Re: [Int-dir] 118

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 17/04/2019 à 18:03, Joel M. Halpern a écrit :
> Your earlier text included the line:
> 
> "A MAC address SHOULD be of length 48 decimal."
> 
> Even if the SHOULD were not capitalized, that would look like an effort 
> in this document to specify the length of a MAC address.  With the 
> capitalization, it appears even more strongly to be such an effort.
> 
> One of your suggestions removed that text, which would be a good way to 
> resolve this problem.  Eric's question is based on the text you sent, 
> which is taken directly from the document.

Understood. I will remove the phrase telling MAC SHOULD be 48.

(one remark though.  Some Windows people call a MAC address something 
else than what IEEE defines to be a MAC address.  For example, they 
create a MAC identifier that has nothing to do with an interface; that 
is unique across all Microsoft machines; it is useful for new devices 
like my new tablet having no RJ45 but tracked by my IT dept by a MAC 
address and disallowed to use WiFi; I forgot the name of that MAC 
address; it is called 'MAC something address'; it may be visible in 
BIOS; it is 48bit length).

Alex

> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 4/17/19 10:29 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
>>
>>
>> Le 17/04/2019 à 16:24, Eric Gray a écrit :
>>> Adding to what Joel said, why are we attempting to define how long a 
>>> MAC address SHOULD be?
>>
>> We are attempting to define how long a better privacy Interface ID 
>> (not MAC) should be.
>>
>> There is a difference between an Interface ID and a MAC address.
>>
>> An Interface ID is what to put near a prefix to make an address.  For 
>> example, 3 in 192.168.1.3 is an Interface ID.
>>
>> The longer IID the better privacy, intuitively speaking.
>>
>> Why do you think we try to define how long a MAC address should be?
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ietf <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern
>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 9:39 AM
>>> To: Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>
>>> Cc: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>; IETF Discussion 
>>> <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; 
>>> [e-mail]
>>> Subject: Re: 118
>>>
>>> Trimmed.
>>>
>>> On 4/17/19 3:46 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
>>> ....
>>>>
>>>> I propose the following:
>>>> OLD:
>>>>>        A randomized Interface ID has the same characteristics of a
>>>>>        randomized MAC address, except the length in bits.  A MAC
>>>>>        address SHOULD be of length 48 decimal.  An Interface ID
>>>>>        SHOULD be of length 64 decimal for all types of IPv6
>>>>>        addresses.  In the particular case of IPv6 link-local
>>>>>        addresses, the length of the Interface ID MAY be 118
>>>>>        decimal.
>>>>
>>>> NEW:
>>>>>        A randomized Interface ID has the same characteristics of a
>>>>>        randomized MAC address, except the length in bits.  A MAC
>>>>>        address SHOULD be of length 48 decimal.  An Interface ID
>>>>>        SHOULD be of length specified in other documents.
>>>>
>>>> Do you disagree?
>>>
>>> "SHOULD be of a length specified in other documents" wihtout any 
>>> reference to what the other documents are or how to find them seems 
>>> like a recipe for implementor error.  Can we be somewhat more specific?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Joel
>>>
>>
>