimately come from a registry administered by IEEE and are supposed to be allocated exactly once to one hardware entity.
>  
> Is MAC address randomisation something that IEEE approve of, in which case how does the registry work, or are we at risk of working on a problem that results in an interSDO dispute?
>  
> - Stewart
>  
>  
> 
> 
>> On 22 Sep 2020, at 21:22, Andy Smith <ajsphila@gmail.com <mailto:ajsphila@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>  
>> Yiu-
>>  
>> I’d like to help here.   Is the problem that residential devices can’t be reliably tracked for purposes of policy enforcement?     Or is it an IP address depletion issue?  
>>  
>> I noticed iOS 14 does allow for disabling of random MAC addresses.  
>>  
>> Andy
>>  
>>  
>> Sent with emacs for iOS
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 22, 2020, at 15:50, Lee, Yiu <Yiu_Lee@comcast.com <mailto:Yiu_Lee@comcast.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi team,
>>>  
>>> We proposed a BoF. The agenda is inhttps://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/109-Agenda.md <https://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/109-Agenda.md> and the proposal is inhttps://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/BoF-Proposal-20200918.md <https://github.com/jlivingood/IETF109BoF/blob/master/BoF-Proposal-20200918.md>. You can also find the draft herehttps://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-randomized-macaddr-ps-01 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-randomized-macaddr-ps-01>.
>>>  
>>> At this stage, we are looking for inputs for more use cases and interests of working together in this domain. Please post your comments in the mailing list.
>>>  
>>> Thanks
>>>  
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Int-area mailing list
>>> Int-area@ietf.org <mailto:Int-area@ietf.org>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> Int-area@ietf.org <mailto:Int-area@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org <mailto:Int-area@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>