Tokenized addresses (was: Re: Feedback on draft-gont-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-01)

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Sat, 14 April 2012 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.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 1EA9821F85B1 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:01:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.052
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.052 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.503, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YpgP+LrwxQm9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from srv01.bbserve.nl (unknown [IPv6:2a02:27f8:1025:18::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89EDC21F85A8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 130.41-14-84.ripe.coltfrance.com ([84.14.41.130] helo=[192.168.102.30]) by srv01.bbserve.nl with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <fgont@si6networks.com>) id 1SJ9A2-00028M-V6; Sat, 14 Apr 2012 22:01:31 +0200
Message-ID: <4F899C40.1060403@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 17:48:16 +0200
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Organization: SI6 Networks
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120313 Thunderbird/3.1.20
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Subject: Tokenized addresses (was: Re: Feedback on draft-gont-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-01)
References: <E7607B61-9889-43A9-B86B-133BD4238BA2@gmail.com> <1334276068.3945.408.camel@karl> <4F882A44.3080305@si6networks.com> <1334363774.3945.541.camel@karl> <9DDD54D3-5A69-499B-8496-119641348B1F@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|289e913e0066f2de615a1e1b85762bcbo3DBUc03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|9DDD54D3-5A69-499B-8496-119641348B1F@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <4F89851D.1030504@si6networks.com> <4F89901F.1090401@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F89901F.1090401@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, 6man Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 20:01:36 -0000

On 04/14/2012 04:56 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> Does this really help renumbering? e.g., if you have ACLs, they are
>> based on the whole IPv6 address, rather than on the IID...
> 
> This is linked to the whole question of why people assign static
> addresses and how that interacts with renumbering. By getting rid
> of the MAC address (so that the server address doesn't depend on
> the network interface hardware) you are part way to static addresses,

At some point I played with the idea of including the interface-index
(rather than the MAC address in F() (in the algorithm in
draft-gont-6man-stable-privacy-addresses), which would still make the
resulting IIDs vary across networks as the host moves, but remain
constant in the presence of hardware changes.


> and one can imagine a prefix-renumbering mechanism that could handle
> this. Of course here we want an IID that is not only stable but is
> also well-known; servers don't get address privacy ;-).

Well, they *could* -- please see above.

Thanks!

Best regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492