IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: draft-gont-6man-managing-privacy-extensions-00.txt

Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com> Sun, 13 March 2011 00:43 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F123A6A75 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:43:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.572
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L00PnvYdbqtT for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:43:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mailc.microsoft.com [131.107.115.214]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FAB33A6A4D for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:43:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.86.9) by TK5-EXGWY-E803.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:44:35 -0800
Received: from TK5EX14MLTW651.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com (157.54.71.39) by TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.86.9) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.2; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:44:35 -0800
Received: from TK5EX14MBXW653.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([169.254.3.56]) by TK5EX14MLTW651.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.71.39]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.002; Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:44:35 -0800
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
Subject: RE: draft-gont-6man-managing-privacy-extensions-00.txt
Thread-Topic: draft-gont-6man-managing-privacy-extensions-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHL3kEKAbTYw5EzSU+RGMZ29OXheJQlYKSAgAB+ZoCAANWqgIAATRSAgABA0wCAACYHAIAAG7iAgANveID//32XAA==
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 00:44:34 +0000
Message-ID: <22F6318E46E26B498ABC828879B08D4F0C2420@TK5EX14MBXW653.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
References: <7111FC5F-BC3F-4242-9C3F-037E79894749@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1103091212570.7942@uplift.swm.pp.se> <4D77CBB9.1080702@gmail.com> <233b01cbdef5$8e214550$aa63cff0$@com> <25B3D469-F3DA-4A1D-A462-FEB71FA69485@gmail.com> <091D1284-99E4-450E-8AFF-7D4C6310D760@apple.com> <78B923726E7D59429936580CF127E943A13E758C27@eu1rdcrdc1wx032.exi.nxp.com> <262f01cbdf5d$607c69f0$21753dd0$@com> <4D7C0EE5.2080405@gont.com.ar>
In-Reply-To: <4D7C0EE5.2080405@gont.com.ar>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [157.54.123.12]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 00:43:15 -0000

> It doesn't. The I-D aims at allowing routers specify which policy they want hosts to employ when generating their IPv6 addresses.

Uh? I definitely don't want to give the router at Starbucks the means to specify the privacy configuration of my laptop.

I understand that corporation want to enforce policies so PC and routers are easier to manage, but we have to be careful. If we define that policy as part of the address configuration standard, then it will apply everywhere, not just in the corporate network where the laptop is managed. That seems a terrible idea. 

If we want policy options to be applied safely, they have to be propagated by trusted mechanism, where the host can verify the authority of the policy source. Anything else is abuse waiting to happen.

-- Christian Huitema

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email