Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default?
Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Sun, 02 February 2020 16:11 UTC
Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0AA8120127 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Feb 2020 08:11:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 MdxQHwlKCWdL for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Feb 2020 08:11:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x12e.google.com (mail-il1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B2B5120125 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Feb 2020 08:11:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id o13so10509504ilg.10 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 08:11:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gZJ0LYkGlIJ9hpk38jogZfwFhOnNCzDBpl+uIPy9bBY=; b=Z/v+fKvjvLwhTyIOkyKIDMQ6xcQyNBKfv+rySJj9Rn7zk/Sl2qG7JR6ZVTIzyHK2ph zveCn7pkzlQsnNzsobGqnTkPQSllRODaQEt+/kINx8gCejR/Kr7CX0+rUnyI0WQ92IBU ZjdT69f+1gzBPT89Sq6xv72wYlkSGYnxod6/mBvgo+zvIAQRlywByKjVR4s0lsyP+F1m ocCYiMRsCrYd0FKJ4FEwa43UfSM6jWsLTFgNU7WKD2eHTZDzbhgDhUgSLZi9dd6i1ZLd hGOXzLBD3ieCFV/VcxxbbFbUYR+6I4BdOPsgPkuwdVIB6jXlICMoQaOv3Ssgi5jARhqN GJ2g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gZJ0LYkGlIJ9hpk38jogZfwFhOnNCzDBpl+uIPy9bBY=; b=NE5tMm4ksPaTlRJeVPnRc5EB+MrTTCUopqoF81tWHapVDcJGyIkYYJOUNPgVW2UvNy lwl6zYJOKv7sikk2RLwfybPFYVpkcHewZqmSeponOcGrX5POBzf/+y+Mur9MmDO1Vyc3 kEcDeaMHjZHUExwAHJtMsRQd9oL1ERwJKnZrlOBncU2RoGntoZJiF9v0hQGRpEViF6d1 +6Z96Y/PNV3pz3gAve9YQ+SU99x+D8MoIaR0u+5OSyED4CF2o5Pw2xARLnDOXKqoiqFz Tqu0bsv33Fj2aaiCK504VxBDxkbpmnKb1TgE/6VE4ZmLpGM6o9zsQYBQcA/N0dBs/oTT MM3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVdYuyI+GfVrr8DogFzQ23WiZFWePvYbrhkZ5Ru+FEwR2bdibNG IBPWMfx2nu2eVz9cxawlf9G7zex2xv51uR3N+/s=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqykl3u29yJBRJeZhoM26pjcgJYfUvRSvFW9km6e7mgN1gM4o8E6lbQqEcDpX/Q5+7GFXnvDQc4194CJei+WjyQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:d090:: with SMTP id h16mr12214867ilh.78.1580659916536; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 08:11:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAO42Z2we-rJTdou9pR8509J1wS95Hfz67+=ThxKJkEZpTe0H4Q@mail.gmail.com> <F29AC68B-6C69-4AEB-B0BA-7DE77281E431@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <F29AC68B-6C69-4AEB-B0BA-7DE77281E431@puck.nether.net>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2020 11:11:18 -0500
Message-ID: <CABNhwV1vLM3LJnb=HSBtwoBz+4BtL9aYKmWpUqE4tGumKGhA3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default?
To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
Cc: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d60247059d9a1089"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/FF3Hk66Pm4bFH8peXwJ_wPUJN7E>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 02 Feb 2020 16:12:00 -0000
On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 8:16 AM Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote: > > > On Feb 2, 2020, at 3:53 AM, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 2 Feb 2020, 19:05 Jared Mauch, <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote: > >> They are also useful and needed when debugging hashing or 802.3ad related >> issues. To debug the flow hash you often need stable addresses which are >> not easily changed > > > Can you explain how you do this troubleshooting? Do you spoof end users > addresses? > > > No you try to find a combination of source ip, dest ip, protocol and > source plus dest ports that aren't working and debug from there. > > The routers/hardware compute a hash from these tuples plus some initial > entropy to assign traffic to a specific link member. If you have 4 or 6x > 100g links (for example) you may see one link member misbehaving from a > software bug or programming issue. You have to debug these layers to find > the bad link. > > Some of the vendors make seeing their hash calculation easier than others. > If we want to fix the bug we have to leave it broken or reproduce it for > the developers. > > You may see this as 1:16 flows behaves poorly or is dropped. Sometimes you > are more unlucky than others. > Gyan> The L2 or L3 hash algorithm in generating the hash is vendor proprietary usually an XOR of the tuple. For example, Cisco lb hash for all of their IOS flavors is generated using source/destination by default, however you can add port to the lb hash alg making it a tuple. The lb hash alg feature is pretty basic and is standard operation for most all vendors which have a CLI show command to determine what member ink of L2 bundle the src/dest flow is taking. I am not aware of any Cisco bugs. Which vendor are you referring to regarding software bug or programming issue? > or provided by the average user who just expects the technology to work. > > > Temporary addresses have been the default on Apple OS X since Lion in 2011 > and Windows Vista in 2007. That doesn't seem to have prevented IPv6 working > for the average user. > > > HE may mask the issue so the end user isn't seeing issues but doesn't stop > things from working. > > Day in the life of an operator perspective on making things too hard to > debug automatically. We try but sometimes it takes that user report. > > This is aside from my concerns about the hyper privacy people blowing out > ND. > > If you are spending all your time in software/centralized lookup platforms > you are missing out on the joys of debugging networks based on ingress > interface and these hash calculators > > Gyan> Most all newer platforms across all vendors are hardware based and > of course the larger platforms have distributed LC FIB versus centralized > processor. > > > > >> Sent from my iCar >> >> > On Feb 1, 2020, at 4:24 PM, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Stable random IPv6 address works best to meet the objective of an >> enterprise. >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> ipv6@ietf.org >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > -- Gyan Mishra Network Engineering & Technology Verizon Silver Spring, MD 20904 Phone: 301 502-1347 Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com
- RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses for th… otroan
- RE: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Naveen Kottapalli
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… otroan
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Tim Chown
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Jared Mauch
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… otroan
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Bob Hinden
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Warren Kumari
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Mark Smith
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… David Farmer
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Philip Homburg
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… otroan
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Tim Chown
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Mark Smith
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Philip Homburg
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Michael Richardson
- IPv6 address usage (was: Re: RFC4941bis: conseque… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: IPv6 address usage (was: Re: RFC4941bis: cons… Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Mark Smith
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequence… Christian Huitema
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Jared Mauch
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Michael Richardson
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Ca By
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Warren Kumari
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Jared Mauch
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Gyan Mishra
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Gyan Mishra
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Christian Huitema
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Ole Troan
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Jared Mauch
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Gyan Mishra
- SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of … Jared Mauch
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Gyan Mishra
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences… Gyan Mishra
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Jared Mauch
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Michael Richardson
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Ole Troan
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences… Simon Hobson
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Address privacy Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Nick Hilliard
- RE: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Manfredi (US), Albert E
- Re: Address privacy Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Address privacy Jared Mauch
- Re: Address privacy Gyan Mishra
- Re: Address privacy Gyan Mishra
- RE: Address privacy Manfredi (US), Albert E
- RE: Address privacy Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: Address privacy Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Nick Hilliard
- RE: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) otroan
- Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Ted Lemon
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Richard Patterson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Ted Lemon
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Christian Huitema
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy Nick Hilliard
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Nick Hilliard
- Re: Address privacy Gyan Mishra
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Michael Richardson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fernando Gont
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fred Baker
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Mark Smith
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Ted Lemon
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fernando Gont
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Ole Troan
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy otroan
- Re: Address privacy Ca By
- Re: Address privacy Mark Smith
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Bob Hinden
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Fernando Gont
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Address privacy Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Fernando Gont
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences… Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: IPv6 address usage Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Fernando Gont
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) (was:Re: RFC4941bis: con… Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy Ted Lemon
- Re: RFC4941bis: consequences of many addresses fo… Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Fernando Gont
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (Re: RFC4941bis: consequences… Fernando Gont
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy (was: Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Fernando Gont
- SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) (was:Re: RFC4941bis: consequ… Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Sander Steffann
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Ted Lemon
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Mark Smith
- Re: Address privacy Tom Herbert
- Re: Address privacy Ted Lemon
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Christian Huitema
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Carsten Bormann
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? otroan
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Tim Chown
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Nick Hilliard
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? otroan
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Jared Mauch
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Nick Hilliard
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? otroan
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? otroan
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- RE: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Nick Hilliard
- Re: Address privacy Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Tom Herbert
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Christopher Morrow
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? David Farmer
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Tom Herbert
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Michael Richardson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Michael Richardson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Erik Kline
- Re: Address privacy Michael Richardson
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Michael Richardson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Michael Richardson
- Re: Address privacy Michael Richardson
- Re: Address privacy Ted Lemon
- Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II) Fernando Gont
- Better APIs (was: Re: Address privacy) Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Michael Richardson
- Re: Address privacy Ted Lemon
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Michael Richardson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Michael Richardson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Michael Richardson
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy David Farmer
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fernando Gont
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Fernando Gont
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Fernando Gont
- Re: Address privacy Michael Richardson
- Re: Better APIs (was: Re: Address privacy) Michael Richardson
- Re: Better APIs Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Better APIs (was: Re: Address privacy) Tommy Pauly
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Gyan Mishra
- Re: Better APIs (was: Re: Address privacy) Erik Kline
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Jared Mauch
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Mark Smith
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Jared Mauch
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Jared Mauch
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Gyan Mishra
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Jared Mauch
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Michael Richardson
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Disabling temporary addresses by default? Erik Kline
- Re: Better APIs (was: Re: Address privacy) Fernando Gont