Re: Stewart Bryant's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with COMMENT)
Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Tue, 21 January 2014 16:01 UTC
Return-Path: <fernando@gont.com.ar>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE51E1A03F0; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:01:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 UM2MiXN7R2KW; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:01:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from web01.jbserver.net (web01.jbserver.net [IPv6:2a00:d10:2000:e::3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E17541A017E; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 08:00:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 75-138-17-190.fibertel.com.ar ([190.17.138.75] helo=[192.168.3.102]) by web01.jbserver.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <fernando@gont.com.ar>) id 1W5dkz-00076G-1x; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 17:00:53 +0100
Message-ID: <52DE9158.3080307@gont.com.ar>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 12:25:12 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Stewart Bryant's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with COMMENT)
References: <20140121124718.28900.56916.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140121124718.28900.56916.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, ipv6@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses@tools.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 16:01:02 -0000
Hi, Stewart, Thanks so much for you input! Please find my comments in-line... On 01/21/2014 09:47 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > As Adrian says, this does not look like it impacts the routing systems so > based on a quick skim, no objection. > > I am, however, left pondering as to whether a simple call to the system > RNG wouldn't work well enough most of the time. Because the resulting addresses wouldn't be stable. And if they are not stable, things like ACLs and anything that benefits from stable addresses wouldn't work as expected (that's why e.g. many folks disable RFC 4941) Thanks! Best regards, -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
- Stewart Bryant's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-… Stewart Bryant
- Re: Stewart Bryant's No Objection on draft-ietf-6… Fernando Gont