Re: ESSID ietf-v6only at IETF 100 - security

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 14/11/2017 à 07:24, Warren Kumari a écrit :
[...]

> ​Nope. We have the legacy SSIDs because some people apparently had 
> issues connecting to encrypted SSIDs (because of old OS / broken 
> wpa_supplicant, etc) - this wasn't issue with certs, but rather 
> providing a solution for those who are unable to do WPA enterprise / 
> have old cards, etc.

Well - sorry, but all these reasons seem light for me.

I have Windows 7 which is not old.  Updated regularly from Microsoft and 
from employer IT.

The WPA_supplicant comes from original.  It is widely accepted at many 
other hotspots.

My laptop is very well able to do WPA enterprise, and WPA2 Enterprise.

The laptop is a Dell E7440, 2 or 3 years old.  I dont accept to call 
that old.  What makes laptops old is when they break; they often break 
because of mechanically moving parts like hd, but this one is SSD.

Rather, I suspect there is a preference at the Access Point to favorise 
Macintosh variations of WiFi Clients, rather than Windows.

I also wonder why my Windows complains that the cert emmitted by IETF is 
"not configured as a valid anchor".  Should I manually install that 
cert?  If so, that is little reasonable to ask.

Alex

>   There was an assertion made that some people were not using nat64 and 
> were using ietf-legacy were easier, and so there should be parity, and 
> so the ietf-nat64-unencrypted was created.
> We are changing the name of the ietf-legacyXXX network at each meeting 
> because we don't people who connected to it at a previous meeting to 
> become sticky to it and keep joining -- it requires a specific action at 
> each meeting for the user to choose the unencrypted network -- we'd all 
> prefer that people use the encrypted network...
> 
> 
> 
>     And yes, my VPN FortiClient works ok on ietf-nat64-unencrypted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     Alex
> 
> 
> 
>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
>     IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>
>     --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea 
> in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing 
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of 
> pants.
>     ---maf